(Continuation of Part 1 & 2)
McClave concluded her discussion of gestures by delineating their different dimensions: “In a nutshell, that is what gestures tell us, the manual gestures.” She then went on to explain, “We also looked at head movements, because it turns out that people move their heads in predictable ways in American culture.”
One example of head movement showing meaning was when people said anything that was inclusive such as “all,” “whole,” or “completely.” There would be a lateral sweep of the head on the word. McClave hypothesized this happened because with the earth’s gravity, many things are arranged horizontally.
McClave showed us video clips from a study conducted at CSUN with four of her graduate students. They set out to prove that the head sweep was worldwide, not just in America. They analyzed head movements of Arabic, Korean, and Bulgarian speakers. In addition, to rule out the influence of Hollywood, they studied the people of Turkana, a group of nomadic pastoralists in northwest Kenya. McClave concluded, “The data is showing around the world; we can’t claim it’s universal because no linguist would ever try to do that, but we can claim we’re seeing it all over the world with no exposure to American culture, to television or anything else. We’re finding this sweep, lateral sweep. What does this tell us? We hypothesize that humans can conceptualize something that is absent or even abstract as being positioned in space. This has amazing implications for ASL because this is exactly what ASL it still does. It positions something abstract in space and then makes the sign for it, sets that it up and then keeps pointing to that same space to represent that entity. Well it turns out, and by the way, everyone thought this was peculiar to sign languages. Sign language made this up. Turns out we’re all doing it. What probably happened, again the hypothesis is, signers are incredibly observant; they are watching you like no one else because they need every clue they can get for communication to be successful. So, it means that maybe what happened was signers? saw all of us doing this, were able to pick up on the nonverbal and then use these nonverbal cues that hearing have in order to grammaticize in ASL. Just a theory, but I’m sticking with it at this point.”
Another thing they discovered in their study of people around the world: speakers moved their heads or make gestures for each individual item on a list. McClave showed us more video clips of these examples.
McClave discussed intensification—lateral back and forth head movement—with us. Research by Chuck and Candy Goodwin and Manny Schegloff, at the University of California at Los Angeles, found that lateral head shakes mark assessments whether good or bad. Linguists assumed the origin was something with a negative comment. McClave postulates a different origin. She explained her hypothesis thusly, “The lateral sweep is to show an array of objects. Remember? We said, well, if it sweeps you’re going this way. Well, if you intensified something, there is more if it, right? So, then if you’re going back and forth, there’s just more and more to see.”
McClave continued, “. . . this is more evidence that we conceptualize abstract or absent entities as position in space, how the mind is actually working. By the way, this fits beautifully with theories from Berkeley where George Lakoff said that we think metaphorically, basically all of our thinking its metaphoric. So, this fits beautifully with this. We are positioning things in space, again supporting these theories. We also find that this relates to ASL. We found speakers showing image sizes depending on the head movements, the size of the entity. And by the way, what ASL does this too. If you’re giving something to a tall person in ASL you go up. If you’re giving something to a short person in ASL, you’re going down, to a child.” She then demonstrates giving something to a short person but looking up, explaining that it is ungrammatical in ASL to do that.
The last topic discussed was back-channeling—giving cues to a speaker that we are listening. Back-channeling was first noticed by Victor Yngve at the University of Chicago in 1970. It is assumed the listener back-channels when he or she feels like it. However, McClave discovered going over her data, speakers nod when there was nothing to nod at. She started to look at the listener. She commented, “The minute the speaker went down like this, within one second the listener would back-channel.” They found this in other languages.
McClave closed with, “What did all of this tell us? It tells us in the gesture world, we need to rethink utterance. To depend only on speech, you have no idea, really what, whether you’ve gotten the thought. A lot of the information is coming across on the gestural channel and we’re finding out that people, even though they are not aware it, are responding to it.”
