This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
: Teaching Sociology, Vol. 14, No. 4 (Oct., 1986), pp. 243-248 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1318381 . Accessed: 18/12/2012 21:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Teaching Sociology.
This content downloaded on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
many of whom continue their education in the evenings. like other state agencies affiliated with the National Endowment for the Humanities. With fewer than a dozen majors and a large service responsibility in saw a need to courses. The wisdom of this remark is manifest. Like sociology. 1986. and some suggestions to that end will be provided at the end of the paper. RATIONALE The Sociology Department at the University of Evansville consisted of four sociologists and one anthropologistin 1982 (it subsequently lost one sociology position). By inviting the viewer to suspend disbelief. and intrinsically interestingmanner. non-didactic. evaluated. Cinema Sociology was designed for an adult community audience. Unlike other programs using feature films (Smith 1973. psychoanalysis. It provided an occasion and an environmentin which the task of film interpretation demanded at least the partial exercise of the sociological imagination. film exposes the viewer to social worlds beyond the orbit of personal experience. the film accomplisheson an empathiclevel what sociology accomplishes through historical and cross-cultural comparison: creating the capacity to understand the oneself by understanding broadersocial context which structuresone's actions and choices. CinemaSociology was sponsoredby grantsfrom the Indiana Committee for the Humanities in 1982-83 and 1983-84. while others were the subject of short notices and synopses. From the beginning Cinema Sociology was conceived as a humanitiesproject. p. The purpose of this paper is to present the rationale. a work of art. The film is. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions . thirdyear costs were covered by a donationfrom a local philanthropist. Sociology departments in like environmentsmay wish to adopt or modify the format in an effort to make similar inroads in their own communities. does not underwrite projects for longer than two years. half of which had never been shown commercially in the area. 1982. the Department introductory its strengthen ties to the liberalartsand humanities. cinematic his243 Teaching Sociology. or personal biograopens out into multiple dimenphy. format. and evaluationof the program. More than 2600 persons attendedits 18 films. The Sociology Department at the University of Evansville operated a successful film/discussion series called "Cinema Sociology" between 1982 and 1985. Among other reforms and innovations. Vol. 14 (October:243-248) This content downloaded on Tue. But its uniqueness lies in its intellectual stimulation of adult communityresidents. It also wantedto increaseits visibility among adult community residents. As Demerathnoted regardingthe use of feature films in stratification classes.and donated faculty time. The series raised the profile of the Sociology Department in the community. Four of the first-run featuresreceived full-length reviews in one of the city newspapers. Theformat of the series is recommendedfor sociology departments that wish to strengthen their ties to the humanities. Consequently. Literarycriticism. The IndianaCommittee for the Humanities. The task. and postage. the restriction of sociology to context entails no limitation. unless we see the film as a didactic reification. the Departmentdecided to seek outside funds to sponsor a film series it hoped would showcase the sociological perspective aroundcampus and in the metropolitanarea. The University of Evansville provided space rental. utilities. Inasmuch as the artist's vision is informed by myth. an exemplar of transparent concepts. The program could be converted to classroom use. publicityexpenses. The project's goal was to cultivate this quality of mind in a voluntary. The University's Development Office undertook the search for a local sponsor in recognition of the popularityand prestige the programcame to enjoy in the community. It is also interdisciplinary. Yet. provideda needed service. the product of creative intention. 72). and added to the statureof the University of Evansville as a center for the humanities. "Most films are more faithful to sociology in establishing the context of their plot than in unravellingthe plot itself" (1982. accordingly. among other things. Two of thefilms used in the project are discussed. and justified. as hermeneutical:it involves interpretations subjectiveand objective of contexts of meaning. Demerath1981) and documentaries (DeFronzo 1982) in the classroom.as well as a grant from the University's Informal Learning Program.THE SOCIOLOGICAL CULTIVATING CINEMASOCIOLOGY: IMAGINATION THROUGHPOPULARFILM CHRISTOPHER PRENDERGAST Illinois WesleyanUniversint A film/discussion series that broughtthe sociological imaginationbefore sizable audiences of adult communityresidents is described. ideology. These funds covered film rental. interpretation sions. projection equipment and operator. No admission was charged.
