AMS Group1( Jenna, Ty, Helen, Catherine)

Response to Helsinki/

Tampere Group C:

Cosmopolitan

1) Having worldwide rather than limited or provincial scope or bearing.

2) Having wide international sophistication.

3) Composed of persons, constituents, or elements from all or many parts of the world.

Source: Merriam-Webster On line. 18 September, 2008.

We find your challenge to the wold ‘cosmopolitan’ interesting because it was in a way similar to and different from our challenge at the same time. The discussion on refugees is an interesting one. Why are refugees not regarded as cosmopolitan? If you look at the three definitions of cosmopolitan above,

you will see that the 2nd definition is the one which it seems not so inclusive of refugees. ‘Cosmopolitan’, in modern usage connotes the adjectives Exotic, Sophisticated, Stylish, just as the Warwick group 3 suggested and just as your image of the Cosmopolitan Magazine cover also suggests. Therefore a refugee who might have a worldwide scope isn't considered cosmopolitan because he/she does not choose to move to other countries but is forced to be on the move because of circumstances. In other words because of not having sop

histicated and exotic experiences.

Key Word – BEAUTY
Response

The Travelling Concept of Beauty

The concept of “beauty” [spelled in the Philippines as “byuti”] hav

e been appropriated by the bakla [loose translation: effeminate gay man] in the Philippines to refer to self—the self that is in his inner core, that corresponds to the true, the good, and the feminine. (Ethnographers such as Fenella Cannell, Mark Johnson, and Martin Manalansan have also noted this inventive usage in their respective studies.) So when one bakla tells another, “my byuti is very tired today,” he actually means that “I’m very tired today.”

This wonderful twining of “self” and “beauty” (in the traditional sense of the word) has visible implications of gender performances in the Philip

pines, particularly that of the bakla. The bakla makes a clear distinction between “natural beauty” (natural na ganda) and “authentic beauty” (tunay na ganda). Natural beauty relates to physical attractiveness that is biological determined or, as most Filipinos would say, God-given.

“Natural Beauty”

Angel Aquino, Actor

Authentic beauty, on the other hand, refers to the inner self, to byuti. For the baklas, it is not enough to say one has beautiful core. It is imperative for them to show and perform it to other people, particularly in pageants, which is arguably the most popular form of live entertainment in the country. The purpose of the performance

is to validate their identity.

“Authentic Beauty”

In realizing their byuti on stage, the bakla uses theatrical devices such as costumes, make-up, and lighting. He imitates the looks, the speech, and the walk of the models and stars in Manila and in Milan. For the bakla, his conception of authentic beauty does not contradict with the theatricality (read: artificiality) of his performance. His staged beauty is deemed authentic because it reflects his inner self, his byuti. And that could never be faked.

Keywords: beauty, self, authenticity, theatricality

Response to Helsinki Group A

Transcultural

(“…it seems that in almost every aspect of society or culture there is something "trans". So, if there is transculturality in everything, where is the place for cultural-specific? Is transcultural education really possible? And transcultural mental health?! If transcultural is a notion of UNIVERSALITY of culture, then why we just don't say UNIVERSAL? If transcultural refers to something common to all cultures then what's there to "exchange"? Isn't it just an oxymoron?”)

response:

Patrice Pavis, in the introduction to The Intercultural Performance Reader, discusses transcultural in an attempt to define the word intercultural. He explains transcultural theater to be something that goes beyond culture to find gestures and traditions that speak to the universality of the human condition beneath race, class and culture. The observation that your group made regarding the universality of culture is quite keen; however, we would like to postulate that perhaps the transcultural is found in small moments or brief experiences rather than in broader categories such as education or mental health.

We recognize the difficulty behind discovering anything that is universal, but there is a beauty in stumbling across some common ground in a world of differences. Something transcultural doesn’t have to be universal, but if it can link two cultures for a moment and provides a forum for conversation, than it exists beyond the realm of the paradoxical.

This link is a street performance of a “transcultural waltz”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl3lbdRk_qE

A quote from the artist:

“Art is not just beauty. It is conveying a profound personal message. Any artist should work as mirror of society and reflect the important issues of life. Moreover, as an artist, I feel the obligation to have a positive impact on our reality. It is not important what you achieve with your talent. It is important how you share it.“

- Rafael Sotomayor

What makes this performance transcultural? We’re not entirely sure, but if it evokes something in you or reminds you of even a moment in your life, it has gone beyond the culture of the artist and taken a hold of you. Somehow, this performance evokes a different response in each of us. Rafael Sotomayer is using his art as a form of communication to transcend locality, culture, and perhaps even time. Is this not what art is supposed to do? Somehow bring us together through images, gestures, performances… education?

Staff Warwick Janelle Directions

We encourage all the students to use the comments function which is a link beneath each of the posts on the main blog page when you want to comment on a particular group response. This will keep the individual comments together with the subject posting and will make for a less 'messy' blog.

This suggestion comes to you from Ed, who has enjoyed what he's seen of the postings so far.

AMSTERDAM Group Response to Keywords: Tradition, Tanghal, Ephemeral

Group members:

Gargi Bharadwaj
Loreto Leonvendagar
meLê yamomo

Warwick Group 3 Response to Helsinki Group A: “Culture”

Thanks for the amusing video – here’s another image to analyse: Spitting is forbidden for Native Americans! We think the humorous interplay of the cultural symbols on display here is very interesting. What do you think??

As a question of whether such behaviour in the video is indeed “cultural”, it seems as if there is a difference, in English at least, between the words “cultural” and “cultured”. To be cultured implies an adherence to a socially-acceptable set of values and morals, whereas the word cultural merely denotes something to do with a culture in general.

