Posts Tagged ‘Culture’

• Avruch (2002)

  Date: 2009.10.17 | Category: Study Reflections, Unit SSK12 | Response: 0

  Reflection (Do not use for the Learning Log)
  Unit: SSK12
  Week: 7
  Date: 17 October 2009

  Patrick shows us that the “inadequate ideas of culture” over simplify culture and disconnect culture from the very individuals that perpetuate its existence. I believe in one sentence Patrick beautifully captures the problem the inadequate ideas present, but you know me (or at least you’re learning, somewhat painfully), I don’t do one sentence. 🙂 May I take the liberty of expanding upon this nugget of truth (if there is even such a thing ;))?

  I believe Avruch is saying that the “inadequate ideas” individually or collectively, limit the diversity of culture(s), restrict the sense of cultural change, and/or confine culture merely to a set of national/ethnic customs.

  If we used all or most of the 6 “inadequate ideas” to form our understanding of culture, I believe we would find that it would be this monolithic thing (almost existing independent of humankind), everyone in a national or ethnic people group would have the same one, and that it would be unchanging and timeless. That might have worked for Tylor, but it is, as the words suggest, inadequate for Avruch.

  Dallas points out that Avruch says, “Using [the inadequate ideas of culture], we argue, greatly diminishes the utility of the culture concept as an analytical tool for understanding social action…” You might ask, “How so?” I suggest this is the key to Avruch’s argument. I would like to contextualise the context again. The title of the book is Culture and Conflict Resolution. Immediately we get a sense that we’re not just talking about culture, but rather Avruch’s understanding and desired use for understanding culture are put in context. That it’s about how culture affect peoples’ behaviour and their thinking, and how understanding peoples’ culture might help in conflict resolution, both on a grand scale or something as small as a discussion between two people or even the differences of opinion in our own tutorial group.

  Not just the book name, but also Avruch’s name raised questions for me. Avruch is a Jewish name, and so for me at least, this further contextualised the book and chapter. I wondered if he is Jewish then might the Middle East conflict and the Herculean task of finding a resolution there be at the forefront of his thinking. I did a little research and sure enough, Avruch might be considered an expert in Hebrew religious and secular culture, Israeli society, politics and government. He has written extensively in this field, so it would seem the Middle East is at the forefront of his mind. Being Jewish doesn’t invalidate his opinions of the situation; he is actually quite critical of Israel. As are many Jews, one reading of Ha’aretz Daily newspaper will show you that.

  Going back to the concept of culture with all of the above in mind we should get a better understanding of why the 6 “inadequate ideas”, the first and second definitions (at the very least) of culture, and especially the concept of “Culture as custom” are of little value to the analysis and assistance toward the resolution of conflict, big or small. These ideas and definitions inadequately address the complexity of varied and plural cultures, they don’t account for cultures’ fluidity and dynamism, and if culture is this reified thing, then it doesn’t allow for human individuality.

  In relation to Koral’s second question, I am a firm believer in the plurality of culture in the individual. I belong to a western culture; an Australian culture; I’m heavily influenced by British and American culture; I am saturated in popular culture through the mass media (how many of us have related something we saw or said back to The Simpsons?); I have a team culture at work that promotes professionalism, dressing smartly (i.e. suit and tie), going the extra mile attitude and always being prepared to help your fellow soldier in the trenches.

  I’m not sure I like to think of all of the above being influences for a conglomerated individual culture. I think they are distinct and separate. Whether they can stand on their own or they are interdependent, and especially dependent upon western culture is for another discussion. Perhaps this is why the term sub-culture is a good one. My workplace is an interesting illustration of this. I have worked for St.George Bank for many years and St.George has a well-entrenched and distinct culture, it’s a good one, a friendly one. For many years I have acted and thought according to the culture promoted. Since December of last year St.George Bank has been a part of The Westpac Group and Westpac has a very different culture, in many respects these cultures are in conflict. I have had to learn to think and act in a certain way for my colleagues in Westpac, while continuing to think and act the St.George way for my St.George colleagues. They have not blended for me; I participate separately in the collective cultures of each institution. Is this what Penny Oakes was referring to? Finally, I like Avruch’s example that “A person possesses and controls several cultures in the same way, as sociolinguists tell us, that even a so-called monolingual speaker controls different “registers” of the same language or dialect”. This is self-evident when you observe the way you talk and behave differently from the work or professional context to the familiar or social context.