Pretentious Crap

[zhao]

unless you're talking about smaller (unmodern) tribes still in existence, to which I'd be interested in studying more on myself...

yes that is what i'm talking about. currently functioning micro-societies, which number in at least the hundreds, scattered in regions like Indonesia, Africa, and S. America... i know very little, but if you didn't see this thread before it might be of interest. (and the audio link still works)

 

[Chris]

if you didn't see this thread before it might be of interest. (and the audio link still works)

ah, yeah, I do remember that one, definitely have to check back on it. thnx.

 

[zhao]

a bit embarrassing as i noticed that i'm repeating some things i said in that thread above...

not exactly to do with the band level societies, but tribal or cheifdoms or traditional states in Africa, a friend of mine recently told me of some letters written by a German "explorer" from Africa in early 20th century, like 1902 or something, which included the following:

these africans are so primitive and their societies so backwards, that they consult their women on major decisions and indeed, even allow them to be part of the governement!

 

[Chris]

oh how backwards those Africans were

 

[zhao]

were being the key word here as they have since, thank god, been enlightened to the modern and progressive Christian ways (with their wives in the kitchen. there is no food but that's not important -- long as they stay in the kitchen)

 

[Mr. Tea]

Don't forget the female genital mutilation!

 

[zhao]

yeah... sigh... after i made the above post i realized that i was speaking from an idealized view of various african culture's treatment of women.

but just for balance, the boys also go through painful and dangerous initiation rites in many of these cultures -- for instance left in the wild for weeks with no clothes or shelter, if they make it they're men, and if they don't, they don't.

 

[nomadthethird]

didn't take issue with this before but must now.

it is all too common for people like us to broadly generalize from a 1 dimensional and extremely limited perspective about the myriad of "pre-industrialized" societies which thrive to this day, and conflate them all according to a bullshit cardboard cut-out idea that we got from ignorant film directors.

band-level societies (gatherer-hunter nomadic less than 100 per unit) do not have anything like uniforms, and according to very many anthropological studies, enjoy total individual autonomy as well as intimate connection with the community --- both of which we "civilized" people lack.

there are hundreds maybe thousands of such micro societies functioning today, some of which approaching tribe-level (centralized power, a few hundred members), each with unique lifestyles -- it is all too easy for us smug westerners to lump them all together.

and as a side i'm entirely convinced that the 20 century construction of individuality, on the whole, makes us less happy.

Whoa whoa whoa. Nobody lumped anything together. The only thing I was commenting on was the way that until recently, in our culture, 'individuality' in dress was not the be all end all. There was nothing "wrong" with looking like others in your tribe on purpose.

That was all that I was saying.

Sometimes you add this entire dimension to what people post that has nothing to do with what they've actually said. Of course, I was pretty open-ended and general, but I wasn't lumping anything together with anything, or limiting anybody. I was making the same point

as a side i'm entirely convinced that the 20 century construction of individuality, on the whole, makes us less happy

you were making.

 

[nomadthethird]

ah ok that makes sense. i wasn't quite sure what the purpose of her "loud yelping" comment was actually.

but i'm not sure if band-level societies have any "uniforms" or rituals... there is no "shamen" or leader of any kind...

Yeah, they do, they have ritual costumes.

Have you ever seen a coming of age ritual in a South American or African tribal culture or a North American warrior's costume? I go to an NA meeting with lots of Mohawks and yeah a lot of indigenous peoples in North America do have ritual costumes that are used for more or less the same purposes we use our own subcultural "hipster" clothing. Tattoos as well.

 

[nomadthethird]

And "band-level" societies may not have shamans or leaders, but most of the still existing tribal societies do.

 

[Mr. Tea]

The only thing I was commenting on was the way that until recently, in our culture, 'individuality' in dress was not the be all end all. There was nothing "wrong" with looking like others in your tribe on purpose.

I think individuality-of-dress in Western (or at least English-speaking) cultures is overstated - by which I mean, the concept is overstated. When was the last time you saw someone who looked literally *nothing* like anyone else you've ever seen? I know you live in a kinda arty part of NY (or however you'd choose to describe it) but even so, people are going to be more or less identifiable as members of one subculture/'tribe' or another, aren't they? If I think about people aged (say) 14-30 I see in London, you've got students, fashion kids, indie types, goths, rudeboys/girls, 'chavs', rockers, assorted sub-species of hipster and so on.