Monday, May 9, 2011
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Spontaneous Gestures - Part 2 of 3
(Continued from Part 1 of 3)
McClave reiterated that gestures are connected to the thought expressed. She micro analyzes at one-thirtieth of a second because video goes by at thirty frames per second. She and her team, “. . . found the gesture will line up with the co-expressive part of the speech, but, it always either precedes it or comes right down on that beat where that speech is co-expressive.”
Early misconceptions about the relationship between gesture and speech were that gesture translated your speech. McClave clarified, “The gesture researchers realized that we see features and gestures that never were in speech. Therefore, it can’t be possible that it’s translating the speech because it was never there to begin with in the speech.”
McClave commented “. . . the listener picks up the gesture and no longer knows how that information got to them, through the gesture or through the speech. It only becomes totally integrated the mind. We’ve done enough experiments on this to find that people are paying attention to the gesture, incorporating into their understanding of the interaction and no longer able to tell you what came through the gesture medium what came through the speech medium.”
McClave showed us a video clip and pointed out, “Now, before this, linguists were working which is working with audio data. They would ask “Guess?” jeans? He’s talking about Guess? jeans.” However, it’s not what he’s talking about, she continued, “He’s talking about the logo across his shirt. So, now, you if you ask an interlocutor what he said, he’d say ‘yeah, they were wearing this logo across their shirts’ . . . .”
After showing us several video clips, McClave responds that linguists started to realize there were different dimensions of gestures—iconic, metaphoric, abstraction, deictic, and beats.
In a video clip, we saw a woman using an iconic gesture when she’s “holding a child.” Another clip, we saw a man describing something abstract by using his own body to show location (self-marking).
We’re shown a metaphorical gesture in another video clip. McClave notes, “So, if you know something about sign language this will be interesting. He’s going to talk about the shine in a little child’s eye. That’s not a physical things, so, he’s going to gesture for it.” She stops the video and says, “So, he’s doing something very close to ASL and there’s more about the connection with ASL and gestures later.” In the fourth video clip, the speaker refers to “the cycle of life.” After we see the speaker sweep her right hand to the right, McClave comments, “Here linguists love this. Why? First of we got one metaphor in speech. “Cycle of life,” a metaphor. We’ve got a different metaphor on the hands. The body coming out with two simultaneous metaphors. . . .”
McClave pointed out, “The deictic dimension, linguistics divide into concrete and abstract pointing. Concrete means you’re actually pointing at somebody that is right there with them or is something in the environment. But it turns out much like ASL signers, hearing people point at things that are not there at all.”
In another video clip, McClave noted that a man points to someone not there when he says, “So I’m gonna ask this one lady.” McClave interjected that, “He’s going to go over to his left. In fact the head moves first and the point goes to left. This is amazing if you know ASL. ASL has grammaticized the same thing. Which leads us to believe, to postulate, maybe ASL is based on the observation of hearing people. But nobody knew hearing people were doing this when they started to do the linguistics of ASL.”
Beats were the last dimension of gesture described. McClave asserted, “It was originally assumed that beats emphasized particular syllables. That when you wanted to emphasize a syllable you came down on a beat.” However, she discovered that the beats occurred on unstressed syllables and during silence, manifested in rhythmic patterns. Therefore, if you have to come down on the tone unit nucleus, the thought is already in the brain—the whole utterance is build up around the word.
McClave mentioned Brian Butterworth, a researcher in England. He claimed gestures happened because we are looking for the right words. She noted, “Those gestures happen but they’re very rare. . . . So, based on the evidence I've shown you, David McNeil of the University Of Chicago has put forth a theory of how we actually think. He calls it the Growth Point Theory because we can predict that the gesture will match up with the word that is semantically related to. And then there’s a predictable timing relationship. He hypothesized that probably this word and this image were a unity in the brain to begin with. And that what’s within your mind and then you go and build up your utterance around this thought, basically.”
Next we watched a video of a woman discussing a location in the O’Hare Airport. McClave described how the woman’s utterance is build up around the image in her mind using the Growth Point Theory.
