Culture

How different are you from the main character in your book? In my book “The Giver”, Jonas was the main character. We both have 5 things that are the most important things in our lives. Mine were family, parkour, friends, atheism and comedy. Jonas’ 5 most important things to him, according to me, was the ceremony of 12, assignment, family, friends and rules. We do have some differences, but we also have a few similarities and I will be comparing them. The first most important thing to my life is family. family is the fourth most important thing to Jonas. In my family there is me, my mom, my dad and my brother. Jonas’ family is, his father. sister and mother. The only difference between our two families is that Jonas has a sister and l have a brother. I love my family a lot and Jonas did too until he felt he was betrayed by them.

Friends, to me, is the 3rd most important thing in my life. To Jonas, friends are his fifth most important thing to him. In “The Giver” Jonas’ friends were Asher and Fiona. My five best friends are Josh, Tristan, Hunter W., Hunter F., and Chase. Jonas liked his friends, but they weren’t the most important things to him. In my life, friends are very important to me, that’s why they’re number 3 on my list. I’m sure friends would be more important to Jonas if he had more free will and choices. The fifth most important thing to me is Comedy. Jokes, laughter, funny movies or shows, I love them. Without humor in my life, I would be incredibly depressed. I love joking around with my friends and just having a good time.

My favorite comedy movie is “Grown Ups” and my favorite comedy show is “Real-time With Bill Maher.” My favorite Joke is “guess what, what. chicken butt.” The most important thing to Jonas is his Ceremony of 12. He was incredibly nervous about it before it happened. It was something he was looking forward to his whole life. In his ceremony of 12, he and the rest of the current 12‘s got their alignment. In the book, Jonas was skipped but later was turned back to at the end. Also at the ceremony, everyone under 12 would move up a number. Jonas‘ assignment was the second most important thing to him. Although it would become his first and most important thing since his ceremony was over Jonas’ assignment was the job with the most honor in the community.

It was to become the new giver. In order for him to become the giver he needed to be the receiver of memory and receive memories from the current giver. The second most important thing in my life, without a doubt, is parkour. Parkour is a french word that means to run over or through. It’s a way of movement of getting over obstacles or from point A to point B. You do it safely and efficiently by using as little energy as possible. I’ve been doing parkour for about 2 years I think and I love it. It’s my favorite hobby sport and I don’t think I will ever grow tired of it. Now back to Jonas. Rules, until the end of the book, were Jonas’ 3rd most important thing. In the community, they would have the precision of language. He would correct people if they were wrong. Some rules he disregarded but mostly everybody did anyways. For example, he rode his dads bike before he was allowed to. So that’s why rules is number 3 on the list. The final thing I have to talk about is Atheism.

I guess it should be religion but my religion is being an Atheist. I study religion a lot and I‘m currently reading the book, “God is not one” which it talks about almost all of the main religions there are today. I think religion is important to me because religion has such a big influence on everybody’s life. I guess I am sort of agnostic since I am always open to new ideas and religions. Since none of them have persuaded me I currently don’t believe in a “God”, Well, those are the five most important things in my life and Jonas’ life according to me. My top 5 in order are family, parkour, friends, atheism and comedy. Jonas’ are the ceremony of 12, his assignment, and rules. family and friends. What are the 5 most important things in your life and are they similar to anybody in the books you’re reading?

Kings held a unique position in Egyptian society. Somewhere between human and divine nature, they were believed to have been chosen by the gods themselves to serve as their mediators on earth.” (HISTORY) The materials that were used to create Khafre’s Enthroned Statue, symbolized the Pharaoh’s time as King of Egypt and his eternal afterlife. The enthroned statue portrays the body of Khafre which shows the great power that given to him by God, and the formal design shows the qualities of religion and political status entombed in the statue. This unique design symbolizings his eternal life as being timeless with hidden religious messages that is depicted within the sculpture. The seated Statue reflects Khafre’s political nature and religious convictions of his time through the formal qualities of its design and iconography. The statue is made of diorite, which was extremely valuable, unbreakable stone, that symbolizes and expresses Khafre’s unwavering power as a Pharaoh.