 

[nomadthethird]

I think individuality-of-dress in Western (or at least English-speaking) culture is overstated - by which I mean, the concept is overstated. When was the last time you saw someone who looked literally *nothing* like anyone else you've ever seen? I know you live in a kinda arty part of NY (or however you'd choose to describe it) but even so, people are going to be more or less identifiable as members of one subculture/'tribe' or another, aren't they? If I think about people aged (say) 14-30 I see in London, you've got students, fashion kids, indie types, goths, rudeboys/girls, 'chavs', rockers, assorted sub-species of hipsters and so on.

Definitely. You're right. Just like in most other arenas now, the illusion of "individuality" in dress is based on the illusion of "choice" in a marketplace that is really just a bunch of limitations, a room full of mass produced and mass marketed cookie-cuttered stuff that we're all wearing in some combination.

 

[nomadthethird]

you live in a kinda arty part of NY (or however you'd choose to describe it)

At the moment I'm in self-imposed exile from Bushwick, but Bushwick is a great example. In Bushwick you have a great cross section of pretty extreme early 90s-ish Fresh Prince inspired futuristic American Apparel hip-hop hipsters, then you have the sort of skaters that overlap with these but are a little more laid back and grungy, then you have the starving artists who just wear paint covered jeans and wool sweaters, then the remaining 80% of the population is Dominican, Puerto Rican, and black, but with their own little bits of early 90s futuristic hip-hop hipster flair, too.

There are strange feedback loops, and people wearing the same things that you'd never expect. Like my 50-year-old Dominican neighbor had the same hoody with a black and tan print as my boyfriend had, just with more neck tattoos and a fade. Everyone has big neon nikes.

 

[nomadthethird]

And skinny jeans are everywhere now too, even in the ghetto.

 

[nomadthethird]

a bit embarrassing as i noticed that i'm repeating some things i said in that thread above...

not exactly to do with the band level societies, but tribal or cheifdoms or traditional states in Africa, a friend of mine recently told me of some letters written by a German "explorer" from Africa in early 20th century, like 1902 or something, which included the following:

"these africans are so primitive and their societies so backwards, that they consult their women on major decisions and indeed, even allow them to be part of the governement!"

I know this is what most people are going to call a petty, minor point and they're going to say I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill, but something that I've noticed many times, and it's always bothered me, is that when people are talking about the women in a society, they always make it possessive, as in "their women" (example, "have you seen the way Iraqis treat their women"), but I've never once in my life heard anyone refer to the men in a given society as "their men"--nobody ever talks about how Americans treat "their" men.

Pretty telling. More proof that Heidegger was right about language.

 

[Mr. Tea]

The ones that piss me off the most are those that exist at the intersection of heavy-metaller, punk, goth, biker, hippy/crusty/'traveller', candy raver and generic stoned post-apocalyptic dickhead. By going out of their way to look as 'alternative' as possible they just end up lookng even more homogeneous than your average ultra-introspective subculture. They just remind me of the bit from Monty Python's Life Of Brian where the 'messiah' shouts to the crowd "You're all individuals!" and they bellow back in unison, "Yes, we are all individuals!!!".

 

[Chris]

I think what you're talking about is the "kidzz" culture that kind of exists at the nexus of the Deadhead, Phishhead, Jamband, Desert Party, Goa, Crusty, Rainbow Family, New Age Traveller, and Burning Man scenes.

I... I was kind of like that in my late teens... I just kind of fell into that crowd after living in fucking ORANGE COUNTY for 6 years. Ughhhh.


dreads, Dead and Phish tour, acid, ecstacy, dancehall, raves, DnB parties, Rainbow Gatherings, trading Dead shows, living on the road for a while... the whole thing. In my defense, the dreads were just temporary and only started forming on tour. *shakes head*


I don't totally regret it though. Shaped who I am, for better or worse. But yeah, those people are pretty much permanently on drugs, especially when in groups. It's INSANE. They do more drugs than ravers at their worst.

*edit to say, I never dressed in the post-apocolyptic yogi costume, but I came across them too often.

 

[zhao]

I know this is what most people are going to call a petty, minor point and they're going to say I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill, but something that I've noticed many times, and it's always bothered me, is that when people are talking about the women in a society, they always make it possessive, as in "their women" (example, "have you seen the way Iraqis treat their women"), but I've never once in my life heard anyone refer to the men in a given society as "their men"--nobody ever talks about how Americans treat "their" men.

Pretty telling. More proof that Heidegger was right about language.

i was TOTALLY thinking this.

 

[zhao]

that's nothing to be very ashamed about chris. as long as you are over it.

 

[josef k.]

Here is another one -

Why are male authors often referred to only by their last names (Updike, Mailer, Dickens, etc)

Whereas female authors always need both names (Emily Dickinson, Jane Austen, and so on)