Hannah Griese
Distinctive Sociology: Service and Family
When I came to St. Olaf College, I was decidedly undecided about my major. Although I had many interests and passions, I had no real inspiration for what I ‘wanted to do with my life.’ It is fortunate that during my time at St. Olaf I had several professors who encouraged me to think about my future in terms of vocation. I was encouraged to take classes that interested me and not to worry too much about majors or concentrations. As Prof. Williamson put it, “Take classes that you like and let those make up your own concentration.” During the process of figuring out what path to pursue, I have formulated three questions that are helpful in determining my vocation: What do I enjoy doing? What do I see in the world that needs doing? Where do these activities and needs overlap? It is only recently that the answer to these questions has become clearer to me. At this point in life, the answers to my vocational questions center around two mains themes: service and family.
In looking back on the sociology/anthropology major, there is no doubt that my experiences have led me to find such value in service and family. Discussions and readings about ideology and worldviews, power and knowledge, cultural relativism, social location, and ethics have all been instrumental in creating, directing and encouraging my passion for service and interest in families. The exciting, profound, and especially the troubling things I learned about my own society have made a lasting impression on me. In my portfolio, I have included pieces that represent some of these influential experiences. The goal of this paper is to reflect on how the experiences have shaped me and to look forward to how the knowledge I have gained from my soc/anthro classes will both serve me and help me serve others in the future.
Perhaps the most earth-shaking experience for me was learning about ideology and social construction during Anthropological Theory. By critiquing ideology, we were able to view seemingly ‘normal’ categories as constructions. For example, the idea of gender is conceived as a naturally occurring category with the two genders encompassing specific and often opposing traits. Yet these traits vary over time, across cultures, and within our personal experiences. While we have a dominant idea about what a female human is like, we seldom find a woman that perfectly fits society’s idea of the ‘female.’ Such ideologies exist because they are useful; indeed, they simplify our lives. They tidy up the messiness and reduce the amount of work we have to do to interpret other people. But these ideologies can also play a big role in covering up networks of power. They can also deny the real experiences of people, who are then left to struggle with the disparity between the reality of their own experience and the reality dictated by society. These ideologies are not merely false categories that we are free to use or ignore. As we discussed in class, ideologies may be imagined but they are not imaginary – they shape our lives and our thoughts. Even when we learn to critique ideology, we are not free from it. Often, the best we can do is try to acknowledge the role it plays in making us feel or think in certain ways.
From this understanding of ideology, we moved on to talk about the relationship between power, knowledge, and definition. If we understand ideology to be socially constructed, we can ask the questions, ‘why is society constructed this way? Who made it this way? Whom does this construction serve?’ Foucault’s theory of the connection between the knowledge and power made a huge impression on me. When I understood the idea that power does not just mean political, monetary, or military force but also social force and the ability to control how other people think about things, something really clicked. I suddenly began to realize why language and definitions are so important. The people in power are the ones who get to tell the stories. They get to slant the story however they want, whatever way serves them best. And they may not even do this on purpose, though frequently they do. This means that most of what we know about disempowered or peripheral groups comes from the perspective of the empowered and central groups. In translating this into my own experiences, I realized that this means that most of what I know about other cultures and countries is based on the interpretations of the powerful, the rich, and the academic. Though I had traveled quite a bit, I had always viewed local people as ‘other,’ but really, they are the authorities on themselves. Listening to the stories of the disempowered or marginalized in America and abroad is a crucial part of gaining a fuller understanding of people and cultures.
