The Culture of Art

I find the cave paintings to be the artists’ attempt to communicate their relationship with the world. The depiction of wild horses and delicate deer show the admiration the people held for these animals and their environment. As various animals were shown to not only be food sources, but forces of life besides humans, I reach the conclusion that the artists also worked to commemorate the spiritual and symbolic importance the natural world had in their life. In this sense, art becomes another way to share nature and spirits, perhaps even with future generations.

Following the previous point, animals may have been more central to the cave artists’ understanding of nature. In a world where survival depends on understanding and predicting animal behavior, these paintings specifically used animals to represent power, transformation, and mystery in a way drawings of humans did not. This is solidified for me as the human drawings are more abstract and rough compared to the detailed depiction of other animals. Ultimately, animals held more importance in the economy and ritual acts and myths than humans, and were rendered accordingly.

These paintings suggest a complex social life. As many of the figures required scaffolding, lighting, and various tools, one can draw the conclusion that the artists had shared intent and collaborated to complete the work. Repeated techniques and motifs suggest cultural transmission, possibly through something like an apprenticeship. Also, as the innermost cave chambers were mostly difficult to access and well decorated, it can be assumed that these people held these places as important. Ideas of magic and religion based in nature can also be seen in the paintings.

The depth and complexity of the caves speaks to the humans’ endurance and creativity. To see their canvas, the artists had to fuel their flame source with animal fat. Scaffolding was required to reach the ceilings. Even the physical task of grinding minerals into paint was demanding. Even the method of painting-brush, finger, etc.-required preparation.  

I think the art was primarily used for storytelling. Images could have encoded myths and explanations for creation, various phenomena of the natural world, or where the people came from. This storytelling could have simply been a channel to create or maintain a cultural identity as well. Documenting memories and beliefs shared across the group is just like writing a story. Ultimately, I think both of these possible functions of this art tie into another possibility, psychological expression. Art could have been their outlet for fear, wonder, and creativity. In this case, I think of the expression “people have always been people,” meaning that these cave artists felt the same boredom, wonder, and dangers of existence that people feel today, and art was and still is a way to process these feelings. Even in the “harsh” conditions of the Paleolithic era, people found ways to give their lives creative meaning while surviving. I’d go so far to say that “art,” creating images to make meaning of things, is an instinctual part of being human. 

Alternative rock music, as an art form, produces and is the product of culture, primarily spreading feelings and ideologies across social groups and generations. Alt rock began emerging mostly organically in the late 1970s as a resistance to mainstream music and how increasingly commercial the industry was becoming. Slowly but surely, a platform for resistance, identity, and emotion was built for this genre.

American band Bikini Kill pioneered the "riot grrrl" movement, maintaining feminist themes throughout their career and expressing intent through fiery performances.

Particularly, marginalized voices rode this wave while commenting on, usually critiquing, social norms, politics, and consumerism. This gave voice to alienation and existential angst especially, making a shared identity for those disconnected from mainstream identity. The “counter-culture,” “underground” narrative made space for those against dominant ideologies. 

Rage Against the Machine explore the exploitation of Indigenous peoples, especially in Mexico, in their song "People of the Sun," https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scyC9A6o_Ts

Objectively, alternative rock speaks to autonomy, vulnerability, and an overall discontent with the status quo. Artists developing and contributing and sharing these pillars in their music wanted raw sound while talking about things that were important to them. The genre became a form of cultural storytelling, transcending borders and language. In writing this assignment and considering this genre specifically, as a form of culture, artists like PJ Harvey, Rage Against the Machine, and The Cure come to mind; PJ Harvey challenged gender roles while exploring sexuality and violence, Rage combined rap and punk to call out racial injustice and call for radical political change, and The Cure wrote to the emotional complexity of resisting social conformity. Each artist channels a branch of the collective struggles that unify the genre.