McClave reiterated that gestures are connected to the thought expressed. She micro analyzes at one-thirtieth of a second because video goes by at thirty frames per second. She and her team, “. . . found the gesture will line up with the co-expressive part of the speech, but, it always either precedes it or comes right down on that beat where that speech is co-expressive.”
Early misconceptions about the relationship between gesture and speech were that gesture translated your speech. McClave clarified, “The gesture researchers realized that we see features and gestures that never were in speech. Therefore, it can’t be possible that it’s translating the speech because it was never there to begin with in the speech.”
McClave commented “. . . the listener picks up the gesture and no longer knows how that information got to them, through the gesture or through the speech. It only becomes totally integrated the mind. We’ve done enough experiments on this to find that people are paying attention to the gesture, incorporating into their understanding of the interaction and no longer able to tell you what came through the gesture medium what came through the speech medium.”
McClave showed us a video clip and pointed out, “Now, before this, linguists were working which is working with audio data. They would ask “Guess?” jeans? He’s talking about Guess? jeans.” However, it’s not what he’s talking about, she continued, “He’s talking about the logo across his shirt. So, now, you if you ask an interlocutor what he said, he’d say ‘yeah, they were wearing this logo across their shirts’ . . . .”
After showing us several video clips, McClave responds that linguists started to realize there were different dimensions of gestures—iconic, metaphoric, abstraction, deictic, and beats.
In a video clip, we saw a woman using an iconic gesture when she’s “holding a child.” Another clip, we saw a man describing something abstract by using his own body to show location (self-marking).
We’re shown a metaphorical gesture in another video clip. McClave notes, “So, if you know something about sign language this will be interesting. He’s going to talk about the shine in a little child’s eye. That’s not a physical things, so, he’s going to gesture for it.” She stops the video and says, “So, he’s doing something very close to ASL and there’s more about the connection with ASL and gestures later.” In the fourth video clip, the speaker refers to “the cycle of life.” After we see the speaker sweep her right hand to the right, McClave comments, “Here linguists love this. Why? First of we got one metaphor in speech. “Cycle of life,” a metaphor. We’ve got a different metaphor on the hands. The body coming out with two simultaneous metaphors. . . .”
McClave pointed out, “The deictic dimension, linguistics divide into concrete and abstract pointing. Concrete means you’re actually pointing at somebody that is right there with them or is something in the environment. But it turns out much like ASL signers, hearing people point at things that are not there at all.”
In another video clip, McClave noted that a man points to someone not there when he says, “So I’m gonna ask this one lady.” McClave interjected that, “He’s going to go over to his left. In fact the head moves first and the point goes to left. This is amazing if you know ASL. ASL has grammaticized the same thing. Which leads us to believe, to postulate, maybe ASL is based on the observation of hearing people. But nobody knew hearing people were doing this when they started to do the linguistics of ASL.”
Beats were the last dimension of gesture described. McClave asserted, “It was originally assumed that beats emphasized particular syllables. That when you wanted to emphasize a syllable you came down on a beat.” However, she discovered that the beats occurred on unstressed syllables and during silence, manifested in rhythmic patterns. Therefore, if you have to come down on the tone unit nucleus, the thought is already in the brain—the whole utterance is build up around the word.
McClave mentioned Brian Butterworth, a researcher in England. He claimed gestures happened because we are looking for the right words. She noted, “Those gestures happen but they’re very rare. . . . So, based on the evidence I've shown you, David McNeil of the University Of Chicago has put forth a theory of how we actually think. He calls it the Growth Point Theory because we can predict that the gesture will match up with the word that is semantically related to. And then there’s a predictable timing relationship. He hypothesized that probably this word and this image were a unity in the brain to begin with. And that what’s within your mind and then you go and build up your utterance around this thought, basically.”