Khafre’s enthroned statue is shown as how a King was supposed to be portrayed, with a perfect statue of divine flawlessness that is intertwined with lotus and papyrus plants symbolizing the unification of Egypt of that time period. Horus the sky god is show as extending his protective wings to shelter the Khafre’s Head. This statue plays an important role in the life of Pharaoh’s afterlife, because now only does it serves as his resting place and it also portrays the life force that accompanied him after death. This statue distinguishes how a King should be portrayed in that time period and still looked like a powerful King even after his death.

“Khafre’s enthroned statue is a funerary statue of the Pharaoh Khafre, who reigned during the fourth dynasty of ancient Egypt.” (Wiki2.org) The statue of Khafre is now located at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. The construction of Khafre’s Enthroned was made from anorthosite gneiss stone, which is very valuable and is an extremely hard dark stone that was brought four-hundred miles down the Nile River from the royal quarries. The statue highlights Khafre’s importance and power as the ruler of Egypt. The statue carved for Pharaoh’s valley temple locate near the Great Sphinx was part of how the funeral rituals were done in that time period. This was an important function that was done within the Egyptian tombs to show the life force that accompanied a person after death when the body leaves to go into the afterlife, but still needs a place to rest.

The statue of Khafre is an exquisite piece of art and of art history, that echo’s the period of time it was created in, to show the history of Egypt and its people, and stands to this day as a reminder of its significance and value of a long-ago era in history. Keeping this in mind, we learn that there were priceless pieces of artwork that were created, solely depending on each time period that may have similar meanings but also different messages and at the same time. Egyptian artists and sculptors adhered to a system of strict rules known as canon to create the consistencies of their artwork. The Egyptian canon suggested that perfection was to be rigid, and ageless while showing the idealization of the reality of the artwork. Art was also used to portray images of power and authority in those times of Ancient Egypt and the falcon covering Khafre’s head by Horus, who was the god the sky and heavens imply of Pharaoh’s divine status. Roughly 1,500 years later, the progress of the canon design emerged in the Greek artwork by reflecting its new ideals of perfectionism.

Artist and photographer, Sandy Skoglund spent her childhood traveling the country- her first few years of life is a reflection of the eclectic art she would later go on to create. Even early on in her life, it seemed as if Skoglund had an appreciation for art, studying art history and studio art at Smith College, and later completing her undergraduate studies at. The University of Iowa. Skoglund, throughout her college career, was interested in and studied multimedia art, printmaking, and various other art forms; she even went as far as studying abroad in Paris. All of the hard work, dedication, and passion Skoglund exhibited paid off in 1971 and 1972 when she earned a Masters’s degree in arts and a masters’s degree of fine arts in painting.

The moment after she received her Masters’s degree, Skoglund hit the ground running, immediately diving into the New York art scene; experimenting with different styles and mediums of art, and even teaching herself photography. Just six years later, in 1978, Skoglund was debuting her Food Still Life’s series at the Ryan Lee Gallery. As she was photographing everyday foods and dishes against warped and psychedelic patterns of the 70s, Skoglund made her mark as a colorful, lively, and surrealist artist. One photograph from the 1978 collection that specifically stands out is Peas and Carrots on a Plate. Vibrant green peas and orange carrots are placed meticulously in a pie-like, lattice pattern on a decorative dinner plate. The plate is centered upon an equally busy patterned background, and although it seems as if it should clash, the patterns create a sense of harmony and delightful chaos, somewhat encapsulating the decade of the Seventies itself.

Not long after her Food Still Life’s series, Sandy Skoglund began exploring more modern surrealist properties, working with repetition, color, and deception of the eye. She was able to successfully make sculpted figures appear as if they were two-dimensional in her prints. Skoglund created well around ten archival pigment prints between 1980-1996 surrounding repetitive figures, more often than not, brightly colored animals and creatures, on monochromatic and mundane backgrounds. Though most critics often choose and adore the neon vibrancy of Radioactive Cats (1980), the complimentary colors of Revenge of the Goldfish (fig.2) seem to draw viewers in, with many believing the two colors are meant to symbolize life and death. A figure sits awake in bed, surrounded by a strange amount of table lamps, cluttering a monochromatic, teal room.

