By Daniel Preissler - Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:31 pm
- Sat Feb 18, 2012 12:31 pm
#25317
Interesting and important post, Jon!
To me exoticism means: A (mis)undersanding of another culture's aspects due to a (mostly positive) interpretation following the rules of a person's own structure without reflection. A person sees something in another culture (or some of it's aspects) that has been produced (as a concept) in the person itself - or let's say in the person itself as a person of it's own culture. People tend to project concepts, thoughts, fears, hopes and any kind of positive or negative feeling onto the other and among the multiple others especially onto Africa and everything related to it. The African leaving in complete harmony with the nature is a quite prototypical exoticist (exotistic?) european concept. The negative (racist) part of the same structure could be
the African who is unable to stay in peace with his neighbours unless he's colonized. This is more or less the difference between Rousseau's "bon sauvage" and Voltaire's half man-half meat eating monkey concept. It's two parts of the same thing.
I don't have the feeling that I explained it completely -not sure if this is possible anyway. Maybe I'll find some better examples later.
Greets, Daniel
PS: Non of these points is treaten completely - you know this would demand a much more direct conversation, much more nights and much more wine - and still then it's not that probable to be done. D
No, they would not!djembeweaver wrote:I know people who have performed the same ceremony but seem perfectly happy to accept the african mystical explanation. Would they be accused of exoticism I wonder? They seem very sincere.
You weren't! At least not by me.BTW I understood 'exoticism' to mean a superficial and idealised adoption of another culture's mystical beliefs and practices. I thought I had been accused of that in relation to my comment 'Sometimes you shouldn't let the truth get in the way of a good story'.
To me exoticism means: A (mis)undersanding of another culture's aspects due to a (mostly positive) interpretation following the rules of a person's own structure without reflection. A person sees something in another culture (or some of it's aspects) that has been produced (as a concept) in the person itself - or let's say in the person itself as a person of it's own culture. People tend to project concepts, thoughts, fears, hopes and any kind of positive or negative feeling onto the other and among the multiple others especially onto Africa and everything related to it. The African leaving in complete harmony with the nature is a quite prototypical exoticist (exotistic?) european concept. The negative (racist) part of the same structure could be
the African who is unable to stay in peace with his neighbours unless he's colonized. This is more or less the difference between Rousseau's "bon sauvage" and Voltaire's half man-half meat eating monkey concept. It's two parts of the same thing.
I don't have the feeling that I explained it completely -not sure if this is possible anyway. Maybe I'll find some better examples later.
About the same for me: 70 or 150 years, we're not talking about a constitution, are we? What I didn't appreciate was the approach towards the information and the person. At the same time, to be honest: I don't even believe it's 40 years old. The way they talk, their relationship makes me too sceptical.The important point about the putative 175 year-old drum was that it is very old - sometimes a good story helps create that sense of reverence. I really don't care exactly how old it is.
That depends on the level of the conversation: there is absolute truth (hard to see/ to get - a hard subject), truth for us as human beings, truth for us being part of a cultural sphere, truth for us as members of a nation (ask a "usual" French, German and English for the reason/s for World War 1.... d;-) ), truth for us as individuals. So let's sayPaul picked up on some of the paradoxes I was alluding to but the greater paradox is this: If a truth is only true when you believe in it, is it true? Pragmatically speaking if belief creates a more positive outcome than non-belief then choosing to believe would be a rational decision (William James struggled with this paradox). Sometimes a good story can provide a better truth then the facts.
it's true inside circle where people see it that way and get some benefit from it, isn't it?If a truth is only true when you believe in it,
Greets, Daniel
PS: Non of these points is treaten completely - you know this would demand a much more direct conversation, much more nights and much more wine - and still then it's not that probable to be done. D
traditional malinke music from Upper Guinea
specialist for sangban/dundunba
band: tolonba
contact: danielfpk@web.de
specialist for sangban/dundunba
band: tolonba
contact: danielfpk@web.de