Next we watched a video of a woman discussing a location in the O’Hare Airport. McClave described how the woman’s utterance is build up around the image in her mind using the Growth Point Theory.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Spontaneous Gestures - Part 1 of 3
On March 30, 2011, I attended a presentation presented by the CSUN Linguistics Club, “I Know What You’re Thinking: What Spontaneous Gestures Tell Us About Language and Thought,” by Evelyn McClave, Ph.D.
Dr. McClave is currently a professor of Linguistics and Deaf Studies at California State University at Northridge (CSUN). She is fluent in American Sign Language and has done linguistic research as it pertains to Deaf Studies.
The lecture focused on McClave’s research on gestures, particularly on as she explained, “. . . spontaneous gestures that hearing people make and don’t even think about what they’re doing. They are beyond the level conscious of recall.”
These gestures do not have any conventionalized forms. She ruled out emblems—the “thumbs up” gesture to represent approval or the index and thumb touch to form the “okay” symbol. McClave explained, “What I am looking at are these unconscious gestures and the basic assumptions we make are the same assumptions all scientists make and, number one, there are underlying patterns waiting to be discovered. Sure enough, we have found them. The second assumption that all of us make is that our body movements are not random. Believe it or not, we can actually predict what kind of body movements you’re going to make usually in certain circumstances.”
Early observations in the gesture field were made during the 1980s. Describing the first work by Adam Kendon, one of the top authorities on gestures, McClave said, “Speakers gesture, not listeners. So it tends to be the person talking who is moving his or her hands. Not the person/people who are listening.” She continued, “. . . gesture and speech are semantically coherent, co-expressive.” McClave demonstrated the gesture of holding a baseball bat but referred to a tennis match. She explained if this were done, the speaker would correct himself in the direction of the gesture, not the utterance—the gesture is always right.
McClave reiterated that gestures are connected to the thought expressed. She micro analyzes at one-thirtieth of a second because video goes by at thirty frames per second. She and her team, “. . . found the gesture will line up with the co-expressive part of the speech, but, it always either precedes it or comes right down on that beat where that speech is co-expressive.”
Dr. McClave is currently a professor of Linguistics and Deaf Studies at California State University at Northridge (CSUN). She is fluent in American Sign Language and has done linguistic research as it pertains to Deaf Studies.
The lecture focused on McClave’s research on gestures, particularly on as she explained, “. . . spontaneous gestures that hearing people make and don’t even think about what they’re doing. They are beyond the level conscious of recall.”
These gestures do not have any conventionalized forms. She ruled out emblems—the “thumbs up” gesture to represent approval or the index and thumb touch to form the “okay” symbol. McClave explained, “What I am looking at are these unconscious gestures and the basic assumptions we make are the same assumptions all scientists make and, number one, there are underlying patterns waiting to be discovered. Sure enough, we have found them. The second assumption that all of us make is that our body movements are not random. Believe it or not, we can actually predict what kind of body movements you’re going to make usually in certain circumstances.”
Early observations in the gesture field were made during the 1980s. Describing the first work by Adam Kendon, one of the top authorities on gestures, McClave said, “Speakers gesture, not listeners. So it tends to be the person talking who is moving his or her hands. Not the person/people who are listening.” She continued, “. . . gesture and speech are semantically coherent, co-expressive.” McClave demonstrated the gesture of holding a baseball bat but referred to a tennis match. She explained if this were done, the speaker would correct himself in the direction of the gesture, not the utterance—the gesture is always right.
McClave reiterated that gestures are connected to the thought expressed. She micro analyzes at one-thirtieth of a second because video goes by at thirty frames per second. She and her team, “. . . found the gesture will line up with the co-expressive part of the speech, but, it always either precedes it or comes right down on that beat where that speech is co-expressive.”
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Education to Help Save Great Apes – Part 2 of 2
This is a summary of the second part of Sarah Etheridge's presentation at Pierce College in the Great Hall of the Student Community Center on Wednesday, March 9, 2011.
