For this weeks readings I feel we should discuss why pre modern societies (In antiquity and beyond) used the depiction of the "other" to characterize peoples who were not in the majority. Why did societies characterize people as "other" whether it was called "Race" or was based on other characteristics. This discussion I feel will answer a lot of our questions that we posed last week about Race.
When reading the pieces listed under "Imaging an Outside World," I tried to resist the temptation to see these as early examples of race making, especially since they were based so much on imagined peoples, creatures or monstra. At the same time, I think that these may be manifestations of Eurocentrism and xenophobia predicated on what could be characterized as a (universal?) fear of the unknown. However, another way of approaching this question is to consider the extent to which the term race or rasa was so connected to the notions of caste and stain, as described in the Martinez and Nirenberg pieces. If race is somehow linked to systems of oppression, then these two linguistic connections become really important and possibly suggest that what we consider to be race making is, to a large extent, the creation of caste based on some type of stigma or stain.
I agree with Mike's idea of universal fear of the unknown. In "Experiencing Strangeness", many of these medieval maps were crafted and outlined with major detail of the known world, while that of which was unknown was subject to assumption and alteration by the hands of the cartographer. As for the labeling of other, an example from this reading was simple things such as eating habits which often led to the name the group was given. Also, forms of social (political) organization that were different than European styles and ideas helped to enforce the idea of "strangeness" in terms of the European norm. This reading brings up the point that strangeness is strictly linked to the accepted reality of a given group of peoples.
I agree with you Mike. I understand your temptation in seeing the race making in, “Imagining an Outside World.” I think that the monstrous representations of the other in medieval maps are in-themselves a system of oppression mentioned in Martinez and Nuremberg. Considering that many of the Europeans read unrealistic and fantastical accounts of these places, as mentioned in Phillips’ piece, it’s possible that many Europeans began to formulate their own racial perceptions on the “other.” Along with these adventure stories, these maps create a false representation of the other which can ultimately lead to race.
I agree with your assessment, however, would it not be accurate to suggest that this racism is more in line with the “concepts of pollution and purity, especially when enforcing social and political divisions, which have been exploited by the ruling classes to maintain their privileges?” If you want to isolate any group, like Jews, gays, blacks, etc. the best way is to suggest that they are a source of pollution; or impure. I think that in Medieval Europe, religion and the concept of purity played a large part in their ethnic cleansing campaign.
I want to focus on the mapping aspect of this weeks readings.
Munkler argues that there are two main factorts that contribute to European perceptions of the oriental through mapping, “a presumption of specifically medieval partiality for the bizarre and fantastic” and “articulating a medieval exoticism with regards the distantly strange as deviating in principle from ones own being— as an entirely other” (197).
In what ways does this begin the idea of European exceptionalism that is not necessarily argued in Phillips piece. Can these monstrous perceptions of the oriental be an example of the beginning of race and racism?
I agree, from reading the mapping part of the readings, I felt that it was necessary to pin point that the idea of the "monstrous" was something that alienated those who were unique to European culture. Although it didn't directly create race, its pretty clear that it was one of the founding reasons why it slowly started to be molded.
Trade routes to China and India were some of the earliest of the ancient and medieval world. It's not as though people in these areas were completely new to the European world. Perhaps though second hand accounts of travelers confusing the people of the Orient with other people who may have attacked or given these travelers negative experiences are what really drove these perceptions to people in Europe who were not able to travel and see the Orient firsthand , thus starting the basic ideas of what we term as racism now.
What I noticed that was rather interesting is the origin of the word monster and how over time it changed to a more negative connotation than what we're used to today. When originally using the word it signified several things such as striking and remarkable, signs from the gods or even and expression of nature's creative freedom.So in naming these various groups, Monstra, was no more at least in my opinion the notation of someone different than what people were used to. What it has become though is this negative stereotype of savagery. This progression through various maps and reports from different explorers from it origins to how it is seen now is quite illuminating.
Agreed: the way that language can be nefariously repurposed is striking. As I read that bit that you're mentioning, I was reminded about the etymology of "fable," and it's close relationship to "fabulous" and "fabulistic"--especially since we learned that some of these expeditions were grounded on fabulistic stories.