Printed The six films each year were arranged groupsof in threeby topic and shown on consecutive Fridaysin the fall and spring. Since discovering the sociological dimension did not exhaust the task of interpretation.with the potentiallymelodramatic Casablanca gaining thematic credibility as a film aboutrenewed moralcommitmentby its placement last in the series.Yilmaz Guney.The second film. secular society requires. Stroszek. while Stroszek depicted the modern waste-land through the eyes of three contemporary German immigrants to America. It is perhapsthe major context for interpretingthis particularfilm. the confinement of women.however. is torn between the insurgency and the secularhumanist ideals of Ataturk and Marx. The film Yol illustrates the way in which the sociological imaginationfacilitatesthe hermeneutic task. were devoted to the sociological perspective. a courtship ritual that demandsthe constantsurveillanceof chaperonesto prevent sexual contact.5 This content downloaded on Tue. The hermeneutictask is to understandthe way the four story lines converge on a single theme. as the print media could justify a feature story on each quarter'stheme and film selection. made in 1976. A good film is richer than any single context. Each has been touched by modernvalues to some degree and each faces a conflict with the patriarchalfamily.The weight of traditionis set against the secular ideals of the founderof moder Turkey. It also permitted a "dialectical" organization of films within a theme. Miller). who wrote and directed the film from prison and then escaped to edit the finished work. who are the least touched by modernity. Ataturk. and the male code of honor stifle the individual autonomy that a democratic. Cries and Whispers). The prison. The Chant of JimmieBlacksmith posited the promiseof a new world. moral.no attempt was made to restrict audience discussion to set topicg or to introduce sociologicalconceptsas learningobjectives. whether public roles in modern society provide meaning and purposein face of the pendingreality of death whethermoral (CitizenKane. Ironically. The story concerns the experiences of four Turkishprisoners released for a week's furlough to visit their families. The issues explored in printed materials and open discussion during 1982-83 included whether the society we are creating today-a society of impersonal organizations concerned with largely instrumentalgoals-does not necessarilyproducealienationand dehumanization (Citizen Kane. or the receptionthe film received without and some insight into the social structure historyof the filmmaker's home society: Turkey. the images and symbols which capturethe filmmaker'svision (with all its contradictions). But even here it is not exhaustive. the centralmetaphorof the film.and whether the essence of social life is not but artifice and theatre (Grand Illusion. The spring 1984 series had the exact same triadicstructure. It is virtually impossible to interpret the characters' actionsandmotivations." It began with a film set in the frontier (McCabeand Mrs. The clan loyalty thatis the social basis of Kurdishsolidarity. was something of a bicentennialgift. the series concluded with My Dinner With Andre. reason is not but the rationalization of social dominance (Mon Oncle d'Amerique). This schedule lowered poster and booklet costs and maximized publicity. the Fall 1983 theme was "Estrangement Transcendence the New and in World. adulterykilling. The Rules of the Game). a documentary about pet cemeteries).and the way the whole is bound to several contexts that remain cinematically implicit. and psychological as well as sociological questions. It is a pre-emption that must be earned through concrete cinematic analyses. as well as powerful culture criticism. and the reclaiming of a man's wife and children by his father-in-law following the man's violation of the masculine code of honor are some of the customs that alternately implore and oppress them as they undertakethis "trek of life" (yol in Turkish). The Conversation). Widow inheritance. when the promise of a new beginningwas in full flower (as was evidence of the commodityrelation). works on multiple levels. The films chosen for Cinema Sociology raised philosophical. The sociological imagination is essential for tying the action on screen to one of those contexts. (This hystericallyfunny film is perhaps the most penetratingdepiction of estrangement ever filmed. The filmmaker.the filmmaker's message. examinedthe hollowed-outwreckage of the American Dream after it had been completely commodified. the only revolutionarygroup in the film is the separatistKurds. FORMAT GROUPING FILMS BY SUBJECT tory and a half dozen other disciplines all whose fulfillment is contributeto an interpretation an ever-receding ideal.244 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY materials. set in the present(Gates of Heaven. Staking out the sociohistoricalcontext as the domain of the sociological imaginationis no deprivation.and the revolutionarystandpointof the filmmaker. as well as issue weekly notices for particular films. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions .) Finally. For example. the transitionfrom to patriarchal civil society. a film about renewal and transcendence. filial justice. A closing scene has the hapless Stroszek runninginto a gaudy amusementparkon an Indian Reservationcarryinga frozen turkey!So much for the AmericanDream! PRINTED MATERIAL Upon enteringthe auditoriumviewers found a sixor seven-page brochure(two folded sheets of 8. Appendix A lists the films in the sequence in which they were shown. a Kurd himself.
