Epistemology, Biculturism, and Globalization in 600 words or less

The Epistemological Privilege of Biculturalism

In the post-imperialist society of which we find ourselves inhabiting, the rise of globalization and consequent international awareness of impacts and concerns is inevitable. This is particularly evident with the current global financial crisis. We occupy a point in history in which the economic stability of each sovereign nation is directly dependent on the overall stability of the global economy. The ideology of entitlement and subsequent propagation of a “manifest destiny” has extended the imperialists’ notion of globalization not limited to the expansion of national boundaries but toward international economic trade – i.e. the globalization of capitalism. In “Biculturalism and Community: A Transformative Model for Design Education” Anthony Ward insists that this current international market economy directly threatens the pedagogy of institutional thought and design education.

The notion of power and privilege and the determination of their entitlement lie at the forefront of imperialist thought. Wherever the concept of privilege is utilized – and as we find in the globalization of capitalism, worshiped – there is inevitably the creation of a substantial dichotomy between those who receive privilege and those considered unworthy of privilege. This separation of privilege manifests itself prominently throughout education systems – where the cultural identity and thus voice of the privileged is given superiority over the underprivileged - and is most apparent to Ward in colonial settings.

“It is in the postmodern discourse on voice that the connections between education and power become finally clear. In the last fifteen years all of these arguments have been nurtured through postmodern (and deconstructivist) discourse that has challenged notions of value, legitimation, and authorship – the issue of power and voice. These discourses take on a particular poignancy in colonial settings, such as New Zealand where culture, class, race, and ethnicity congeal into a multiple oppression, and where the educational process play a prominent role in the processes of subjugating subordinate cultures and colonizing indigenous peoples.” [Ward, 92]

We must not put aside and ignore history but rather admit that the United States is fundamentally a colonial society. Our educational systems and political tendencies suffer from the same oppressions and subjugations that Ward finds prevalent throughout New Zealand. Our privileged Eurocentric cultures are reinforced through taught dominance and unquestioned veritability. In this way, the dominant Eurocentric cultures engulf any opposition of their superiority, attaining a hegemonic imposition over subordinate cultures through the globalization of capitalism and, in effect, have achieved an international economic colonization.

“Recorded history (which we normally assume to be the history) is invariably the history of the winners, of the hegemonically successful dominant culture. In design, our built history tends to be that of the dominant Eurocentric culture. The histories of minority cultures are rarely, if ever, valorized in the contested space of the urban landscape.” [Ward, 93]

Our design schools are experiencing an increasing awareness of the wealth inherent through the incorporation of multicultural perspectives. It is now widely believed that there exists an “epistemological privilege” of the oppressed. This privilege resides in an ability (or the necessity) of the oppressed to have knowledge systems based on both the dominant and oppressed cultural norms and contexts.

“Oppressed people have a kind of epistemological privilege insofar as they have easier access to this standpoint and therefore a better chance of ascertaining the beginnings of a society in which all could thrive. For this reason I would claim that the emotional responses of oppressed people in general, and often of women in particular are more likely to be appropriate than the emotional responses of the dominant class.” [Jagger, 162]

We are beginning to see this shift in attitude away from the supreme superiority of the dominant culture by the implementation of cultural studies within design curriculum. An example especially relative to North America is the increased attention being paid by design schools to the study of Native American structural responses and solutions that embrace the local climate while retaining a humble footprint upon the environmental impact of habitation.

Those contributing to this school of thought are beginning to understand the wealth of knowledge inherent in cultures that have primal rather than colonial experience with the site. This movement represents an awareness of the faults embedded in an entitlement-biased globalized society. The collapse of any elitist global institution is caused by the unstable dichotomy of a dominant cultural ignorance coupled with increased global awareness. We are starting to observe – and necessarily so in order for international progressivism - the reduction of cultural ignorance and its hegemonical system and an increased global awareness of the epistemological advantage of bicultural insights and thus a shift toward, at very least increasing, academic integrity.



Citations

A.M. Jagger, “Love and Knowledge: Emotion in Feminist Epistemology.” In Gender/Body/Knowledge.

Ward, Anthony, “Biculturalism and Community: A transformative Model for Design Education.” The Journal of Architectural Education, February, 1991.

- b.berry

The Importance of Embracing the Underground

The underground: We hear that term used in so many different ways, and in equally various contexts. For the purpose of my argument, which is on in strong support of embracing all that is the glory of the proverbial underground, I will define the underground from a musical perspective; music that is too hip to gain 'above-ground' notoriety without what is essentially a grassroots movement behind it. Let's just be blunt and say that unless your band has a singer, catchy guitar riffs, and very closely resembles music that is already above ground and/or popular, it is going to be a long, hard slog on your way to recognition at the level necessary to actually see more than the usual 10-20 people who come to your shows, dig?