This view point was especially helpful when I traveled to South Africa in January of 2008. Our class on Religion and Cultural Diversity was seldom conducted in classrooms. Instead, we spent a lot of time interacting with local people. While we learned a lot of history and visited many of famous sites, the best experiences for me were the times that I got to meet with the local people. Not only did this help me gain a better understanding of their everyday lives, but it helped alleviate of my concern about being a voyeuristic tourist. Having learned about colonialism and the early, exploitative forms of anthropology, I was acutely aware and sometimes uncomfortable with being a tourist. The idea of cultural voyeurism was one our group talked about a lot. Was it appropriate to take pictures of the poor township areas? Was this simply exploiting the lives of the people to create photographs of the exotic? There was definitely the potential for that. Fortunately, we did get to know many people and listen to what they had to say about themselves. We found that they really appreciated our willingness to get to know them as well.
One of the women in the township we drove through ran a restaurant where we ate that evening. She told us her whole story, from being a poorly paid maid to gradually buying up the huts around hers to create the restaurant we were in. At the end, she thanked us for getting down off our bus and coming to meet her and her neighbors. She explained that many people drive through and take photos, but never get out, never talk to the people they capture on film. This made a big impression on me. It made me more aware of how I was interacting with other people and how they viewed me during the rest of our trip.
Another tool of sociology and anthropology that has helped me in both the theoretical and in my everyday life is that of locating myself and my experience within the structures of society. On one of the first days of intro to sociology, Prof. Peterson demonstrated C.W. Mills’ theory of the sociological imagination. She drew several concentric circles on the board, labeling the central circle ‘individual’ and continuing outward with ‘family,’ ‘society,’ ‘nation-state,’ and ‘global.’ She was showing us how a single person exists within a large web of social institutions and relationships from the micro level of families out to the macro level of global politics, trade, and relations. As the course progressed, we looked at the interaction between history, biography and social structures, which helped us to connect our own experiences to larger structures and institutions. Finally, we connected this process to Mills’ idea of private problems becoming public issues. These ideas became very helpful later in my coursework, especially in the core theory classes when I began to think about my relationship and my responsibility to other people in the world.
Together, my portfolio pieces from Anthropological and Sociological theory show that I was struggling to locate myself within larger structures and to understand how that placed me in relation to other people, especially those less privileged than I. My Anthro essay synthesizes much of the literature and ideas learned in Anthro theory in a discussion of how values are differentiated across cultures. It examines the different cultural perspectives that surround debates about human rights and child rights, organ harvesting and donation, and environmental issues. This essay represents my first foray into the concepts of cultural and moral relativism, ideas that were new and exciting to me. Although after reading Lukes’ work in Senior Seminar, I’ve come to reject moral relativism, I still maintain that cultural relativism can be very valuable in helping us to understand the beliefs and behaviors of others. In my final sociological theory paper, I explored the meaning and purpose of sociology, ultimately finding a personal connection with the ideals of liberation sociology. I looked at the work of feminist sociologists, who critiqued their own experiences and dealt reflexively with contradictions and oppressions they found in the field of sociology. This essay exhibits my early understanding that practical applications of sociology are important to me. I began to recognize my own interest in doing work that benefits people who have been disadvantaged and disempowered by our modern world.
In Senior Seminar this semester we have had a lot of discussion about ethics, particularly the ethics of conducting anthropology and doing service in other countries. There is an ongoing debate in anthropology about whether or not it is possible, responsible and academically sound for anthropologists to participate in service work during fieldwork and research. Some feel that you cannot conduct true anthropology while also trying to serve those you study. Other anthropologists, like Nancy Scheper-Hughes, argue that you cannot and should not study without serving, that you have a responsibility towards those you study to do so. In practicing this ‘militant anthropology,’ Scheper-Hughes explains that, “we can position ourselves…squarely on the side of humanity,” (420). While I see some of the difficulties of engaging in this sort of anthropology, I believe that this combination of service and science suits me best. My belief is that I can do both if I am transparent about both goals. As long as I acknowledge my priorities and my biases, I believe that I can gather a lot of valuable information that can be analyzed and shared. At the same time, I will also be interacting with my subjects – my friends – in an ethical, caring and human way.