Bright orange goldfish swim through the room, lingering on tabletops and in dresser drawers, turning what once was an ordinary scene, into an ocean of mystery. Producing a similar mood, Skoglund’s print Maybe Babies, depicts babies of different violet and periwinkle hues. Gallivanting around the outside walls of a dark, dimly lit house, the figures are seen crawling up walls, laying in the grass, and some dangling upside-down. All of these similar prints juxtaposing bright, and happy colors, with strange, and almost fearful occurrences. The artist herself is quoted to have said, “My work is based on a Frankenstein model where the human beings have created the world that is out of control and turns on them”, perfectly describing the unordinary and out-of-control dreamscape many of her paintings, prints, and photos depict, always leaving an eerie, indescribable mood.

Landscape refers to all Visible features be it flora or fauna of an area of countryside, which is considered in terms of aesthetic appeal. Both the novels “Never Let Me Go“ by Kazuo Ishiguro and “Far From the Madding Crowd” by Thomas Hardy are set in a countryside landscape. This essay is going to focus on the landscape from the above two novels as a thematic device. In the novel “Never Let Me Go” the landscape appears as a thematic device especially since the Hailsham House children have fears of the woods. This means the landscape contains numerous trees and have no buildings. This is what we can call a rural area where buildings are space and the only thing that can be seen is a lot of trees. The novel is seen to be introduced in those days when parents were stricter to their kids.

The parents did not allow their kids to go out playing on their own‘. There were various myths that further boosted the fear for kids going in the forests (Harrison 1). For example, the myths such as a boy‘s body being found with feet and hands removed were going around‘ What is expected in the woods is darkness and the threatening fringe of the trees. This cast a shadow in the whole school that Hailsham children were attending. There was a notion that a pupil who offends others may be hauled out of the bed at midnight and forced through the window. The pupil should then be forced to stare at the darkness in the woods without knowing what he or she might see. The children of Hailsham seem to have a nice life and they considerably exercised the power of self-expression via art.

The fear of the woods often reflects in a distorted, but rather fundamentally accurate way, their fate. The children are organ donors such as Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy who the novel concentrates more on. The primary purpose of Hailsham is preparing them for the future where they will be dependable and steady to give donations from one to the next‘. Therefore, the landscape is crucial in keeping the children calm at school and without conflicts with others “Never Let Me Go” is mainly unthinkable as an urban narrative since it involves a rural setup where there are more trees. We see that both Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy have different characters but are held up together by the landscape The children of Hailsham lack an understanding of the globe. This is because the clones are not allowed to know more by their makers and this gives a reason for the rural setting of the novel.

It is clear that in the rural landscape particularly in the woods, they will just gaze to trees with various myths that prohibit them from exploring the world. This forces the children to stay inside their school making the donations convenient since they are already available when needed. For example, we see Kathy, Tommy, and Ruth staring through a window of an office. It was during their lunch break, and they are fascinated by the clean, modern space that they see, Tommy comments reverently about the office workers who do not go out either. He says that the clones are focused in looking at the society that created them and fails to understand the economic and social structures. The landscape in the novel is used to shield the students from the real understanding of the fate they have and from the whole world. They are made just to focus on their life in school.

The use of landscape and the place of the characters shape the worldview of the novelt. Through Tommy, Ruth, and Kathy we can learn that their characters while in school are shaped by their countryside. The three who are bound by love tries to understand what is holding them behind and from a real understanding of the world. The landscape contributes significantly why they fail to understand the rules set in the schoolt. The fear instilled in them by the woods makes them recognize Hailsham as the only place they are safei. The purpose of the clones being kept in woods is just to serve the purpose of giving organs to donors without questioning. The physical landscape sets an emotional landscape to the clones such that they just stay in their school comfortable “Never Let Me Go” is a novel that can make one to have sex, dance, and run a marathon among others to convince oneself that you are alive.

The time period of the novel “Never Let Me Go” affect the use of landscape in various ways. We find that those landscapes that are hidden immensely in the woods are the ones used to perform what we can call inhumane actions when we focus on the life of Tommy, Ruth, and Kathy. The rural landscape where the schools of the clones is located would have been used for farming activities. In most cases, the rural areas are very productive when cultivated welL. The landscape can be used for wildlife preservation, especially for the species that are feared to extinct in the future. The landscape can as well be used for planting more trees to reduce the effect of global warming that has been posing a significant threat to human life. The landscape can be used as a homestead for people who are much congested in the urban areas. But instead, we find the landscape being used for bringing up clones and hiding them from the real world.