Even if you look at immensely talented folks who lived for a while on the underground and then hit really big - artists like Elliot Smith, Beck, Digable Planets, NAS, and many alternative hip-hop artists from the Twin Cities - they all had some kind of hook to their music; something that the fickle general American public could very easily latch onto. In the case of Smith and Beck, they had guitars, catchy melodies, etc., nothing too difficult to dig into for the average listener of good music. For the previously underground hip-hop artists are genuinely great at what they do and bring something other than knuckle-dragging chouvonistic bullshit to the scene, they also had a kind of hook in that they are not bands per se, but self-made individualistic icons in their own right; just them, a DJ, and a massive built-up hype. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they are at all lacking because of that. It is DEFINITELY possible for a rapper and a DJ to really put on a hell of show, even without any kind of band backing them up. I just saw Immortal Technique two weeks ago, and he absolutely tore up the stage at First Avenue. His rhetoric, his poetry, and his bad-ass beats were more than enough to keep the audience high as a kite with their fists in the air. His opening acts on the other hand were an absolute waste of space! Anyway, let me get back to the point. That is, unless you have some kind of hook, something that mainstream America is in need of or desires, the chance of "getting discovered" is slim at best, no matter how damn good you are.

So, in light of that rather disturbing image, here is my theory. If you embrace any one thing for what it really is, rather than for what you wish it was, and you do it all the way - the height of your abilities - it is just a matter of time before the world at large realizes just how much you have to offer. In fact, if you are that damn good, you may not ever really have to come out from the underground. More on that after we discuss what is actually so cool about the underground.

The underground is everything that the overground, if you will, wishes it was. I mean, think about it: Rage Against the Machine can't even play a small venue anymore, not unless they charge a ton of money for the ticket, right? And that excludes all those folks who can't afford to go to an expensive show. Obviously this goes for all famous bands or individual artists. Of course, when they get that big fat paycheck, I don't think they individually wish they were back on the underground - which is exactly where every great artists was at one point, don't forget.

Another thing the underground has that the overground only wishes they had, is that always present feeling of "man, these guys are amazing, why haven't they been discovered yet?" That is, in my opinion, the best part of the underground. I was checking out a really great musical project that our drummer Graham O'Brien often performs with, Keston and Westal, at the Kitty Kat Club last night. I, of course, am already too jaded to say to myself, "wow, why haven't these guys been discovered yet?", but I was indeed thinking how absolutely cool it was to be sitting there in that David Lynch-like designed club listening to this bad-ass Herbie Hancock/MMW/awesome 70s vibe jazzy stuff, with only about 20 people in the crowd. I mean, think about it, here is this unbelievably cool club, with this world class quality live funky jazz electronica happening, and I am one of only a dozen or so people seeing it happen! Who knows what the future holds for Keston and Westal, but if their album ever gets a ton of airplay or what have you, I will get to say "I saw them at the Kitty Kat Club in Minneapolis for free, and there was just myself and a dozen or so others in the crowd."

We all know that I could take a completely different approach; a much more negative half-empty approach, which is something I have done many times before. It would go something like this:

There was nobody there because American culture has suffered so much from the instant gratification of television and corporately controlled radio, that nobody gives a shit about seeing great music anymore. It's more about going out to get laid, drink beer, and be a part of "scene" than it is to actually go out on a hunt for bad-ass up-and-coming live music. I remember when that was what young, avant-garde people did every weekend. It was just assumed that you would go out and find some killer live music. This has changed dramatically in this country and the new young generation has become much less attuned to the joy of finding undiscovered talent.

Sure, there is definitely some truth to that. However, I am what I like to think of as a Practical Optimist. That is, I believe it is more useful both for the artist and for the culture that the artist is a part of, to approach things from the perspective that says good music will always prevail, even if it takes a lot longer for the mainstream to find out about it. It's those who dwell in the underground; those who embrace the inherent hipness of the underground, who will be the fulcrum by which bands that are "too hip for the room" will gain the attention and support they deserve.

So I propose that not only the band I play with - which I would say is often too hip for the room too - but every band that is on the underground - either by choice or by the inevitability therein because of the greatness of the music - take a moment to look around. Recognize, while you are here on the underground, how beautiful it is. If and when your band finally earns the respect, support and attention you have long deserved, you just might miss those days when you were playing for 5-10 truly attentive and undeniably hip people at some really cool club in Minneapolis, or New York City for that matter.

I say, in earnest, to the four or five people who might actually read this post: The next time we are playing in a club for less people than are in the band, I promise to look around and take a strong mental picture of what it looks like and feels like to be an amazing band, playing totally hip and creative music that if rocked on the big stage would definitely blow minds. In the end, it's the music that matters. I don't think I could live with myself if my band sucked but we were famous. Hmm, famous last words?

- Christopher Robin Cox