Killing in the Name by Rage Against the Machine Live on BBC Radio 2009. They were asked not to curse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvcotaYpHrQ

I wouldn’t call Alternative Rock a complete culture, but a subculture. While a lot of the components I’m about to discuss could be argued as mainstream now, I contribute that to the ever growing popularity of the genre with bands like Nirvana, and the increasing amount of streaming and easy digital media access. The “language” of the songs are all unified with symbolism and critique, especially against authority. Individualism and DIY are valued. Spaces for the subculture to gather and reproduce include garage venues, online forums, and record shops. Embodied practices like mosh pits, zines, and late-night jam sessions. Fashion represents rebellion and detachment from consumer culture through thrifted clothing, combat boots, and ripped jeans. These components have grown in popularity recently, often detached from the subculture itself and merely taking inspiration from it, but alternative rock was built on these belief systems.

Ultimately, I think Alt Rock benefits society by challenging social norms while fostering creativity. In going against the dominant ideology, people are forced to think critically and examine reality themselves. Rather than going along with “The Machine,” people begin to realize the alternative realities and join the effort for social change.

Icelandic artist Bjork combined classical, electric, jazz, and traditional music into rock through collaboration with engineers and coders to develop new instruments. Her makeup, costumes, sets, and digital media created conceptual worlds of her music. Many of her songs advocate for nature conservation.

The art form fosters creativity in the music’s instrumentation and lyrics, visual and aesthetic components, and independent production. Without a rigid boundary, Alt Rock allowed artists to experimentally blend elements of various other genres and even traditional song-writing formulas. This also worked with the exploration of topics like mental illness, identity, dread, and political dissent that was typically ignored or censored by mainstream culture. Unique stage designs, album art, and music videos became extensions of Alt Rock. The Do-It-Yourself attitude empowered artists to further move away from mainstream, capital-hungry record labels to self-record and release music, design their own art and websites, and independently run venues.

Fugazi, founded 1987, released through the record label co-founded by their front man, Ian MacKaye. The group refrained from getting involved with a major label, keeping merch and ticket prices low despite their popularity.

I think the detriments of this art form are more nuanced, especially if you are not necessarily versed in the genre and its history. Overall, I think Alternative Rock can romanticize despair and display exclusivity. While some of the songs process sadness, many write under a sad aesthetic, which ends up idealizing suffering, isolation, and withdrawal. As the popularity of the genre grows, so does the amount of authenticity policing. Accusing someone of being a “poser” creates internal rifts and further excludes those who don’t align enough, which is especially ironic as that's the exact opposite of what the genre was built on.

American musician Jeff Buckley gained a cult following for the electric experience of his music, and has since turned into the patriarch of hopelessness, romantic yearning, and grief.

Politics and Violence

 Yanamamo rules regarding killing are embedded within kinship obligation and concepts of honor. Rather than being universally condemned, killing is contextually justified, especially in cases of blood revenge. These revenge killings are culturally warranted responses to wrongdoing, particularly the murder or a close kin member. Justice is decentralized, and enacted through this retaliatory violence. The Yanomamo system legitimizes personal retribution, and admires those who participate in it under culturally appropriate conditions. In contrast, Western societies have rules against killing organized in formal legal systems, enforced by the state, intended for individual protection and maintaining social order. Homicide is criminalized, prosecuted, and punished with incarceration or penalties; these formal rules are impersonal and are usually universal despite possible personal injustice. 

Revenge killings, known as nomohori, are an institutionalized form of violence, primarily enacted to avenge the death of a kin member. Carefully coordinated raids often involve coalition-building between male kin and allies. Once alliances are formed, the raiding party travels in stealth and ambushes their enemy. While the person who killed the kin is the target, anyone in the killer’s lineage or village may be targeted and killed symbolically. This not only serves as a means to certify one’s honor, but also prevents future attacks and maintains social balance. Consequently however, these killings can create cycles of feuding between lineages or entire villages, shaping political and social life within the tribe. 

In participating in a revenge raid, killing someone from the offending village, and undergoing the purification ritual upon returning home to his tribe, a man becomes an unokai. This brings a number of social advantages, like elevated status, increased respect, and often political influence. As such, these cultural successes drive biological success as unokai are likely to secure mates and produce a larger number of children compared to non-unokais. While non-unokais spare themselves the danger associated with raids, they occupy lower social status and typically have lower chances for honor and reproductive success. In choosing to become an unokai, a Yanomamo man strategically considers the risk of violence with the potential for increased power, alliances, and children. As these cultural incentives are centered in the Yanomamo society, men have more incentive to participate in revenge killings despite the inherent danger. 

