Sunday, April 20, 2008

Ethnographic Research Project

If I had the time and resources necessary to undertake an ethnographic fieldwork project anywhere in the world, I would venture to one of the major metropolitan areas of Japan, such at Tokyo or Osaka. The primary focus of my study would relate to concepts and understandings of Japanese history had by young people living in Japan today. The field work would consist of interviewing a number of students at various universities within the confines of the city. The people interviewed would not have to specialize in history or any other social science. In fact, it would be preferable to interview a number people who have different areas of study. The interviews would presumably take place on campus or other setting that would allow for the interviewee to contemplate the questions asked and to respond in truthful manner. Each person interviewed would be asked to sign a form which serves as a contractual agreement that I have the right to use the data collected from the interview within my article or other form of presentation of my findings. The interviews would be conducted with the aid of an interpreter since I do not speak Japanese. I would record each interview so that I could review the actual discourse while compiling and analyzing my data. This study would be worthwhile since an analysis of how a people view their own history is greatly indicative of their worldview. According to a few professors of East Asian History at IU Bloomington, many young people in Japan today know very little about the history of their country. This is due to the fact that Japan is the only first world nation which has an “official history,” or a view of history that is proclaimed by the government to be the only right interpretation. Therefore, this study would also be reflective of how worldview and concepts of national identity can be altered by how history is understood or utilized within a given cultural context.

This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Seven Reflection Question.

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Three Significant Varieties of Tradition

One group to which I feel as though I am very much a part and have been so for a significant amount of time is my group of friends who live in the same building as I do. Indeed, this group has had many traditions during the time in which I have been in college and have known the other members. These customs have in fact changed with time based upon a variety of factors that have affected the reasons and for engaging in the said activities. One tradition that was longstanding, but in recent time disappeared consisted of all of the group members eating at one of the many sushi restaurants in Bloomington on Friday nights. While this tradition was still practiced, it served to reaffirm who was considered part of the entirety of the faction. The reason for the disappearance of this habitual practice was primarily that many of the group members are now quite busy with the vast amount of work associated with being a senior. This means that the tradition only ceased in its practice due to the lack of free time had by the members. Another tradition that has become of increasing importance to members of this collective is congregating at the apartment of one of the members late on Saturday night in order to watch a movie or episodes of a TV show on DVD. This is primarily done simply so that the members can socialize and also discuss, and usually complain about, the honors thesis or other coursework that is causing them to have virtually no free time. This has become of increasing importance due to the fact that this small window of time often the only occasion during the week in which the group members are able to socialize with one another. One tradition that I had a part in the creation of is the annual crashing of faculty receptions in late April. This tradition began during my freshman year when many of my friends and I were running low on food towards the end of the semester. Due to the fact that both of my parents are college professors, I had previous knowledge of the qualities of food leftover after a faculty reception. So this has become a tradition based upon the fun associated with the hunt for free food.

This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Three Reflection Question

Sunday, April 6, 2008

Theoretical or Interpretive Approaches to Folklore

The theoretical or interpretive approach to Folklore that I find most compelling is Structuralism. According to this mode of thought, all forms of folklore take on a certain form within the given context of a society. This means that many different genres of folklore have a basic pattern which consists of certain parts that relate to each other to form a structure that is the entirety of a given form of folklore. In other words, all forms of folklore have given parts which fit together to create a formula that is recognizable to anyone who is part of the cultural context in which the given genre exists. This suggests that while each given construct of a genre of folklore is not necessarily culturally specific in that a formula may somehow be universal, each culture does have certain forms that are only understood within a specific cultural context. For example, the concept of a certain kind of joke may exist across cultural lines, yet the actual contents of the joke may only be understood in a certain group. This may be due to the humor of a joke or the general understanding of another given form of discourse to be reliant upon a given form of esoteric knowledge. In addition to this, narrative forms often fit into a given formula based on the type style, form, and aims of a given narrative. This means many commonalities can be found in the structural forms of narratives based on the reason for the composition of the narrative. In my view, Structuralism is in fact a great mode of interpreting verbal and literary forms of folklore through semiotic codes, but it seems that it is a bit more difficult to detect such formulas in other genres of folklore while still focusing on its relevance and function within a given context. This means that structuralism seems to focus more on the concept of classifying and understanding type of folklore rather than on the way that a given text was given cultural significance by being interrelated to other facets of a social group.

This blog entry is my response to the Chapter Six Reflection Question