The clones are never educated pertaining real life despite being taught and writing various essays. The work that they are given at school is just for making them busy to avoid them from thinking about their future fate in life. This awaits them to produce the organs needed for donation conveniently and reliably. In the novel “Far Froom the Madding Crowd”, Thomas Hardy uses the landscape of Wessex We easily identify the scenery and the towns described in the novel, which are located in the southeast of England. This landscape incorporates Dorset and the counties surrounding. Many of the characters live in those landscapes with various struggles in their life. The landscape in the narrative is the natural world where Hardy establishes the reciprocal relationship that exists between the characters and the environment (Borders 1). This landscape of Wessex, demonstrates the changing human positions in the post-Darwinian period, Hardy depicts the natural world in such a manner that portrays the appearance of different people.

The technique that Hardy uses to display landscape removes the sense of human authority and place humans within a different landscape of the natural world under the rule. This means that the natural world is the one that selects those to live and those to extinct going by the Darwin theory. The landscape demonstrates the theory of natural selection. The natural world is the one that holds the fate of various characters echoing stress evolutionary place upon survival, chance, and extinction. The story in the novel travails about Bathsheba Everdene (Carey Mulligan) who got the attention of three men. These three men are represented by a different landscape that shows their way of living. The first man is a poor shepherd Gabriel Oak (Bullhead’s Matthias Schoenaerts) who has livestock.

The landscape that he come from was rural where he would find pastures for his livestock. The second man is Troy (Michael Sheen) who is a wealthy, middle-aged Boldwood. This means that the man comes from the urban area. The third man is Tom Sturridge, who is a dashing soldier. Fanny Robin (Juno Temple) is a spoiler. The narrative “Far From the Madding Crowd” is unthinkable urban narrative since most of its scenes are in the woods. For every scene particularly when Bathsheba is meeting with his suitor’s nature is always there and keeps watching calmly over the drama that comes out of the human lives. Bathsheba is much attracted to Oak, who tells her the truth every time they met. Bathsheba met with Troy in the dark where more urgent desires seem to come out.

The raging passions of Bathsheba mainly happen at night in the landscape where there is a lot of darkness. This landscape is non-other but in the forests where there are no lighting. It in this landscape that Troy manages to speak to Bathsheba without hiding anythingt Some of the suitors like Troy only appears at night while Oak is always there during the daytime and at night as well. Therefore, landscape, as portrayed by Hardy, is an important element since brings other features that give some character courage to express their feelings. If the narrative would have been an urban narrative, we would not have enjoyed the true behavior of some characters, which makes the difference, especially among the Bathsheba suitors. The use of the landscape and the specific position of the characters shape the narrative “Far From the Madding Crowd.” The three suitors met Bathsheba in the landscape of Wessex whereby some preferred meeting her at night.

In fact, we learn the true behaviors of characters due to the use of landscape. The geographical topography where there are trees makes the place dark at night. This darkness is what Troy prefers when meeting with Bathsheba since he knew that he can do whatever he wished without being seen. This shows that Troy was just a pretender and wanted to take advantage of Bathsheba by utilizing his wealth. We see that it is the landscape that threatens abrupt change of lives for the characters. For example, Oak’s sheep are destroyed by the confluence occurrence of circumstances that include an inexperienced sheepdog, chalk pit, and rotted rail that were adjacent to his land. it is only in the rural landscape that such things can be found since the land seem to be deserted by people. Only the livestock owners like Oak take the advantage of the land since they feed their livestock there with a lot of pastures.

Thus, the landscape in the narrative serves as an important factor that echoes Darwin‘s theory of natural selection where only the fittest survives. The narrative “Far From the Madding Crowd” affects the use of landscape as depicted by Hardy. It is clear from the novel that the landscape of Wessex favors livestock keeping, which is practiced by some characters in the book such as Oak. The Wessex landscape is used for rearing animals. Also, the landscape favors the occurrence of various problems among them being Oak losing his animals. Troy is a wealthy man but makes use of the rural landscape as the meeting ground with Bathsheba. The presence of trees makes the landscape appear dark at night, which is the appropriate time that we see Troy meeting Bathsheba.

