1 step forward, 2 steps into shitsville

So, what a great week to be internet-less, huh.
Thing is, 'course I couldve used other peoples wires here and there, but easter and catastrophic things were upon me you see.

Now then, with that thwarted (meaning I can haz 3 year plan and housing) Im back in business.
She wrote, cautiously remembering "wireless" usually means non-existant.

On Baumann, last weeks read:
Baumann, in general, was a hoot to read. Calling groups 'politically retarded', drawing easy to understand parallells between the states and Europe without forgetting the differences. However, he's eager and angry, sometimes to the point where Im loosing both his point and whatever it arguments he used to make it. I guess he writes like I wish we could write (notice here Im already referring to myself as a scientist, ha!). When we know its right, and there's no time or energy to waste on petty things, and at that point you tend to communicate a kinda 'here's my truth, Im right, deal' text. This is, of course, simplification royale, but at its worst, Baumann is truthiness. Albeit, my kind of truthiness.

Im still struggling with understanding what culture is, or how it manifests itself, outside of the social science discourse. This is not a case of poor teaching or misguiding books, just a matter of how one is raised. No 'culture' was bestowed upon me, in order to seperate me from 'the others'. To every argument there was two sides, and reality was something you yourself shaped, just keep in mind that everyone else does it too. Growing up, you quickly realize everyone is not like you, Im guessing how quick depends on how different a stance you take. Or maybe, how well you listen. In any case, the essientialist view of culture, especially as a social scientist, is very hard for me to understand. And not very rewarding to use as a backdrop for any study. My task now is to learn how to at least pretend I understand it when talking to people. Which shouldnt be hard, I already know how to pretend-understand japanese and german.

We've moved in on Nuclear Rites almost a week ago, and Ive been so busy with the study questions I havent really had time to reflect on the reading it self. This hopefully just means Ill be engulfed in it by next week. In short, Gusterson studies a nuclear weapons laboratory, who works there and why, how is the interaction with the town and near-by activists, and what I would call, the relationship between the micro and macro of nuclear ideologies.
Im guessing his central message is (like Baumann) that there's no natural or given ideology regarding nuclear weapons. Himself being against it, he does a brilliant job of not letting that shine through too much. However, Im against any sort of nuclear weapons (and power too) so whatever bias views he shares might not be filtered by my own glasses.
The most interresting chapters are the ones involving the secrecy in and around the lab. Some very high-tech FBI stuff, there.

More on this and much more later, the pile of work next to me seems to have grown half a meter since last I looked. Blargh.

Day 1 & 2 Combined A

So, first thing's first. Im reading social anthropology, which Im hoping to cleverily work into the title soon. This teacher is heaven sent. Parts of our lectures were as close to Dead Poets Soceity Im ever going to be (not a fan, but that's not the point).
In four hours total, we've covered some Wittgenstein, the problems and complications with "culture", nihonjinron, reading for all the tards who are new to it and how this course is gonna play out in general. Mouthful!

Book we're currently reading: The Multicultural Riddle - Baumann, G.
Books I want to start reading already:
Foreign News - Exploring the World of Foreign Correspondents
King Leopold's Ghost
Dreams from My Father

My first reaction, looking back on the history of anthropology and our two last courses, is in all honesty, wtf? How, exactly, did this work? And for so long. I get that there was a lot of people who "did the right thing" or whatever you wanna call it, but part of me just feel we know nothing.
I understand the times were different, present ideologies and what was probably experiences as a right way to do it, just as I am set in my track now. Im just saying it shades the actual data we do have.

(I also wondered what possessed the man behind me to shout out colonialism when we're talking about important post-45 events. Or if the latin sic. in anyway is related to the reading instructions structural - interpretive - critical. I know its not, but I kinda want it to be.)

"Whatever we see could be other than it is. Whatever we can describe at all could be other than it is. There is no order things a priori."
How is this related to anthropology?
Well, there was this thing on chairs, right. The chair is only a chair cause we named it so, in order to seperate it from non-chairs (much like ethnicity, which also only becomes relevant in relationship to someone "different").
And I wonder about sitting? We all sit. I imagine the best anthropologic place to be is much like when youre abroad, trying to communicate with someone, lets say about chairs. They dont know it, you dont know what word they use, but eventually we must sit, somehow. When you reach that level of understanding and showing "Aaah, the sitting place? Oh ok" we're halfway there.
It wont be a chair, still, but at least we're sitting together.

This naturally led into the old "the world wasnt flat, but since people then thought so, anthropologists need to think so to." Of course, the conflict between the two views is interresting.

Step 1: Formulate a plan

The short version would be; I was knocked down last year, I picked myself up, Ive been sitting thru two godawful courses just to get to what Im studying now, I still cant let this place go and now I found usage for it (and so, me).

One of our assignments will be keeping a study log (how Kirk am I feeling? Very) and I intend to do so here. Out of the log a so called reaction paper will be born, I will get good grades and all will be well(-er).
This is handy for a lot of reasons; I get to properly form whatever derranged line of thought Im following, the much needed (i.e craved) use of english is validated and there's that ridiculous feeling of having to do it. Also, the need for personal b.s and excuses may or may not appear, either way is fine.

I think that'll do for introductions. Hi!