Something I found as compelling as learning about the creation of "monster" people in the medieval imagination was being reminded that the European identity was likewise synthesized, albeit by different process. Although Phillips offers a litany of examples as to what led to that, I found the correspondence between Emperor Fredrick II and Henry III (on page 43) to be the most interesting because of it's mention of the pecking order that the seemed to operate by, the result of being "forced to develop at the very least so practical working explanation or justification or narrative to describe their relations with one another." I think this particular passage struck me because I was reading these texts with the intention of trying to answering the question from our first class meeting, and I felt that the concerns about national identity, stratification, and labor resonated seemed to be nestled here as well (if only peripherally).
I posted a comment before but it isnt showing up. As a follow up, I think the idea of a "cultural other" was predominant in the map making process, fueled by this growing Euro-centralism. Munker does a good job of of describing the detail of the mappa mundi and bringing to light some shocking analysis behind the symbols and depictions on the maps. Friedman follows up with this information and clearly points out the need to marginalize the culturally different. The most interesting point is the creation of a mysticism surrounding these peoples. Fantastical stories and legends are crafted as an identity of these various groups of people based on simple things such as diet and tradition. Because it is not a part of European reality, does it somehow become fantasy?
I totally agree with you. That's why I believe that ignorance is what brought down many strong cultures around the world during that time. Therefore, as you mentioned "Fantastical stories and legends are crafted as an identity of these various groups of people based on simple things such as diet and tradition" was made up for indigenous to believe that their world was superior to them. Psychological speaking, European wanted that the New World believed that they knew the World and making them feel inferior to them. Doing so, Europeans will have the total power and control over them psychologically.
These readings of this week, it tries to explain the origin of racism and how was explained tremendously around the world. In fact, Spaniard and Portuguese created the racism in which it is known as “esclavitud” during the expansion. The race is a means coined by the conquerors in America to name all those who have the Spanish language in foreign lands. All nobles and elite people tried to establish a superiority to other race. Which it makes sense when ignorant people were so influenced accepting this though. If we examined the maps of the trajectory of the conquerors and “navegantes.” We can acknowledge that they did not face any issue to input this philosophy to their new territories. “The New World and its people were so totally unfamiliar and unexpected to their first discoveries, indeed almost like another planet, that the latter had little alternative but to fall back on the ethnographies that were already implicated” (Phillips, page 63). This makes wonder what would happen if the Old World and the New World would have faced at the same level of technology and knowledge? Perhaps the history would have been written in a different way or not?
For this weeks readings I feel we should discuss why pre modern societies (In antiquity and beyond) used the depiction of the "other" to characterize peoples who were not in the majority. Why did societies characterize people as "other" whether it was called "Race" or was based on other characteristics. This discussion I feel will answer a lot of our questions that we posed last week about Race.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading the pieces listed under "Imaging an Outside World," I tried to resist the temptation to see these as early examples of race making, especially since they were based so much on imagined peoples, creatures or monstra. At the same time, I think that these may be manifestations of Eurocentrism and xenophobia predicated on what could be characterized as a (universal?) fear of the unknown. However, another way of approaching this question is to consider the extent to which the term race or rasa was so connected to the notions of caste and stain, as described in the Martinez and Nirenberg pieces. If race is somehow linked to systems of oppression, then these two linguistic connections become really important and possibly suggest that what we consider to be race making is, to a large extent, the creation of caste based on some type of stigma or stain.
DeleteI agree with Mike's idea of universal fear of the unknown. In "Experiencing Strangeness", many of these medieval maps were crafted and outlined with major detail of the known world, while that of which was unknown was subject to assumption and alteration by the hands of the cartographer. As for the labeling of other, an example from this reading was simple things such as eating habits which often led to the name the group was given. Also, forms of social (political) organization that were different than European styles and ideas helped to enforce the idea of "strangeness" in terms of the European norm. This reading brings up the point that strangeness is strictly linked to the accepted reality of a given group of peoples.
DeleteI agree with you Mike. I understand your temptation in seeing the race making in, “Imagining an Outside World.” I think that the monstrous representations of the other in medieval maps are in-themselves a system of oppression mentioned in Martinez and Nuremberg. Considering that many of the Europeans read unrealistic and fantastical accounts of these places, as mentioned in Phillips’ piece, it’s possible that many Europeans began to formulate their own racial perceptions on the “other.” Along with these adventure stories, these maps create a false representation of the other which can ultimately lead to race.
DeleteI agree with your assessment, however, would it not be accurate to suggest that this racism is more in line with the “concepts of pollution and purity, especially when enforcing social and political divisions, which have been exploited by the ruling classes to maintain their privileges?” If you want to isolate any group, like Jews, gays, blacks, etc. the best way is to suggest that they are a source of pollution; or impure. I think that in Medieval Europe, religion and the concept of purity played a large part in their ethnic cleansing campaign.