In this case, the spitting can therefore be considered cultural, even if this is not cultured. The act itself confirms a disobedience towards the prevailing behavioural standards accepted by most of society, so is inherently cultural, even if it is cultural deviancy.

Within certain subcultures, though, spitting is considered acceptable, such as on the football or baseball field. For other groups, particularly adolescents, spitting in public can be viewed as a marker of cultural identity, symbolizing a rejection of normative values and giving a communal sense of belonging within a subcultural group at odds with the dominant culture.

However, the act of spitting as a culturally-embedded performance varies from culture to culture. According to the following report (http://www.renmenbi.com/spitting-culture), spitting is an everyday and accepted occurrence in China. This brings us onto the broader transcultural questions of manners and etiquette.


As much as the spitting video makes fun of social convention, etiquette to too great a degree can seem stuffy and similarly comical:

With so many differences between acceptable behaviours, we wonder if there are many behaviours which are transculturally acceptable? Would there be any benefit to a standardized worldwide etiquette? It may stop some intercultural misunderstandings, but would it also be symptomatic of cultural imperialism?

Urgent Post Headings and Footers

ATTENTION!!

PLEASE always start your new blog posts with your location (A, W, or T) and your group (1, 2, or 3) and your names + the keyword, location and group you are responding to (if known)

PLEASE end your blog entries by filling in the 'Labels for this post' box (below) with the keyword(s) you have responded to, your location and your group --and (if you wish) further ways of showing the message's relationship to other postings.

Warwick Group 1 (Adam, Dev, Meseret)

1) Response to Group A (Helsinki). Keyword: Litsedeistvo.

N.b. This response is directly rooted to one of our keyword's: Pakarnnatam.

We were intrigued by your image of Hilary Clinton's many 'changing faces'. We wanted to apply our keyword, Pakarnnatam, to this set of images.

Pakarnnatam is concerned with transition, 'change' and with 'movement'. A metamorphosis of one character in to another. A metamorphosis which stems from one actor playing multiple roles.

What Pakarnnatam does, essentially, is reveal the transition itself between each component of many 'changing faces'.

If, like Hilary, we all have many 'faces', many 'social masks', what Pakarnnatam does is draw our attention to the reality of this, it makes the differences and transitional periods between our 'changing faces' tangible: through, primarily, movement and gesture. Something we can see, hear and almost touch.

This also brings into consideration the sociological, psychological and cultural make-up of an individual. Through pakarnnatam, the actor can experience sociological, psychological and cultural changes as he embodies the identity of another character. Does this not mirror the sociological and psychological (and to a much lesser extent, cultural) forces shaping an individual at each of his/her many 'changing faces'?

As in Pakarnnatam, like many theatrical forms, the circumstances informing the actor (e.g. the script) come to define gesture, movement and expression. In short, the whole body. The circumstances come to define the actor's 'changing faces'/performing multiple identities. This is the same for us in real life. Our contemporary circumstances, politically, sociologicaly etc. come to inform and manipulate our identities.

And one more point, again which Pakarnnatam can help elaborate upon. It is not just our 'face' which is changing. It is our whole body and mind. And not only this. But our whole identity. We understand that 'face' works synechdochally as a part to refer to the whole. But this detracts from the importance of body and mind in establishing the change between these changing identities.


Please refer to the link below. You will see the transitions from animal states (n.b. the state of an elephant) to the neutral state of an actor and in to character states.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJhQ4EjQuVQ&feature=related

Warwick Group 2 (Courtney & Ridzal) responds to Mele Yamomo (tanghal) and AMS Group 1 (Ty's, palabas)

We noticed that the two Tagalog words introduced on the blog had strong similarities in their definitions. Both words, in a sense, have something to do with showing or displaying, to reveal e.g. "premiere" or to expose "exhibit". A performance, then, pretty much does all of these things - it is showing something, displaying, and not just itself (what is on stage, for example) but also representing something outside of the theatre. To fall back on a cliche, it makes real what is not there, but also illuminates what is absent. Taking the definition of tanghal as v. to proclaim e.g. Itinanghal siyang kampeon - He is declared a champion, and palabas as adv. aloud, plainly; performance also lays bare or names something in a manner that allows the audience to better understand something larger outside of itself.

While there are obviously rich similarities between these two terms, there are also discrepancies that delineate one from another. Tanghal, for example, includes in its definition "to exalt," which is absent from palabas. This slippage between the two words illustrates how necessary a precise lexicon is, when it comes to articulating our thoughts and ideas about performance and its consequences (social, political, etc.). The nuance that one term captures is omitted from the other, even though the two, upon initial inspection, appear to be synonymous (and share a linguistic background).

In order to cultivate the more expansive, accurate lexicon, we think it is important to be more flexible when it comes to incorporating phrases and terms from a multiplicity of sources, cultures, and linguistic backgrounds. A systematic reconsideration of how we represent and recognize abstract concepts might be more frequently associated with the methodology of the sciences, but it also has the potential to enhance scholarship. In many branches of the physical sciences, taxonomies are introduced as systems of classification that allow us to name things so we can think about them. In a similar fashion, scholarship depends on our capacity to develop a creative, precise, and provocative system of classification and representation.

Having said that, we also acknowledge that are inherent complications and problematic elements embedded in our suggestion for a more expansive, flexible lexicon. For example, it would be quite problematic if the terms and phrases from non-Western backgrounds being incorporated into academic discourse get appropriated by that Western environment and alienated from their original context. Such a scenario would subjugate non-Western languages in the name of recognizing their value and potential.