Revenge killings are deeply intertwined with key aspects of their culture, influencing and being influenced by various factors:

The political organization of the Yanomamo is decentralized, and largely based in kinship. Leaders are known as headmen, and gain authority through personal attributes and respect. Rather than being formally elected or appointed, headmen gradually earn their position through showing bravery in raids, their ability to organize retaliation, and the amount of their kin allies. By successfully participating in revenge killings, a man’s political capital is enhanced as he demonstrates the ability to mobilize others, ultimately reinforcing his influence in the village’s politics. 

Additionally, participation in revenge killings directly contributes to social status. A man with a record of bravery and success in raids holds a correlating status. Villages are organized along the lines of kinship and loyalty. As raiding parties organize and ensue, alliances are solidified, and this mutual participation in violence defines itself as loyalty. As bonds are often reshaped through more violence or marriage, this social organization is fluid, but ultimately revolves around a shared hatred or animosity towards an offending village. 

Kinship obligations initiate and justify revenge killings. As a close family member is killed, action to uphold familial honor is demanded. Kin groups are also the primary participants in raids, and as such, these familial bonds are strengthened through this shared purpose. Warfare in the Yanomamo arises from and reinforces kin-based obligations. 

As mentioned above, the cultural success of unokais inspire biological success as these men are observed to have more wives and children than non-unokais. Yanomamo women often prefer to mate with unokais men, as they have demonstrated courage and solidified their social status. It can also be observed that marriage and warfare are intertwined systems; marriage alliances with other villages reduce feuding, which in turn manages inter-village relations, and ensures reproductive success. 

Napoleon Chagnon’s work shows how the absence of centralized authority creates space for personal grievances to escalate into cycles of violence. In Western societies, the presence of laws against homicide deter people who may have the desire to kill, enforcing the social contract. Among the Yanomamo, revenge killings perpetuate intergroup violence and hostility, placing individuals under constant threat of retaliation. However, societies with centralized governance have laws that can resolve disputes without personal violence. This reduces long-term social instability, and ultimately encourages cooperation over conflict. Laws help mitigate violent impulses, like defending honor, avenging kin, or asserting power, and offer alternative structures to personal revenge. Certain circumstances, as seen in Yanomamo villages, rationalize violence out of vengeance, not a natural desire to kill, and laws simply help minimize this. 

Language Experiment

Over the course of this language experiment I was exposed to the profound role of body language and the way power shifts based on who controls the flow of dialogue. 

In Part 1, the required silence made me feel very powerless; despite being physically present and mentally engaged in the conversation, only relying on non-verbal cues was incredibly limiting and humbling. I simply could not fully convey what I wanted to communicate, and had to fight every instinct to not speak to clarify my gestures or thoughts with spoken words. I conducted Part 1 while at work, during a slow morning shift, and was thoroughly surprised by how quickly my coworkers managed to adapt and change how all three of us communicated. I thought they'd take advantage of the situation or just carry on normally, but their sentences transformed into simplistic lines and yes/no things I could easily contribute and respond to. Particularly, their tones became more inquisitive and almost suspicious as they worked to try and figure out what I was communicating with just my eyebrows and laughter and thumbs up/down. 

In many ways, the two speakers held the power in the conversation, introducing new topics and easily changing the subject and even being able to just explain something more complex than my yes or no answers. I think this naturally would have given the speakers more control and power over the interaction, but within five minutes of the experiment, the topics on hand would remain until they got a detailed enough response from me and seemed satisfied with my perspective. Still with the yes/no questions, they'd specify and offer hypothetical situations in varying detail to try and grasp as much of my perspective as possible.