REFRESHMENTS The series was held on Friday evenings at 7:30. with three especially popularfilms shown again on Saturday. The to provide an occasion for adult community discussant'srole was limited to ten minutesand the residents to discuss issues of philosophical. and a brief enumerationof the sociological themes found in the three films. as gifts of food normally do.Recall that the goal of the project was ity and some natural linkage to the film. or event in the film. Besides sociological. and moral significance. The discussant'sjob was to focus the sharedenterprise. Persons on the mailing list received a descriptionof the next ROLE OF THE DISCUSSANT season's films a week or so before the media The discussion period allowed the audience to announcement.intimate environs produced a remarkablydevelphor. Additional chairs could be welcoming the audience. not typeset) and permitted a longer essay on the sociological aspects of the film. and a large screen provided an almost ideal The project director also served as a host. 245 (1). He also uncommonoccurrence. Art (1) and Foreign Language (1). and filmgoers' attention on a major dilemma.social similarity(see below). sense of clarify or reflect on the themes and symbols just experienced. It was cheaper (photocopied. It shows how naturally the socioculturalcontext can be broughtto the task of film interpretation. from which the following informationis for discussant selection were communicativeabil. The entertainment value of this schedule is manifest. detached stereo speakers. It also appeared to be more useful to viewers. The combination of gift exchange. Appendix B is part of a quarterly brochure on The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith. film and discussion on a simple form that doubled as a sign-up sheet for the mailing list. These opening comments served to reinforce the program'shumanistic intentions and MAILING LIST/QUESTIONNAIRE to preparethe audience to experience the film on Attendees were asked to evaluate the evening's its own (sometimes uncompromising)terms. The discussants were not experts in cinematic technique or history.the use of refreshments contributed another dimension of satisfaction. often The grantor required annual evaluations of the they were not even film buffs. Philosophy (1). while sparing the audience the didactic inputs the sociologists might otherwise have felt compelled to make during the discussion period. Early arrivalshad the opportunityto read the brochureand enjoy a snack while conversing with friends or the host. AUDITORIUM A cushioned. setting for the series. and popcorn were served from 7:00. juice. the discussant the initial focused commentary. but also to react subjectively. Discussants pants. The films Sociology. 142-seat tiered lecture room with an ROLE OF THE HOST enclosed projectionbooth.abstracted. explainingthe formatand broughtin from the hall for spillover crowds. only to explore one or two. Coffee. The major criteria project. as it established the sociological nexus of the interpretation. whole discussion period to forty minutes. Althoughfilmgoers recomintroducedthat evening's discussantand explained mended a larger room. Political Science (2). Communications(2). thus setting an oped in-group feeling among the regular particiintellectual floor for the interaction. a not giving informationabout upcoming films. Usually some backgroundinformationabout engenderedby occasional crowding. One filmgoer was to this end. The last was fairly cryptic and meant to focus reflection on ideas which often failed to get a hearingduringthe discussion period. the sense of intimacy why he or she was matched with that particular a smaller auditoriumwas worth the film. cookies. That left the audience with a few questions to EVALUATION answer on its own. it helped to create a responsive environment(and may have partiallycompensated for the frequent technical difficulties with the projectors). meta. moved to write an unsolicited "community Informalityand spontaneitywere encouraged. This experience was one of the unexpected were expected to utilize disciplinary perspectives satisfactions of the program. During the third year a separatebrochurefor each film was distributed in place of the quarterly booklet. discussants were recruited from the provided the stimulus. and the booklet an elaboraDepartmentsof English (3). a plot outline. but without discussion.CINEMA SOCIOLOGY x 11 paper) describing the quarter's theme and giving the cast and credits. Computer Science (1). best discussants tried not to solve all the puzzles left by the filmmaker. Although food provision was labor-intensive. The comment" lauding the series in the local press. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions . The brochurewas fundamental to the series. Mathematics tion of the sociological dimension of the interpre- This content downloaded on Tue. the filmmaker's artistic inclinationswere provided as well.