In the second part of Ethridge’s presentation, she focused on education where we live—what she is doing at College of the Canyons. Every semester when the topic of primates and bushmeat hunting came up in her Anthropoly classes, because people didn’t know much if anything about either, she decided to add information into the curriculum. She felt information was left out about the real world and how it affects us every day. When students come into an Introduction of Anthropology class, she feels they should leave with this knowledge.
Etheridge developed a ten question anonymous survey on conservation. Eleven out of one-hundred-seventy-four high school and college students in the Southern California region did not know of bushmeat. The reason most students knew about chimpanzees was through television, film, or medical testing. Many of them did not make the connection that primates would benefit through ecotourism. Almost everybody thought apes were intelligent, but, they did not make the connection that apes would probably suffer if they were kept in a cage because of that intelligence.
In Etheridge’s findings from the survey, she felt people did not understand the information. She had an informal discussion with her students about the results and why this might be the case for their thinking.
In the survey, Ethridge shared, she used ten common animals in Africa and Asia, all of which could benefit from conservation, but specifically targeting great apes. Chimpanzees are the animals most pursued for food, yet people put water buffalo because they think it is the closest thing to a cow. (Two out of one-hundred-and-seventy-five said chimpanzees.) The question asked, “What animal comes to mind for animal testing?” Everyone answered, “Chimpanzee.” On the topic of ecotourism, people wanted to see elephants and lions in the wild. People were not automatically connecting ecotourism with apes and other primates.
Another question asked, “What animal would you think of suffers being in a cage?”
The typical answer was a very large body animal.
She questioned, “When you think of a gorilla or chimpanzee, what kind of cage do you see?”
The response was, “The ones with the bars.”
She then asked, “If you’re putting a giraffe in a closed cage that‘s open, it’s just kind of boring, or the most intelligent animal in a little tiny steel cage, what doesn’t sound right about that?”
Etheridge concluded her presentation with, “It was that question that led them to realize that if they realize chimpanzee are intelligent, it’s that intelligence that is going to lead to problems if they are in those conditions.”
As a result, Etheridge feels there’s a benefit to push for a change in the curriculum—present current issues facing primates thus bringing primates into our real lives.
In the second part of Ethridge’s presentation, she focused on education where we live—what she is doing at College of the Canyons. Every semester when the topic of primates and bushmeat hunting came up in her Anthropoly classes, because people didn’t know much if anything about either, she decided to add information into the curriculum. She felt information was left out about the real world and how it affects us every day. When students come into an Introduction of Anthropology class, she feels they should leave with this knowledge.
Etheridge developed a ten question anonymous survey on conservation. Eleven out of one-hundred-seventy-four high school and college students in the Southern California region did not know of bushmeat. The reason most students knew about chimpanzees was through television, film, or medical testing. Many of them did not make the connection that primates would benefit through ecotourism. Almost everybody thought apes were intelligent, but, they did not make the connection that apes would probably suffer if they were kept in a cage because of that intelligence.
In Etheridge’s findings from the survey, she felt people did not understand the information. She had an informal discussion with her students about the results and why this might be the case for their thinking.
In the survey, Ethridge shared, she used ten common animals in Africa and Asia, all of which could benefit from conservation, but specifically targeting great apes. Chimpanzees are the animals most pursued for food, yet people put water buffalo because they think it is the closest thing to a cow. (Two out of one-hundred-and-seventy-five said chimpanzees.) The question asked, “What animal comes to mind for animal testing?” Everyone answered, “Chimpanzee.” On the topic of ecotourism, people wanted to see elephants and lions in the wild. People were not automatically connecting ecotourism with apes and other primates.
Another question asked, “What animal would you think of suffers being in a cage?”
The typical answer was a very large body animal.
She questioned, “When you think of a gorilla or chimpanzee, what kind of cage do you see?”
The response was, “The ones with the bars.”