Troy with Bathsheba at night would have done anything since he is not being seen by anyone and even Bathsheba cannot see him directly to his eyes, Robin usually met Bathsheba during daytime while Oak would have met her at any time. But we see that the landscape is what set a difference between the suitors of Bathsheba. We see that some just wanted to take an advantage of Bathsheba such as Troy while others loved her seriously such as Oak. The natural world seemed to rule over human beings since it is the one that threatens the life of human and animals. After Oak‘s livestock had died in the forest, his life was threatened, and was forced to go out begging. Humans have no influence on the natural world and it is the one that shapes their place of character.

“Strip! Fast! L05! Keep only your belts and shoes in your hands,,.”(26), In the memoir MEL! by Elie Wiesel, dehumanization has a strong effect on Elie, his father, and the other prisoners The Holocaust was the persecution and murder of approximately six million Jewish people by the Nazis between 1933 and 1945. They were brought to concentration camps then went through forced labor, or were sent to their deaths immediately in a crematory or gas Chamber. During all these, they were treated horribly, lost their rights and had appalling living conditions and little food, A recurring theme in the memoir Mby Elie Wiesel is that dehumanization can make a tough situation a lot harder because they lose their basic human rights, are forced to live in horrible conditions, and lose their individuality.

Dehumanization affects the prisoners because they lost all their rights To begin, one example of their rights being taken is when Elie’s father asks where the bathroom is “ The gypsy looked him up and down slowly, from head to foot. As if he wanted to convince himself that this man addressing him was really a creature of flesh and bone, a living being with a body and a belly, Then, as if he had suddenly woken up from a heavy doze, he dealt my father such a clout that he fell to the ground, crawling back to his place on all fours,“ (29). This shows how the gypsies took away their priorities as human beings, They weren’t granted access to a lavatory, and also got hit when they asked a question. Humans should have the right to use the bathroom and here at the camps they removed those rights Another example of losing their freedom is when they’re commanded to run if they want to go to sleep.

Wiesel writes, “Toward midnight, we were told to run “Faster,” shouted our guards, “The faster you run, the sooner you can go to bed.” (30) The guards were only allowing them to sleep if they ran. They were already exhausted and now being commanded to run if they want to rest, which is another basic right They also knew if they didn’t obey, there would probably be some sort of punishment. The prisoners should be allowed to rest when they are in desperate need of it. The Nazis took away many of the Jews’ basic rights, such as using the bathroom, and going to sleep, which are rights that humans need in order to function, Additionally, the prisoners were belitLled when they were forced to live in horrendous conditions. An example of the terrible living conditions they endured is when they travelled in the ill-equipped cattle wagons which were crowded, hot, and didn’t have any food or drinks.

“Lying down was out of the question, and we were only able to sit by deciding to take turns. There was very little air. The lucky ones who happened to be near a window could see the blossoming countryside roll by After two days of traveling, we began to be tortured by thirst. Then the heat became unbearable,” (18). They were forced to travel in these small cars which did not provide for any of their needs. The Jews were being tortured and were barely able to survive in there. Some died because of the unfit conditions and others became dehydrated and starved. in this quote, Elie says how the heat was unbearable and the thirst was killing them. Another example of the unsuitable living conditions is how they were scarcely fed anything, They got coffee, soup, and bread. Elie describes his day by saying, “ Days passed. In the morning, black coffee. At noun, soup. (By the third day I was eating any kind of soup hungriiyJ At six p,m,, roll call.

Then bread and something. At nine o‘clock, bed.” (32). This example shows how they were not fed enough and had only one real meal, which was soup, They also were forced to live on a schedule, because he said how roll call was at exactly six pm, and bed was at nine. The Jews were forced to live in very inadequate conditions with limited resources such as food, air, space, and free time. Furthermore, the prisoners lost their individuality at the camps because the Nazis took away their possessions and personalities, An example of prisoners losing their own self is when their name is taken away and they get a number tattooed on their arm, Elie recalls, “The three ‘veterans’, with needles in their hands, engraved a number on our left arms. I became A-7713.

After that I had no other name,” (31). This act, of being called a number and losing your own name is really dehumanizing because they no longer have their unique, individual name. They just have a long number, which means nothing to them The prisoners don’t feel like they have anything personal to them because they don’t even have a first name anymore, something that separates each of them A second way of losing their individuality is when they arrive at the Barracks and they‘re forced to remove their clothes and throw them in a pile. “We had to throw our clothes at one end of the barracks. There was already a great heap there. New suits and old, torn coats, rags, For us, this was the true equality: nakedness,”(26).