"Did the film promptyou to think about philosophical. Undoubtedlythe series tappedan unmet need in the communityfor quality films and an intellectual environment in which to ponder them. of 73 responses." Many participants volunteeredthat a select film made a lasting impression. "Having stayed for the discussion. 46 answered "yes" (63 percent). the discussant. college professors (5. The project director was interviewed before each group of three films and weekly notices of the film's awards and accomplishments were common.0 percent). Total attendance for three years was 2675. The average age of our first year respondents was 39. reflecting the low student participation Several questions attempted to find out how effectively we communicated the sociological imagination. If Appendix A is examined carefully. Special invitationsto large organizations. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions . white collar workers (7.5 percent). could be organizedand the location changed to a union hall or church meeting room. Empathicidentificationwith fictional screen characters is one of those rare occasions in which we allow ourselves to try out alternativeego ideals. ATTENDANCE The original grant applicationestimated that 40 to 60 persons would attendeach presentation. This content downloaded on Tue. The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmithand El Norte elicited the most remarksof this kind. During the second year. given the nature and location of the program. professionals (18.000. business people (12. it will show a shift in our film selection from the great classics to contemporary European and off-beat American offerings. twice the original estimate.In fact. Based on the results of the first year returns(108 respondents).such as hospitals and credit unions. CinemaSociology's formatcould be modified to appeal more to working class and minority populations.it is safe to say that the programachieved fifths of those in attendancewere unconnectedto the University.9 percent). From the beginning the series was the beneficiary of widespreadpublicity in both local newspapers. moral or sociological questions?" Here 97. the average attendanceper show was 110 the first year. and several radio stations. the filmgoers were teachers (19.5 percent). studentand professorialstatuses. however. The Evansville Teachers Association co-sponsored the series. AUDIENCE EVALUATIONS The questionnaireincluded an item on occupation. 12 answered "no" (17 percent)and 15 answered"maybe a little" (20 percent). not one commercial theatre would risk showing the type of film in which we came to specialize.0 percent). and distributed posters in every school in Evansville.5 percent). often led to items in employee bulletins. Anotherquestion asked. Teachersdid respond.5 percent). retired persons (6. approximatelythreereturns. participation PUBLICITY If any factor contributed to the success of the project. The quality of discussion naturallyvaried with the film. and blue collar workers (0. The original grant proposal targeted teachers as the main nonUniversity audience. and group dynamics. the quality and level of audience was much higher than anticipated. 25 (21 percent) identified themselves as teachers. This profile is not surprising. Despite these positive responses. We found our niche in the educated middle-class stratumof the community. Based on attendance and questionnaire rate (18. Louis or Louisville (about 130 miles) to see a well-reviewed import.5 percent). of 119 respondents.4 percent answered "yes. it is difficult to know how successful we were in getting adult communityresidentsto think about their own lives in terms of the large-scale structuresand forces discussed in the series. for example. announced each play date in its bulletin. a remarkablepercentage considering the late hour.9. 50 said "a lot" (61 percent). the student paper. among those of a more cosmopolitanbent. did your understandingof the film improve a lot / a little / not much?" Of 82 responses. Attendance increased another 65 percent the second year. allowing for under-reportingof its aims in a grand manner. AUDIENCE AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Between 35 and 50 percent of the audience would remain for the discussion period after the show. but not in large numbers. I think we succeeded fairly well. In the controlled environment we created. Film selection and viewing location might be changed and the literature written differently. it was publicity. A third question asked. Posters were placed in the usual places in malls and downtown and delivered to community organizations.246 TEACHINGSOCIOLOGY tation. On the whole.5 percent). A group of three films on work and class conflict. people who would occasionally drive to St.In answer to the question." with only 2 of 76 responses indicating "no" or "not much.5 percent). In a community of 130. "Did your of understanding sociology improve as a result of the film and/or discussion?". homemakers(11. to 137 per show. students (18. Union co-sponsorship would be essential. 27 said "a little" (33 percent)and only 5 said "not much" (6 percent). then levelled off at 131 per show the third year. Overall.