She then asked, “If you’re putting a giraffe in a closed cage that‘s open, it’s just kind of boring, or the most intelligent animal in a little tiny steel cage, what doesn’t sound right about that?”
Etheridge concluded her presentation with, “It was that question that led them to realize that if they realize chimpanzee are intelligent, it’s that intelligence that is going to lead to problems if they are in those conditions.”
As a result, Etheridge feels there’s a benefit to push for a change in the curriculum—present current issues facing primates thus bringing primates into our real lives.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Education to Help Save Great Apes – Part 1 of 2
Sarah Etheridge, currently a teacher at College of the Canyons, California, did her in-the-field research in Africa and Borneo. Her lecture was the second anthropology lecture of the 2010-2011 academic year at Pierce College in the Great Hall of the Student Community Center on Wednesday, March 9, 2011.
Etheridge’s presentation was in two parts. The first part she defined bushmeat hunting and her work in-the-field regarding the concerns towards primates. The second part covered her research on the current curriculum at College of the Canyons regarding the education of bushmeat hunting. (Refer to Part 2 of 2 to posted at a later date.)
Through her research, Etheridge has discovered, more often than not, people do not know what bushmeat hunting is and how it affects primates (specifically great apes, chimpanzees and orangutans) and what can be done do to stop it.
Bushmeat hunting is humans killing any animal in the forest for food consumption. However, humans no longer hunt primates primarily as bushmeat for food but for profit. Because there is little supply of these primates in the forest, they are in high demand. Plus, hunting primates means a higher return for (little) time and energy expended.
How does this impact primates? Unlike other animals, primates take a long time to mature (as many as fifteen years) and they have long interbirth intervals—one offspring every five years. Bushmeat hunting is the number one threat to great apes. Often times the mothers and their offspring are targeted, because babies can be sold to pet trade, biomedical facilities or zoos. This is why we may see these animals become extinct.
Etheridge emphasized that we were not judging people who hunt. Often people do not hunt because they love to hunt but are forced to because of their economic situation.
Another concern regarding bushmeat hunting is the logging industry by Westerners. Sometimes primates are hunted just to make a statement to warn loggers that they will do what they want in their own community. This makes conservation of the primates much harder.
A few other issues are the entertainment, pets, and biomedical industry. First, she emphasized that primates used for movies and commercials are usually infants and cannot be trained with positive reinforcement. Therefore, they are trained with negative reinforcement (which is basically abusive). Case in point, an audience thinks it sees the look of a smiling, happy chimpanzee, but in reality, it is an unhappy, fear-driven, threatened animal. Next, those who keep chimpanzees as pets (because they are cute) have trouble because they are hard to control and they are strong. In their natural environment, a chimpanzees want to jump, climb, rip and scream. This behavior is not good in a home. In the end, they spend most of the time living in a cage or wearing a shock collar to be controlled. Lastly, the primates used in biomedical facilities come from the wild or are breed at the facility: often twenty to thirty to a cage or kept in a cage the size of a closet for their entire lives. They are not enriched with toys because they need to be kept in a sterile environment. Genetically, chimpanzees and humans are ninety-nine percent the same but that one percent is very different. Ultimately, that one percent difference creates all sorts of problems. Plus, there are other factors such as fear, stress, previous testing, and previous diseases.
The point of sharing this information, Etheridge explained, is to open your eyes and see primates in a different way and be informed. As consumers, help the cause. If you are buying furniture, ask if the wood is from a sustainable forest? Do not buy products that use primates—pictures of primates on greeting cards, in entertainment or for advertisements. A possible solution is to work with sanctuaries and eco-tourism to see these animals, where the profits of such visits generates money for conservation. But, the biggest solution Etheridge asserted is education.
In Etheridge’s in-the-field research, she learned that with the increase of “quality of life” (age, education and income) in an area, the more chimpanzees in the area. Therefore, she feels we should help the people where the primates are indigenous so they are our allies.
