Questions and statements.

1)          Is the inclusion of special education students in classes beneficial to the children?

                Although inclusion would allow students to interact in the mainstream, inclusion would hinder the education of special needs children.

2)  

How can schools approach the problem of bullying?

                Opponents of zero tolerance polices argue that innocent children sometimes are punished; however research shows that bullying leads to a decrease in academic performance and an increase in suicides. The recent portrayal of bullying in media in shows like Glee and the recent suicides show that a nationwide zero tolerance on bullying is necessary.

3)   

   Are standardized tests necessary?

                Standardized tests have become the central point of school academics and subjects that are not reading or math have become not important. Standardize testing has produce children who lack the cultural information such as history and other liberal studies.

4)    

 In an age of diversity in the United States is Multiculturalism teaching important?

                Many schools believe that importance of teaching is being able to prepare students for benchmark tests such as the FCAT, but lessons on Multiculturalism teaches children life lesson that allow them to learn and accept peoples differences.

5)     

 What is a legislation act that would benefit the United States?

The Dream Act would allow permanent residency to non-citizen student who finished high school and are pursuing college or the military. Rather than allowing any one residency, this legislation would allow people who contribute to the United States society in a beneficial way, residency.

Pre-writing Thinking Process

It has been along thinking process as I think about how to write a synthesis essay on The Ways of Seeing, the Panopticism, and Kanye’s West Power video. I read the readings for a third time trying to see how I can connect all to Kanye’s Wests song. Through my thinking process I came up with a three bubble diagram so that it could help me come up with a thesis. I know the essay is going to center on the concept of power and how the three see power. Berger see power as the power of images and how people can take an image and take it out of their historical context thereby mystifying it.  A question I ask myself is it important to take into account that the concept of art means different things to the rich and the poor. In Foucault’s Panopticism power is intensified by using the Panopticon concept. This is where  I can somehow connect the both readings. While both of them deal with observing/seeing and both use adaptation, in Foucault everyone can be the observer and the society as a whole is responsible for power. The society shares the power to create a more efficient society. The question that arises is if everyone in able to use images as a form of power in Bergers and if they convey the same type of power. There is one line that I trying to figure out what it says, “They surround us in the same way as a language surrounds us. They have entered the mainstream of life over which they no longer, in themselves, have power,” I think this line will help me figure out what to write. THE PROBLEM IS trying to connect these two writings with Kanye’s video. Kanye’s video shows the composition unity that Berger said described to emit power and it looks like a painting that would be in the Sistine chapel. Could this be what Berger was referring when he said that images could be taken out of context to be used for other purposes (the heavenly skies)? Kanyes’ images can also display that he is the system in power only to be defeated by power itself. Is he saying that power is a responsibility??

One point in Panopticism

One point that Michel Foucault presents in “Panopticism” is the concept of the Pantipcon building which allowed observance to be a powerful tool. The design of the Pantipcon allowed everything to be observable from the watchtower. Those who were being observed could not contact others. With no contact between them, there is no chance for disorder. The power is distributed evenly within the society, anybody can become the observer. This concept was different from the popular norm of the king having all the power. Just knowing that you were being observed functioned better than using violence. The idea of the Pantipcon allowed for the emergence of using reform rather than making prisoners a spectacle. The Pantipcon concept creates efficiency; it is this efficiency that makes the Pantipcon concept easy to be applied to many disciplines. This is supported by Foucault’s statement, “Is it surprising that prisons resemble factories, schools, barracks, hospitals which all resemble prisons?”   

Pollan's Counterargument to Madsen

Although Kyle Madsen says that “Pollan’s angle of vision may be too dominant and intense for some readers,” Pollan takes into account the demographic of the readers of the New York Times. The readers of the New York Times tend to be liberal and college educated. According to the New York Times media kit 56% of readers have a college or higher education. People who are liberal and have a college education are more concerned about climate change. The content of the writing shows that his angle is direct toward the liberal readers. He includes the liberal audience by criticizing Dick Cheney,”…the vice president, who famously dismissed energy conservation as a `sign of personal virtue.`” Also Madsen argues that Pollan’s “intense angle of vision may leave out some readers.” However Pollans colloquial structure such as asking rhetorical questions like “So what exactly would I have to show for all my trouble” gives an atmosphere of a conversation between Pollan and the reader.