Since film selection anddiscussant selection are the two most importantfunctions. trying to keep her alive. it is also necessary to advise that not every departmenthas the personnel to execute this kind of public event. 1978) * The authorwill provide abstractsof these films upon request. community-oriented While suggesting that other departmentsmight wish to seek outside support for film/discussion series. and evaluationof a film/discussion series that successthe fully incorporated sociological imaginationin a humanities setting.Adulterykilling was not Seyit's right. She had disgraced while him and her family by turningto prostitution he was in prison. retainingthe format. however. There is a scene in Yol where Seyit Ali leads his son and wife at night across the wind-swept. 1971) Gates of Heaven (RobertAltman. underdressed snow-covered mountainside. sensing his irrevolve. The communicativeexchange was more spontaneousand democraticthan most interactions between academic faculty and the public. it is imperativethat the department personwhose proclivitieslie in this direction. This could be offset by selecting older films or using video tapes. The final scene in this sequence. these were not outcomes we could realistically expect to contravene. that interested departments would experiment first with the format.The projectexceeded its own modest goals and may be expected to have similar effects in like environments. This content downloaded on Tue. Pilgrimageand Sacrifice The Chantof JimmieBlacksmith(Fred Schepisi.CINEMA SOCIOLOGY And where the social environment is clearly and responsiblefor the predicaments choices of the characters. It may help people understand what sociology and selfhave to do with one another. APPENDIX A: FilmTitlesandThemes* Fall 1982 Theme:The Alienation Self in Modem of Society Citizen Kane (Orson Wells." her fathertold him. but it surely made a difference. and the psychologicalrewards usually associated with making gifts to others. But the best bet is to seek the aid of the DevelopmentOffice in obtainingoutside subsidies. shows Seyit Ali carryinghis unconscious. format. In short. 1982) El Norte (JuanNava. It broughta large numberof benefits to the sociology faculty. half-frozen wife on his back. Perhapsthe best time to offer a course like Cinema Sociology would be either the Januaryshort term. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions . and the series did not help us retain an endangered position in sociology. Cinema Sociology provided an occasion in which it was legitimate to express insights of this kind. understanding SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION This paper presentedthe justification. a stronger linkage to the humanities faculty and mission. 1942) The Conversation(FrancisFord Coppola. 1971) My Dinner with Andre (Louis Malle. The trek was her execution. As a consequence. The major obstacle to converting Cinema Sociology to classroomuse is film rentalcost.an Englishprofessorassumedresponsibility for the series starting the fourth year. 1939) Mon Oncle d'Amerique(Alain Resnais. Miller (RobertAltman.The projectis now in its fifth year. Although our enrollmentsand recruitmentof new majorsdid not improve. But it is also an image thatbears within itself the existential distance between tradition and modernity. 1937) The Rules of the Game (Jean Renoir. while his son beats her with his belt.there is no doubt that identificationcan promote sociological understanding. "Be hard. 1978) Stroszek:A Ballad (WernerHerzog. 1978) Casablanca (Michael Curtis. 1983) Spring 1985 Theme: Women and Patriarchy Cin of Women(FedericoFellini. 1942) Fall 1984 Theme: Ethnicityin Contemporary Society Yol (Yilmaz Guney. Nearly all the aesthetic advantagesof the large screen are lost in the latterstrategyand it cannotbe recommended. 1982) Chan is Missing (Wayne Wang. for the right departmentin the right setting (a liberal arts universityin a small city). It is an image of concentrated emotional power that only art can create. 1980) and Fall 1983 Theme:Estrangement Transcendence in the New World McCabe and Mrs. a projectlike Cinema Sociology might prove to be a valuable addition to community life. 247 for schools having that schedule. 1974) Cries and Whispers(IngmarBergman. 1972) The Marriage of Maria Braun (Ranier Maria Fassbinder. Nurtureyour hatred. It is hoped. 1972) Spring1983 Theme:SocialRules The Grand Illusion (Jean Renoir. or the summer term. followed by the host role and the booklet writing (all accomplishedby a single person ratherthan a have a group). 1981) Spring 1984 Theme: Rebellion.but inevitablydiminishingthe sociological aspect of the interpretation. This was not the case at the University of Evansville after the original project director left. but his duty. including enhanced visibility. 1980) A Brief Vacation(Victorio DeSica. shot from a distance. To interpret such a scene without the sociological imagination would be to impoverish it.Fees imposedon students registeringfor the course would help recover some costs. and far less ritualistic and deferential. How lasting an impact it made on audiences is unknown. kudos from the University administration(which loved the publicity).