In the coming year, I plan to be serving in either South Africa or Malaysia as part of the Young Adults in Global Missions program of the ELCA, a prospect which is both thrilling and intimidating. There will be difficulties in trying to serve others. Making sure that I am serving them according to what their needs are and not merely what I perceive their needs to be, avoiding a one-sided conversation, and acknowledging the strengths and talents of the people I’m serving will all be important. The Global Missions staff has been most reassuring, explaining that what we do is not missionary work in the traditional sense, but is focused on the practical needs of others. They also explained that a large part of my job will include simply being in relationships with others. They call this the ‘ministry or presence,’ a concept that is really appealing to me. I think my participation in this program will help others, but it will probably help me even more as I learn about service and gain a better understanding about my role in the world.
As I look beyond the coming year, I think about what sort of field I might want to pursue as a career. The field that interests me most has become more obvious in the last few semesters. In addition to a focus on service, I have also developed an interest in family studies. I have taken Human Sexuality, Intro to Family Studies, Marriage and the Family, and Family Relationships and found the dynamics of families and the relationship between families and social structures to be fascinating. Although most of these courses were not in the Soc/Anthro department, I was able to use many of my analytical tools to understand families on both macro and micro levels. In Marriage and the Family, for instance, we looked at how private family troubles become public issues. When both parents in a family work and have trouble finding safe and affordable for their children, they are dealing with the private struggle of trying to maintain their children’s safety while remaining financially stable. When thousands of families are having this same difficulty, the problem of safe, affordable childcare becomes a national issue. I found this issue so interesting that I conducted qualitative research within my family to look at how the motherhood experiences of my mother and sister reflect great social trends. I have included the resulting research paper in my portfolio, as it show both my interest in qualitative research and in family studies. In doing that research, I realized that there are many issues in the family studies field that would benefit from sociological research and analysis. I feel that such research would be really exciting and could also have beneficial applications in public policy, community organizing, and family counseling. In the future, I hope to attend graduate school and focus on the sociology of families. Working with family issues would be an excellent way for me to blend my interests in service and families.
My family studies courses have also touched me on a more personal level and have made me aware of one of the great difficulties of being a sociologist. Sociology and anthropology are, or should be, inherently reflexive disciplines. In studying the structures that affect people on a daily basis, you cannot help but be aware of the way that they affect you as an individual. Being intentionally reflexive is crucial to understanding your own biases and social location. Because of this, it can be hard or even impossible to divorce your personal experiences from what you are studying. I have often found this to be true and this can lead to funny or uncomfortable situations. Imagine having a serious talk with your significant other and simultaneously thinking, ‘oh, we are developing a rapport which may lead to greater intimacy and trust.’ Slightly awkward! It can feel strange to apply theory to your own life, but I think that it can also make life richer. Personally, I find that being able to understand the structures that are influencing my life is appealing and exciting, if a little strange at times. As I think ahead to having my own family, I know that I will have to juggle my analytic perspective with my emotional responses to situations. While some could see this as turning emotional experiences into colder, analytical ones, I believe that it will actually give me a greater insight into my experiences and those of my family.
As I review this essay, I think about my goals for the future. I believe that I have very high standards for myself and I see a great deal of ambition in my goals. My ambition is not exactly traditional. I do not see myself wearing power-suits at an office, receiving gigantic pay checks, or coming home to an elegant house. My ambition lies more along the lines of working for people and working for change, of working to change the institutions that all too often make life so difficult for the marginalized. I also see myself working to raise my own family in a socially responsible way. I do not underestimate the difficulty of these goals. I believe it will be hard, but I also believe that it will be rewarding. I can see a lot that needs doing in this world, and the sociology of service and families is something that I enjoy doing. The intersection of social needs and my own personal enjoyment have helped me understand my own vocational calling to help improve the lives of those around me. And if I were to identify a singular goal for my sociology, it would be just that – creating a better place and way for people to live.
Works Cited
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy. (1995). The primacy of the ethical; Propositions for a militant anthropology. Current Anthropology 36:3 p409-440.
