by designs 66 Replies latest social current
The "Awake" magazine ripped off the story about the Tasaday tribe from Nat Geo and printed it as fact. When the nat geo story was discredited the "Awake" did a peculiar retraction, coz , of course "Jehovah's Spirit Directed" organization is never wrong.
Before that the "Awake" wrote a poor imitation of the "Bricklayers Story" as fact too, but no retraction on that one, this was all decades ago, but I knew from then on that they made things up.
Lisa Bobeesa:
Well you would have to ask them to see how they felt about losing their hand-made canoes and their ability to make them.
Did they? Or did they no longer know any other way? One would have to ask them.
This is not the right way to see the matter.
When these Aleutians were offered the boats with outboard engines, they were still able to make their own canoes. They chose boats instead. One would assume they preferred boats, and saw no point in keeping the canoes. Maybe as a relic of times past, but not as a practical way to do for a living.
I wish Cousteau had asked THEM that question, whether they regretted the loss of the canoes, before he aired the show. That is exactly my point. He was regretting the loss of a skill and a way of fishing; but those who had engaged in that way of fishing for much longer than Cousteau had been alive were not regretting it. Oh, how sorry he was for them; only he didn't have to do for a living that way. He would go away in his own modern boat. Now, his ancestors made the mistake of not living in the Stone Age thousands of years ago, so he was able, one could even suspect "allowed" to have that. Not the Aleutians.
Your culture values learning certain other languages and cultures, so you are just following your own cultural norms.
It would be interesting for you to know -and I am not lying- that there are still some people in my world who say you sort of pollute yourself by learning the language of the Barbarians. Yep, you've sort of given up on your own values. Fortunately for us so-called traitors, the world has proved these "purists" wrong. Even they are learning English. It is very useful to talk, say, to Ahmadinejad or the Chinese.
I'm not kidding you: When I was a teen-ager, there were many people who would NOT study English, but would take other languages instead, because English was the language of the empire. I'm happy to say that this gave me a "hell" of an advantage. At the very least, they had to recognize they had been utter fools, but this they did when they had to study the language of the barbarians later in life, when they were not able to master it so well. These are "the purists", those who would like us not to become "contaminated" with foreign vices.
I would like to make a comment here as well. In this post, as in many others, I find myself in a very different situation that most people on this forum. This is, I believe, a reflection of where I stand in life with respect to many people on this forum. In here, I don't speak seeing myself from the point of view many of you guys see yourselves. I think as if I were the Indian.
The wider point I am trying to make is that some people, probably full of good intentions, would like to "preserve" this wonderful culture, and therefore DENY them the possibility of doing away with things and habits that they choose to drop. These people would suggest that this tribe be kept on a freezer, as perennial children who would not be allowed to decide what they want to do with their own lives, which should come first than their culture. I am afraid that some scientist or "social scientist", some revolutionary, will wield his or her prestige to say, "Let's keep them that way", only so he or she can have subjects for a study, or "to prove their point". That is the kind of good intentions that pave the road to hell. "You're wonderfully pure and pristine; YOU HAVE TO STAY THAT WAY, whether you want it or not.
I remember one time when a group of foreign people went to a certain country (I'm not telling you which one) and found themselves happy to "wade" a river. Their word, not mine, and it was said in English. It made for a wonderful adventure to them. The children of that town "wade" that river every day. Well, not every day; some times the river is so full of water that it is dangerous to cross and they have to stay on their respective sides. They don't find any adventure in crossing the river. It is a nuisance. They have to get wet every time. Wouldn't it be great if they had a bridge? Points of view, eh?
The beacon of reality award for the day goes to dgp for the post above.
re: comment on cruises. I can see it as a sort of Club Med. It is funny to think people are soaking up a different cultural experience. I went from being a tourist in NY to a long time resident. These buses full of suburban people drive into the city. Tour guides point out Central Park as the bus whizzes past it. They seem the large crowd in front of the Metropolitan Museum of ARt but no one ventures inside for even ten minutes to see a rare masterpiece of art. Broadway is also a quick glance out the window. No one actually sees any plays, Broadway or off-Broadway. I gave my church group a long list of resident restaurants, real gems that are affordable. Very different from home. Everyone at a Korean deli or Starbucks.
When I went to Europe, we made a point of venturing outside the major cities to do normal things. No one would believe I was American, despite my accent.
What is the point of travelling is you are immersed in the American culture that is a very small part of the native culture.
Walking through a forest is very different than looking at photgraphs on a calendar/
The off topic award of the day goes to BOTR for the post above.
P.S. - Band on the Run, I may start a thread soon where we can discuss Margaret Mead; I think it may be of interest to several people here.
I wanna see Patagonia....
The beacon of reality award for the day goes to dgp for the post above.
Agreed. It's good to have someone who can present a different perspective.