Analysis

As Geertz and his wife ventured to a Balinese village, he did not know that he was going to study so intently the art of the Balinese cockfights. Geertz and his wife were able to overcome culture barriers to enter the Balinese community and observe closely something that had not been studied, the cockfights. The cockfights brought with them a chaotic atmosphere to the quiet Balinese culture. Not only did the cockfights bring entertainment and money to the community, they also hold a deeper meaning. In a country where there is gender equality, only men fight roosters. The roosters are part of the men and more importantly than running the risk of losing money is the risk that challenges the men’s honor.  Cockfights are organized to illustrate the importance of honor in the game. Everything from determining the umpire and being able to pay the bet immediately show the importance of trustworthiness and honor in the society. The deep fights involve more equal in strength roosters and attract bigger bets, but what is important for those in deep fights is honor. The shallow fights attract less money and smaller crowds but attract those who only care about the money.  They are looked down upon and are in a lower level in the stratified culture of the Balinese. Being the observer, Geertz realizes that the cock fights are a part of the culture having guidelines that everyone must follow. At the end of the day, whether you win or lose is not a drastic change in your life.  Winning or losing a cockfight will not change your social status. The cockfights are just a part of the Balinese culture and as an anthropologist Geertz has been able to observe the culture and write down his observations so others can glance into one of the aspects of the Balinese and be able to understand them

Through how a men care for his rooster one can identify the importance of the rooster to the men. As the word cockfight suggests it has a double meaning. Not only does it represent the roosters, but it represents an aspect of the men. The roosters become to symbolize the men’s honor and prestige.  The men personified the roosters by grooming them and feeding them.  They bathe them in what is equivalent to that of used in ceremonies. This is not common in a culture where animals are considered to be a representation of evil. The sculptures of demons are represented by animals. The cockfights are a bridge to the Powers of Darkness. Like the Aztecs who sacrificed their enemies each day so that the sun could rise, cockfights hold a religious purpose. The cockfights serve as way of being able to pacify the demons that threaten to destroy their lives.  

The cockfights have made the Balinese community into a stratified community. As a means of economy, the cockfights have been able to circulate the money around the village and other villages. The organizations of the cockfight bets show the stratification of the community. The deep fights are higher stakes than the shallow side bets. This is because those in the center are usually wealthier than those in the peripheral. The one center bet is surrounded by many smaller bets which is equivalent to the few wealthy and the many poor in our modern society. And just like in our society, the center bet controls how much the side bets are going to be worth. The social hierarchy made by the cockfighting puts those who just gamble for money at the bottom of the social pyramid and those who place the highest bets (deep play) are at the highest position. Those in the highest bets are regarded to have the most dignity and respect.

Furthermore there is a deeper value besides monetary value behind the cockfights. In reality the cockfights is a means of defending a man’s honor and respect. Because honor and prestige are at stake, men do anything to strengthen their bird from stuffing “its wound with various sorts of medicines” to blowing its mouth. The importance of honor is seen throughout the whole cockfight process. Men only bring their cocks to umpires who are known to have honor and respect and the center bets are given to the umpire to be held. It is very uncommon for arguments to sprout from the players. Those greedy for money are looked down upon and not seen as true cockfighters.

While one outside of the Balinese culture might see cockfights as animal cruelty, the Balinese see the fights as insight to their own lives. A lot about a person is revealed through the fights. They are like a form of art; the fights are the medium that shows the individual.  If your only purpose for participating in the cockfights is the money your greediness is exposed. The pride and loyalty is shown by betting in favor of those in your own group.  Cockfights are an evaluating experience to the men and they are able to learn by the fights.

A culture is made up of several elements that make it functional. The Balinese cockfights are only one aspect of the culture. Being in the outside of a culture, one glances inside the Balinese through Geertz’s observations. We are able to see that cockfights are not just for betting purposes and that the Balinese do not see it as animal cruelty. We are able to see the culture from the Balinese point of view. Although the culture is not defined by one element, Geertz gives awareness to one of the most important aspects of the Balinese culture.