DeleteI want to focus on the mapping aspect of this weeks readings.
ReplyDeleteMunkler argues that there are two main factorts that contribute to European perceptions of the oriental through mapping, “a presumption of specifically medieval partiality for the bizarre and fantastic” and “articulating a medieval exoticism with regards the distantly strange as deviating in principle from ones own being— as an entirely other” (197).
In what ways does this begin the idea of European exceptionalism that is not necessarily argued in Phillips piece. Can these monstrous perceptions of the oriental be an example of the beginning of race and racism?
I agree, from reading the mapping part of the readings, I felt that it was necessary to pin point that the idea of the "monstrous" was something that alienated those who were unique to European culture. Although it didn't directly create race, its pretty clear that it was one of the founding reasons why it slowly started to be molded.
DeleteTrade routes to China and India were some of the earliest of the ancient and medieval world. It's not as though people in these areas were completely new to the European world. Perhaps though second hand accounts of travelers confusing the people of the Orient with other people who may have attacked or given these travelers negative experiences are what really drove these perceptions to people in Europe who were not able to travel and see the Orient firsthand , thus starting the basic ideas of what we term as racism now.
DeleteWhat I noticed that was rather interesting is the origin of the word monster and how over time it changed to a more negative connotation than what we're used to today. When originally using the word it signified several things such as striking and remarkable, signs from the gods or even and expression of nature's creative freedom.So in naming these various groups, Monstra, was no more at least in my opinion the notation of someone different than what people were used to. What it has become though is this negative stereotype of savagery. This progression through various maps and reports from different explorers from it origins to how it is seen now is quite illuminating.
ReplyDeleteAgreed: the way that language can be nefariously repurposed is striking. As I read that bit that you're mentioning, I was reminded about the etymology of "fable," and it's close relationship to "fabulous" and "fabulistic"--especially since we learned that some of these expeditions were grounded on fabulistic stories.
DeleteSomething I found as compelling as learning about the creation of "monster" people in the medieval imagination was being reminded that the European identity was likewise synthesized, albeit by different process. Although Phillips offers a litany of examples as to what led to that, I found the correspondence between Emperor Fredrick II and Henry III (on page 43) to be the most interesting because of it's mention of the pecking order that the seemed to operate by, the result of being "forced to develop at the very least so practical working explanation or justification or narrative to describe their relations with one another." I think this particular passage struck me because I was reading these texts with the intention of trying to answering the question from our first class meeting, and I felt that the concerns about national identity, stratification, and labor resonated seemed to be nestled here as well (if only peripherally).
ReplyDeleteI posted a comment before but it isnt showing up. As a follow up, I think the idea of a "cultural other" was predominant in the map making process, fueled by this growing Euro-centralism. Munker does a good job of of describing the detail of the mappa mundi and bringing to light some shocking analysis behind the symbols and depictions on the maps. Friedman follows up with this information and clearly points out the need to marginalize the culturally different. The most interesting point is the creation of a mysticism surrounding these peoples. Fantastical stories and legends are crafted as an identity of these various groups of people based on simple things such as diet and tradition. Because it is not a part of European reality, does it somehow become fantasy?
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you. That's why I believe that ignorance is what brought down many strong cultures around the world during that time. Therefore, as you mentioned "Fantastical stories and legends are crafted as an identity of these various groups of people based on simple things such as diet and tradition" was made up for indigenous to believe that their world was superior to them. Psychological speaking, European wanted that the New World believed that they knew the World and making them feel inferior to them. Doing so, Europeans will have the total power and control over them psychologically.
DeleteThese readings of this week, it tries to explain the origin of racism and how was explained tremendously around the world. In fact, Spaniard and Portuguese created the racism in which it is known as “esclavitud” during the expansion. The race is a means coined by the conquerors in America to name all those who have the Spanish language in foreign lands. All nobles and elite people tried to establish a superiority to other race. Which it makes sense when ignorant people were so influenced accepting this though. If we examined the maps of the trajectory of the conquerors and “navegantes.” We can acknowledge that they did not face any issue to input this philosophy to their new territories. “The New World and its people were so totally unfamiliar and unexpected to their first discoveries, indeed almost like another planet, that the latter had little alternative but to fall back on the ethnographies that were already implicated” (Phillips, page 63). This makes wonder what would happen if the Old World and the New World would have faced at the same level of technology and knowledge? Perhaps the history would have been written in a different way or not?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete