‘Rock-art’, ‘Animism’ and Two-way Thinking: Towards a Complementary Epistemology in the Understanding of Material Culture and ‘Rock-art’ of Hunting and Gathering People

In recent years, the concept of ‘animism’ has gained considerable popularity among archaeologists in exploring non-Western expressions of material culture. This development has also influenced recent academic approaches towards the study of ‘rock-art’ of people living as hunter and gatherers or in a hunting and gathering tradition. We argue here that attempts in this direction so far are generally compromised, because they fail to take Indigenous philosophies and intellectual contributions seriously. Any concern with Indigenous material expressions, including so-called rock-art, has to involve a critical re-assessment of academic discourse itself and a challenge to the primacy of Western scientific and literary, academic methodologies. With reference to the ‘rock-art’ and the world-view of the Ngarinyin (Kimberley, Northwest Australia), we present some preliminary thoughts for the development of an alternative interpretative framework, while offering a (much needed) legitimacy to another more balanced epistemology.     

To See and to be Seen ראה in Genesis 16 and Genesis 22

ABSTRACT

The aim of this article is to demonstrate: 1) that the root ??? plays a crucial role in Genesis16 and 22, where Hagar and Abraham see and acknowledge Yahweh, and Yahweh sees and shows solicitude; 2) that there is a close connection between Yahweh as ‘he who sees and he who is seen’, i.e. between his solicitude and his appearance, as expressed in the names for God and places in Gen 16,13-14 and Gen 22,14; 3) that there is a link between Yahweh’s appearance, his holy places, and his double promise; 4) that Genesis16 and 22 are variants of the same narrative with the same theological point, namely: Yahweh’s solicitude; and 5) that the theological criticism of God in Genesis 22 as an authoritarian being whose will may lead to violence being committed in his name, ignores the central message of Genesis 22, namely, God’s solicitude in rejecting human sacrifice.     

Michel Foucault

Despite his repudiation of antisemitism, Renan influenced the development of antisemitic ideologies in both France and Germany. His typology of ‘Semite’ and ‘Aryan’ was adopted especially in Germany and and combined with biological concepts of race to become the foundation of the concepts of ‘Semitism’ and ‘Antisemitism’. Renan, however, always insisted on a linguistic/cultural definition of race and regarded the biological conception, while it might have had some primitive reality, as outmoded and immoral in European civilization. After 1870 the growth of German racial antisemitism led Renan to elaborate repeatedly on race as a civilisational phenomenon that in modern Europe should have lost its biological origins. His argument that modern Jews were integral members of the French ‘nation’ and ‘civilization’ was profoundly influential on the emergence of the theory of the modern ‘nation’ as the liberal state. Gobineau's theory of race also lent itself to exploitation by racial antisemites, though it was not overtly antisemitic. Unlike Renan, however, Gobineau in his later years inclined to a vague personal antisemitism. The main difference was one of temperament as well as devotion on Renan's part to a liberal idea of the nation, as opposed to Gobineau's aversion to liberalism and modern civilization.     

Space, culture and economy—a question of practice

This article addresses the current debate within geography and other circles studying urban and regional development of the relationship between culture and economy. It revolves around two arguments. First, that the relationship should be seen not only as a question of epochal change, of de-differentiation and culturalisation of the economy; it should be considered as an analytical rather than a historical question. Second, it is argued that a theoretical articulation may be gainfully employed starting from the level of social ontology-particularly an ontology of practice. These arguments are developed starting from a critical discussion of two dominant bodies of thought about the relationship, following which, a demonstration of the inseparability of practice and meaning is used to conduct a theoretical re-articulation of culture and economy. Finally, the spatiality of the culture economy relation is considered, displacing the emphasis from connectivity in bounded regions towards joint involvement in the production of space on different scales.