When the Balinese accepted Clifford Geertz as a co-villager into their society, he was given an opportunity to see and analyze their culture through a Balinese point of view. Bali is a friendly natured society that has been well studied, so it is no surprise that Geertz was instantly attracted to the fury and violence of the less acknowledged Balinese cockfights. In this article, Geertz provides an anthropological analysis of the cockfights and their representation of the status hierarchy that is internalized by the Balinese and veiled by a seemingly friendly and equal society.
Geertz’s writing maintains an enjoyable balance of personal anecdotes and factual information and rhetorically appeals to his audience. It is clear that Geertz has an anthropological angle of vision towards the cockfights, and it is expressed through his references and footnotes. He acknowledges the work of fellow anthropologists and sociologists, using their terms and thoughts to add build his own ideas. By including the information from other studies on the Balinese, Geertz appeals to ethos and adds to his credibility and trustworthiness. His use of complex language suggests that he is targeting a more educated audience, such as social scientists; however, Geertz includes a personal story in the introduction scatters humor throughout the article, allowing his message to still be understood by the average public. He appeals to logos by presenting data that gives an in depth background of the Balinese cockfights, allowing him to formulate a logical argument.
I agree with Geertz’s main argument that the cockfights metaphorically express the status hierarchy of Balinese society. Their society is mostly friendly and equal without sexual differentiation; however, cockfights are a unisexual activity where a villager’s dignity, honor, and status are momentarily affected. Rather than allow it to dictate the village, true class warfare is sublimated into a more socially acceptable fight between two chickens; however, there are some things that I disagree with Geertz on.
Although I agree with Geert’z main argument, I think that he may overestimate the magnitude with which the cockfights represent social status. While it may have a part in the reason the Balinese villager’s participate in cockfights, other factors may also have an impact. Geertz mentions that the Balinese despise all animalistic behaviors or actions and fear the dark powers of animalistic demons, yet he only briefly explains that cockfighting may be a sacrifice for such evil. These facts provide a new angle of vision that express a different purpose for the Balinese cockfights. He addresses this alternate view but does not refute it as the main purpose for cockfighting, so this information seems to conflict with his argument.
Geertz’s took an anthropological point of view on the cockfights; therefore, he saw how they were a representation of the Balinese society. As an animal science major, my views differ from Geert’z significantly. I would view the cockfights through the impacts they had on the cocks. Geertz fails to mention any moral values relating to the animal cruelty involved in cockfighting. In fact, he describes the fury of the cockfights as “beautiful” and “abstract”. It’s as if he disregards the concept of right and wrong when analyzing the cockfights, and does not see the abuse of the cocks as a problem. This article challenges my beliefs because Geertz and I have differing angles of vision.
I may not agree with some of his points, but Geertz’s article does a good job at sparking intellectual thought about one’s own culture. Geertz takes the simple act of cockfighting and looks at its deeper meaning, using that to define the social and cultural establishments of Balinese society. This has allowed me to think about what actions in my culture may also have deeper meanings. The article shows that looking at an action from a different angle of vision could reveal an underlying purpose for the action. Geertz does not jump to the conclusion that the Balinese fight cocks just for entertainment and gambling. He believed that the cockfights had a specific purpose, and he sought to discover it. I believe that his article stimulates an interest in discovering ambiguous meanings by taking different views on a subject rather than the seemingly obvious views. He explains that societies have different interpretations of themselves. This also makes me wonder what my actions say about myself and my community. Are my actions representations of the struggles and success I face in life, and do different people interpret my actions differently based on their points of view?
Geertz gained access into the lives of the Balinese villagers and was introduced to their cockfighting through their eyes and their interpretations. He was able to “read” the cockfights as though they were words in the collective text of the Balinese culture. When analyzing the cockfights, Geertz did not see them as just a way for the Balinese to entertain themselves. Instead, Geertz saw the emotion in it and saw the expression of the allusive caste system of Balinese society.
No comments:
Post a Comment