Etheridge’s presentation was in two parts. The first part she defined bushmeat hunting and her work in-the-field regarding the concerns towards primates. The second part covered her research on the current curriculum at College of the Canyons regarding the education of bushmeat hunting. (Refer to Part 2 of 2 to posted at a later date.)
Through her research, Etheridge has discovered, more often than not, people do not know what bushmeat hunting is and how it affects primates (specifically great apes, chimpanzees and orangutans) and what can be done do to stop it.
Bushmeat hunting is humans killing any animal in the forest for food consumption. However, humans no longer hunt primates primarily as bushmeat for food but for profit. Because there is little supply of these primates in the forest, they are in high demand. Plus, hunting primates means a higher return for (little) time and energy expended.
How does this impact primates? Unlike other animals, primates take a long time to mature (as many as fifteen years) and they have long interbirth intervals—one offspring every five years. Bushmeat hunting is the number one threat to great apes. Often times the mothers and their offspring are targeted, because babies can be sold to pet trade, biomedical facilities or zoos. This is why we may see these animals become extinct.
Etheridge emphasized that we were not judging people who hunt. Often people do not hunt because they love to hunt but are forced to because of their economic situation.
Another concern regarding bushmeat hunting is the logging industry by Westerners. Sometimes primates are hunted just to make a statement to warn loggers that they will do what they want in their own community. This makes conservation of the primates much harder.
A few other issues are the entertainment, pets, and biomedical industry. First, she emphasized that primates used for movies and commercials are usually infants and cannot be trained with positive reinforcement. Therefore, they are trained with negative reinforcement (which is basically abusive). Case in point, an audience thinks it sees the look of a smiling, happy chimpanzee, but in reality, it is an unhappy, fear-driven, threatened animal. Next, those who keep chimpanzees as pets (because they are cute) have trouble because they are hard to control and they are strong. In their natural environment, a chimpanzees want to jump, climb, rip and scream. This behavior is not good in a home. In the end, they spend most of the time living in a cage or wearing a shock collar to be controlled. Lastly, the primates used in biomedical facilities come from the wild or are breed at the facility: often twenty to thirty to a cage or kept in a cage the size of a closet for their entire lives. They are not enriched with toys because they need to be kept in a sterile environment. Genetically, chimpanzees and humans are ninety-nine percent the same but that one percent is very different. Ultimately, that one percent difference creates all sorts of problems. Plus, there are other factors such as fear, stress, previous testing, and previous diseases.
The point of sharing this information, Etheridge explained, is to open your eyes and see primates in a different way and be informed. As consumers, help the cause. If you are buying furniture, ask if the wood is from a sustainable forest? Do not buy products that use primates—pictures of primates on greeting cards, in entertainment or for advertisements. A possible solution is to work with sanctuaries and eco-tourism to see these animals, where the profits of such visits generates money for conservation. But, the biggest solution Etheridge asserted is education.
In Etheridge’s in-the-field research, she learned that with the increase of “quality of life” (age, education and income) in an area, the more chimpanzees in the area. Therefore, she feels we should help the people where the primates are indigenous so they are our allies.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Tribal Dance Jam Interview on Tribal Dance Nation
Keli of Tribal Dance Nation asked me if I’d be available for an interview for her blog. She is planning to attend Tribal Dance Jam on Saturday, January 29, 2010, at REMO Recreational Music Center and wanted to share with her readers what to expect.
I met Keli, an Arizona resident, last summer when the TDJ Collective performed at Venice Beach Music Festival. She had just completed the weeklong American Tribal Style (ATS) General Skills (GS) and Teacher Training (TT) with Carolena Nericcio of FatChance BellyDance in Highland. I was facilitating a performance by the TDJ Collective (named after Tribal Dance Jam) where dancers from all over the area come together to perform without a rehearsal—100% improvisation. Keli, along with two other dancers joined our performance.
To my surprise, the interview was not on paper but on video. We coordinated our schedules and via Skype we chatted with each other.