As a metaphor for communication between two drastically different cultures, non-verbal communication will always appear to be more limited and less capable of deep, "meaningful" conversations, especially to a speaking culture. However, the non-speaking culture requires much more abstract thinking, personal attentiveness and connection, as well as precise clarification. The speaking population may execute their ideas faster, but popular opinion would eventually begin to set in and sway many perspectives as well, whereas the non-speaking population would remain precise and determined to properly communicate an individual opinion. The latter population would likely be considered primitive, limited, or even less intelligent by the speaking population which could foster and immense superiority complex and imbalance of power against the symbolic culture. 

In our own population, individuals with speech impediments, that are non-verbal, or those on the autism spectrum have clear parallels to the symbolic communication I experienced in Part 1 of the experiment. These individuals are often interacting with other people impatiently fill in the blanks, assuming their thoughts and contributions in the conversation, overlooking their ability and sense of self entirely because they do not verbally communicate the same way. This very clearly strips symbolic communicators of their  power and reinforces how exclusionary the societal norms regarding communication are. Symbolic language asserts identity often more straightforward than verbal language alone.

In Part 2 of the experiment, I struggled even more, but forced myself to complete the full 15 minutes. Every few words or so, I'd find myself catching and stopping my tone from changing, making my face go blank, and clasping my hands behind my back to refrain from using them. It felt incredibly unnatural, like I was some sort of expertly trained Artificial Intelligence that could say all the right things but wasn't yet programmed to actually respond and engage in the conversation. 

My partner explained my lack of emotion in the entirety of the interaction left them feeling very disconnected, unsure of my general mood regarding the topics at hand, and questioning if I was even present in the moment. Once the timer was up, they circled back to each point we discussed, asking for clarification if I was being sarcastic and this part or trying to be funny at that part.

This revealed how crucial the nonverbal "signs" in regular, everyday communication is in our language. They surpass the role of "support" to what we have to say and instead have become part of what we have to say: through emotion, clarity, and emphasis. I also found it incredibly hard to keep any sort of rhythm or pace while speaking, though I might have just been too busy trying to remain monotone and still, but I think this also speaks to how particular people are on body language compared to the words we speak. For instance, "I'm fine," while dodging eye contact, fidgeting, and overall physically looking not fine- all that body language contradicting the spoken language forces the conversation partner to reinforce or challenge the interaction. 

Similarly, within our population individuals with autism or social anxiety disorders may feel overwhelmed or unnatural trying to constantly interpret and analyze body language in every interaction. 

Within high-stakes situations like conferences, speeches, negotiations, or confrontations, body language can be a bit of a liability. Unless masterfully controlled, which I now know from first hand experience is very hard to do, body language in situations like these can reveal unsettling feeling, nervousness, or simply too much emotion; this means the ability to withhold such body language becomes a form of power in particular dynamics. From personal experience, tense or highly emotionally charged situations become easier if you do ignore the other person's body language and instead focus on actively listening or just driving your point across. 

Part 3 of this experiment offers more conditional examination, the effect of written language while communicating. Overall, I think Part 1 would have been easier to complete if I had been allowed to write, as I could have completely gotten all my points across throughout the conversation. While I did observe my partners adjusting their communication style to try and get as much of my contribution as they could, they were still limited as to what questions they should have been asking as my cues were so limited, we could've taken the full 15 minutes getting my crystal clear, unspoken take on a singular topic. The ability to write also would have given me much more authority in guiding the conversation to new areas or even circling back to previous points made. 

Ultimately, I find written language to be a massive advantage to any culture. It allows for the storage, expansion, and transformation of knowledge across generations and continents. As such, international communication opens the door to spread even more ideas, translate even more cultures, and coordinate various populations economically and even politically. Written language allowed isolated communities to transform into the globalized world we see today. 

To sum up, this experiment offered me gratitude for my methods of communication, and revealed just how delicate even an ordinary, mundane, or "meaningless" conversation is. Words are incredibly powerful, but gain so much permanence and strength from non-verbal context and writing. Communication is a dynamic, mutual exchange that flows from each eyebrow raise and spoken word alike. This experiment has also granted me the perspective to work for more connection and attentiveness when interacting with symbolic communicators, and also just mentally acknowledging any/all body language in any interaction.