The tribalsocieties not made extinct by encroachmentdisintegratedas the whites spurredoverturesof kinship and reciprocity. 1980. insulted. is keen on proving himself as industriousas the lower class Scotch. whose rules and values he masteredso well. and Mrs. 1973. Armedwith a letterof reference. Jimmie explodes. a half-white Australian Aborigine raised by the Rev. His article. SOCIOLOGICAL THEMES 1. Nicholas J. IL 61702. Newby humiliates him by withholding his wages and arrangingto place his pregnant wife as a servant in a distant town. "Through a Double-CrossedEye: Sociology and the Movies. in that order. paying for sexual favors with alcohol. a sheep shearer. James. RetributiveJustice: Jimmie Blacksmith's vengence has an "Old Testament"qualityaboutit that is foreign to Aboriginal society. Yelling "I declarewar!. The same norm of reciprocity applied to sexual relations:men offered theirwives to kinsmenas a form of hospitality. 3. Approximately300. Neville. and finally again a fence-builder on the Newby farm. Departmentof Sociology. Sydney: George Allen & Unwinn. This content downloaded on Tue. and urban sociology at Illinois Wesleyan University. he is visited by Rev. military action and interAboriginalviolence. but they felt justified in cheating them of their wages because they would only "squander" them on their kin. Addresscorrespondence Christopher Prendergast. At each job Jimmie is either underpaid.248 APPENDIX B: Booklet Materialfor The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith CREDITS Fred Schepisi Fred Schepisi Fred Schepisi. Don D. English. 2. Neville ConstableFarrell Ray Barrett Gilda. September15. "A Film-AugmentedCourse in International Social Movements. that is. pp." TeachingSociology 1:48-61. indoctrination. Mobility is won throughsevere restrictions on is personalconsumption. to 1986). Finally captured and awaiting execution. pp." appearedin The AmericanJournal of Sociology (August. 1982. DeFronzo. anthropology. The objects of his violence also symbolized what he wanted most in white society: full rights of property.untilsufficientproperty amassed. 1982. through Christopher Prendergastteaches social theory. Jimmie finds himself excluded from the settlers' society.the normof reciprocitymeantthathe could never accumulatethe wealthhe needed to own land as long as he maintainedsocial relationswith his kin.includingsexual propertypossessed exclusively by the male head of household. By 1900 the native populationhad declined to 75. the whites treated the Aboriginal villages as brothels. converting them into marketablecommoditiesthroughpersistent hardwork. For I For informationabout the colonization of Australia. Not only did they pay Aborigines less than whites on caste grounds." TeachingSociology 10:98-101. REFERENCES Demerath. Illinois Wesleyan University. 1981. see Aboriginal Australians: Black Response to White Dominance. and caste norms of the colonizing group were imposed on the native populationby a combinationof force. 1982. were penuriousto the extreme. The Australiansettlers. he retraceshis path." TeachingSociology 9:169-188. 9-21. "Teaching Introductory Sociology by Film." a phrasehe learnedat the sheep ranch." Teaching Sociology 9:69-82. The tribe Jimmie Blacksmith was initiated into exchangedgoods accordingto normsof reciprocitybased on kinship. as among the colonists. ANTHROPOLOGICAL BACKGROUND 1. It was not accumulatedby individualsseeking to gain power or prestige over other individuals. The tribesmanwas undera moralobligationto share. Neville." Even after marrying a white woman. The Europeans were expected to repay with food supportand to cease hostile actions. his "declarationof war" owed more to his Christian side than his Aboriginal. He organizedthe Cinema Sociology program while at the University of Evansville. or told to leave Mort and Uncle Tabidgi because his visiting half-brother threaten"to turn the place into a black's camp. by offering their women as a sign of friendliness. legal. 18 Dec 2012 21:22:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions . Propertycirculated within the tribe. and Irish immigrantswho spreadtheir farms across the lush landscapeof Jimmie's ancestors and who now debate the merits of a Constitution denying political and civil rights to the native Aborigines. Smith.2 3. "Teaching Undergraduate Sociology Feature Films. and unequalexchange relations. Jimmie's wife Angela Punch PLOT OUTLINE The year is 1900 and Jimmie Blacksmith. TEACHING SOCIOLOGY JimmieBlacksmith. When Mr. The Aboriginies also attempted to create relationshipsof obligation with the settlers by bringing them into the kinship system.Jimmiefinds work as a fence-builder for the farmer Healy. 148-158. CulturalDomination:The religious. 2. "Alfred Schutz and the AustrianSchool of Economics. 1788-1980 by Richard Broome. As a half-caste. alcoholism. Thomas Keneally Ian Baker Cinematography: Brian Kavanagh Editor: Music: Bruce Smeaton Producer: Director: Screenplay: CAST Jimmie Blacksmith Tommy Lewis Mort FreddyReynolds Jack Thompson Rev. killing the families of those who abused him. who begins to wonder whether his culturalindoctrination Jimmie Blacksmithdid not of contributeto his violence.000. Work/MobilityEthic: Frontiersocieties develop by exploiting abundant("free") naturalresources. 2 I am endebted to Pauline Kael for the analysis of kinshipand reciprocityhere and below. drawn from the poorest quarters of Anglo-Saxon society.000 Aborigines were living in some 500 tribes when the Britisharrivedto set up a penal colony in South Australia in 1788. See her review of The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith in The New Yorker. Bloomington. a tracker for the sadistic Constable Farrell. Instead. Most deaths were due to disease.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?