The prisoners weren‘t allowed to keep any of their personal possessions, including their clothing They have no individual style now, being forced to wear the same outfits. They don‘t have anything to make them unique and their own person. They all are being grouped as one ‘thing’ that needs to be eliminated, as Hitler believed Dehumanization takes away their sense of individuality because they aren’t permitted to have a unique name or possessions. In the memoir Mby Elie Wiesel, a theme that repeats many times throughout the book is that dehumanization can make a tough situation a lot harder because they lose their basic human rights, are forced to live in horrible conditions, and lose their individuality.

The prisoners lost their rights, such as using the lavatories, and sleeping when they‘ve reached the point of utter exhaustion. They also were kept in unfit living conditions where they received an inadequate amount of food and didn‘t have enough space. They also lost their sense of individuality, such as their name and personal items. Dehumanization can make difficult times much harder because there’s nothing left that they can call their own, and they didn’t live in comfortable spaces with their basic rights.

The creation of murals has a long history of telling stories everywhere in the world. This art form can be traced from the early beginnings of human settlement to the present. The Chicano Art and Mural movement was an integral part of propagating the message of the Chicano Movement while maintaining their culture and soliciting solidarity among their community and other devalued and marginalized groups. The Chicano mural movement is based on the creation of wall art with themes dominated by sociopolitical ideals while glorifying Mexico’s native and indigenous history, Spanish and colonial exploitations, emphasizing cultural identity and political action teamed with the struggles and lives of common men and women.

Murals are an important medium for artists to express themselves publicly by creating messages on buildings, housing projects, schools and churches. Most murals are large, open air, free to the public, and created and seen by the community involved. “No single style unites them; their commonality, to the degree that it exists, derives from the thematic factors and what might be called “the Chicano point of view,” a difficult thing to define and one that, even now is undergoing transformation” (Goldman, 258). Murals do share bringing art to a local level, speaking to people’s pride and neighborhood identity while reclaiming their cultural heritage.

Chicano murals burst onto the United States scene in the social and political activism scene of the 1960’s. During this time unlikely alliances formed to improve life for the underserved both in gender and race. In Natalia Molina’s book, How Race is Made in America she writes, “how the racial construction of one group affects others, sometimes simultaneously and sometimes at a much later date” (Molina, 5). She describes this as racial script, “society highlight the ways in which the lives of racialized groups are linked across time and space thereby affect one another, even when they do not directly cross paths. Racial scripts function in three main ways.

First, they highlight how racialized groups are acted upon by a range of principals, from institutional actors to ordinary citizens. Second, all groups are racialized, but we often do not recognize this shared process, and thus we fail to see their common connections” (Molina, 6). Speaking with my hometown of Santa Fe artist and muralist Samuel Leyba about his over three decades of creating murals, “he wanted to educate his people about who they were and that they were Americans with the same rights as every citizen.” Leyba grew up as one of 11 children living in a Santa Fe neighborhood at the end of the turbulent 1960s.

He described his neighborhood as not working well with substandard education, little access to healthcare, drug use and death rate above the national average. There seemed to be little possibility for change. Leyba with his artistic talent and education could have left his community, but because of his love of place and family he looked to change his hometown. He wanted to communicate his Chicano heritage in a manner that was confrontational but not offensive. Three strong cultures, Native American, Hipic, and Anglo influenced his prolific mural career in Santa Fe.

While being different cultures they share a common thread, being one of the last territories to become a part of the United States with the feeling of isolation and being ignored by this new government. Leyba described the “mother of all murals” in Santa Fe, created by Zara Kriekstein, Gilbert Guzman, Jerry Garduno, and Frederico Vigil, located on the side of the State Archives Building as a sample of Molina’s theory of counterscripts. Molina explains that among racial scripts there are counter scripts which “brings to the conversation is an entreaty to see how these practices of resistance, claims for dignity, and downright refusal to take it anymore cut across a range of communities of color, thus once again showing us how they are linked” (Molina, 11).