The interview is in two parts. Keli refers to the event on her blog as “L.A. Tribal Dance Jam.” That happens to be a combination of the event and the name of one of my bellydance troupes. My troupe name is L.A. Tribal. The name of the event is called Tribal Dance Jam.”
Interview Part 1 of 2
Interview Part 2 of 2
I met Keli, an Arizona resident, last summer when the TDJ Collective performed at Venice Beach Music Festival. She had just completed the weeklong American Tribal Style (ATS) General Skills (GS) and Teacher Training (TT) with Carolena Nericcio of FatChance BellyDance in Highland. I was facilitating a performance by the TDJ Collective (named after Tribal Dance Jam) where dancers from all over the area come together to perform without a rehearsal—100% improvisation. Keli, along with two other dancers joined our performance.
To my surprise, the interview was not on paper but on video. We coordinated our schedules and via Skype we chatted with each other.
The interview is in two parts. Keli refers to the event on her blog as “L.A. Tribal Dance Jam.” That happens to be a combination of the event and the name of one of my bellydance troupes. My troupe name is L.A. Tribal. The name of the event is called Tribal Dance Jam.”
Interview Part 1 of 2
Interview Part 2 of 2
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Mock (yeah) • ing (yeah) • bird (yeah) • yeah (yeah)!
In 1974, Carly Simon and James Taylor’s, “Mockingbird,” hit the pop charts. I can see my friend Phyllis and me standing out on the front lawn of her parent’s house on Shoup Ave. We’d crank up the stereo and belt out the song at the top of our lungs, alternating between who’d sing Carly's or James’ part.
Phyllis’ parents were not home during the afternoon. I learned later that she was what became a term called “latch-key kid.” We met in youth band during the summer of 1974. Then we discovered we went to the same junior high school. We were inseparable.
Another favorite pastime of ours was baton twirling. Yep, we would spend hours on the front lawn trying different routines together.
I wanted to be a majorette since as long as I can remember. I would spend my allowance on a baton from Karl’s hobby store in the Fallbrook Mall. The problem--it would get a dent in the metal and in no time at all be endered useless. I must not have shown promise because a professional baton was never an option.
Anyone who remembers West Valley Youth Band will remember w e had a junior and senior band. The senior band had Nancy Rupender(sp). She was a phenomenal baton twirler, letting the baton twirl as she let the thing fly (sometimes two) in front, behind, and up above, as she herself performed multiple turns, flips, and cartwheels.
Phyllis and I were just happy we didn’t get a dent in our batons. Those mockingbird days are long gone. High school pulled us apart. I went to El Camino and she to Canoga Park High School.
I hope when Phyllis hears “Mockingbird” by Carly Simon and James Taylor, she pauses and reflects.
Phyllis’ parents were not home during the afternoon. I learned later that she was what became a term called “latch-key kid.” We met in youth band during the summer of 1974. Then we discovered we went to the same junior high school. We were inseparable.
Another favorite pastime of ours was baton twirling. Yep, we would spend hours on the front lawn trying different routines together.
I wanted to be a majorette since as long as I can remember. I would spend my allowance on a baton from Karl’s hobby store in the Fallbrook Mall. The problem--it would get a dent in the metal and in no time at all be endered useless. I must not have shown promise because a professional baton was never an option.
Anyone who remembers West Valley Youth Band will remember w e had a junior and senior band. The senior band had Nancy Rupender(sp). She was a phenomenal baton twirler, letting the baton twirl as she let the thing fly (sometimes two) in front, behind, and up above, as she herself performed multiple turns, flips, and cartwheels.
Phyllis and I were just happy we didn’t get a dent in our batons. Those mockingbird days are long gone. High school pulled us apart. I went to El Camino and she to Canoga Park High School.
I hope when Phyllis hears “Mockingbird” by Carly Simon and James Taylor, she pauses and reflects.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