Leyba while not the artist of this mural explains that the artists collaborated to present a message to America. The mural consists of three cultures living harmoniously in the southwest. Men and women dressed in traditional Hipic costumes are dancing together while Native American elders and their children watch sitting under trees. A small Anglo contingency is standing blurred in the background of the mural. All activity is taking place on one side of the raging Rio Grande River. A large brown skinned arm draped in a Native American blanket holds fish, corn, and medicinal herbs signaling life. A large eagle is resting on the fingertips of the large hand.

With the overpowering size of the arm filled with items at the forefront of the mural, it seems to let the viewer know that the Natives have brought their best to America as they continue to honor their past heritage and culture while respecting their American future. The isolation of being on the “other side of the river” has united them in their struggle. The mural is significant in making allies among the Chicanos, Native Americans and Anglos in their transition to their new country.

Chicano murals served as a mirror to the Chicano community reflecting their shared experiences. Art critic and historian Justino Fernandez said, “ To understand this mural art is to consider and submerge oneself in spiritual, social, political,philosophical and historical problems of our time. If ever a subject begged for interdisciplinary analysis it is this juncture of aesthetics, sociology, and politics” (Tibol, 27). In these turbulent political times, murals old and new will continue to communicate to racialized groups to form alliances, acknowledging we have a shared history that should bring us together to help build a more just society.

The field of anthropology differs from so called “hard sciences” in several major ways. Unlike chemistry or physics, very few anthropological ideas and concepts are regarded as being absolutely correct. In fact it might be fair to say that most anthropologists agree to disagree. The subject matter and goals of this academic discipline are quite complex, and leave much room open for speculation and varying interpretations. In addition to the wide range of topics being investigated, there is also great diversity in the way anthropologists approach their work. One specific approach is known as French structuralism.

The name refers to the professional perspective shared by both Marcel Mauss and Claude Levi-Stauss. These men developed and refined French structuralism after having been influenced by a nineteenth-century French sociologist named Emile Durkheim. Durkheim’s study of the correlation between diversity, integration, and culture convinced him that there were two types of social integration: mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity. Mechanical solidarity describes how antiquated cultures with homogeneous populations are held together by their common traits.

Organic solidarity describes the way modern, heterogeneous cultures are made up of diverse individuals who function independently in the same direction. Durkheim chose to focus on various aspects of group and social unity while placing a large emphasis on the collective consciousness rather than individual perspectives. Collective consciousness can be defined as specific ideas, values and feelings that are shared by all or most members of the group being studied. He created terms such as “elementary forms”, which refers to the source and origin of beliefs or ideological traditions within the group mind.

A final example of Durkheim’s interests would be his examination of the interaction that takes place between social rituals and individual people. He describes social rituals and institutions as being powerful enough to influence lone individuals. Such social interactions came to be known as “social facts”, which are representative of the collective consciousness. In later years, Marcel Mauss modified his uncle Durkheim’s anthropological theories. Both men wanted to simplify social facts into elementary structures, so that they could then be analyzed in a more scientific manner. Mauss approached this problem from a different angle than his uncle had, mainly by switching his focus from the group to the individual. This change was precipitated by the idea that there is an ingrained mental structure within everyone, and that structure forms the building blocks of the group mind.

Reciprocity is a type of ingrained mental structure. Mauss and Levi-Strauss regarded reciprocity as a universally inherent part of human nature. As Levi-Strauss studied the social implications resulting from various kinds of reciprocity, he realized that people have an innate, behavioral predisposition towards gift giving. This observation can be explained through the concept of binary oppositions, in which social meaning is derived from the contrasts of two opposites. While studying the marital exchanges of women between kinship groups, Levi-Strauss made an observation about how the mind functions during such exchanges. He claims that ‘the mind balances positives and negatives, so in a given exchange system, two of the relationships must be positive, and two must be negative.’ His structural style is also apparent in his book “The Raw and the Cooked”.

Levi-Strauss makes comparisons between myth, which he is attempting to understand, and a topic he knows more about: language. In this way he tries to draw parallels between ideas in an effort to simplify the overall issue. He then tried to break down mythology into its elementary structures by describing how myths operate in the subconscious region of the mind. Levi-Strauss’ analysis of mythology included many comparisons, qualitative observations of society and its interactions, and lastly an analysis of the inner workings of the mind. His final goal is very specific, and it has to be. Another anthropologist studying the same topic might conduct his/her research and analysis in a completely different way, perhaps even without the same goal in mind. Levi-Strauss’ methods and goals make him a structuralist.