In this discussion of the “modern” and “primitive”, modern was used in the sense of “modernist” – as in the cultural movement from the late 1800s to the early 1900s.  We watched a video of the Tiller Girls, and we looked at a painting of a railroad crossing the ocean.  We identified characteristics of “modernism” as uniformity, linearity, patterns, and order.  Progress, conquering the natural, expanding.  We then looked at how modernism tends to treat “primitivism” by way of colonial attitudes and endless collecting and categorizing of “primitive” artifacts, of people, and of cultures.  However, some of the trends in current American culture seem to be quite different from those of the early 1900s.  Progress remains important, but for instance we seem to value individualism and customizable experiences as well as returning to an idea of the natural.  I would be interested in looking at how the intersection of the “modernist” and the “primitive” compares to the intersection of the “current” and the “primitive”.

We then discussed portrayals of and attitudes towards the “primitive” in modern works.  One topic we addressed by way of Josephine Baker’s “Banana Dance” and the cabaret scene Nella Larson’s novel Quicksand was the idea of performing an image belonging to “your” people or participating in a culture that is yours (either personally or ancestrally), versus performing a stereotype.

Though not in the same contexts of black identity or African colonial attitudes, this is an idea that I run into a lot as a second generation American of varied ancestry.  I want, on some level, to participate in my cultural heritage, but I don’t feel as though I can do that properly because I’m so far removed from it.  The things that I know about “my” cultures are really no more detailed or nuanced than what my American cultural knowledge tells me – and those things tend to be vastly oversimplified at best and straight up stereotypes at worst.

For instance, the fragments of Filipino culture that I remember from when I was a kid are very few and very hazy.  I remember learning a dance with castanets, I remember a song about planting rice, I remember pancit and some kind of caramel candy.  I am quite confident that if I tried to recreate any of those things, the result would be at least a little offensive to actual Filipino people.  (Honestly, I think the “planting rice” thing might have been a joke, but I don’t know…)  When I was in middle school, my (white) mother insisted that I learn Tagalog because “it’s important not to lose things like that”.  She bought me a Rosetta Stone course, which I practiced every day because I actually rather liked the idea of forming a connection with my family’s past, and particularly with my grandmother.  A few months later we learned that my grandmother’s mother tongue wasn’t Tagalog at all, but another regional language.

This is an incredibly common theme that I’ve seen among my friends, many of whom are two or three generations removed from a non-US heritage.  We cling to things like cookie recipes and individual words of a language and meticulous calculation of fractions of ethnicities.  We proudly claim to be Polish, Irish, Brazilian, Japanese, Greek…  And then we try to go back and learn the dances and foods and languages that we think must have been important to our families.  We don’t have much personal connection to that history, though, so I at least am suspicious that we make our decisions about what we learn and how we portray it unfortunately based largely on stereotypes, simply because we don’t know any better.  Which would then only reinforce stereotypes.  I don’t feel like I have the right to portray or to claim any of my heritages, and in fact it seems like it might be detrimental to more authentic communities for me to try to do so.  But what’s the alternative?  To sever ties with family history, and completely erase any semblance of inherited cultural identity?  I don’t know.

As someone who is not exactly interested in English as a subject, Sam’s talk on the modern primitive was riveting. I really liked how his scope focused on race and gender. He started out by first explaining what each term meant separately. He used images like a train crossing the sea to represent modernity while showing a picture of white colonizers measuring black children for the primitive. It was a very stark juxtaposition.

He then explained how his area of study looked at the intersection of the two, and how different areas of like and art reflected both the primitive and the modern. Some of the things he showed us was the Tiller Girls and Josephine Baker. They were revolutionary because they broke what was then social norms. It was very interesting to see how people perceived these women after the performances.

Sam also talked about how museums affect our perception of the primitive. Sam described how everything we get to put in a museum is taken from someone else for our gain. I think it is also very interesting how museums creates this divide between the viewers and the viewed. It could also be dangerous by thinking that the viewed are no longer a part of society and rather are part of the past.

As a racial minority at  Cornell, I kind of know what it feels like to be talked about as if you aren’t there, especially in classes that have to do with race and American history. The way we learn about it makes it seem like a thing o the past, but sometimes people forget to bing up current events that are still a large part of society today,

I also thought the LGBT+ museum he showed us a video of near the end was really cool. It may be somewhere I would like to visit.

Last Wednesday, GRF Sam Legasse discussed “modern primitives” – how our perceptions of various stereotypes in the past has shifted as people frame them in new contexts, modify their labels, and blur their lines.

For me, the most striking image, the example of subverted stereotypes that stood out the most in my mind, was Josephine Baker in her banana skirt, swinging onto a Parisian stage from the top of a fake palm tree. From a simple internet search about her life, I learned that this performance catapulted her into international fame overnight. Apparently, the vision of her swaying hips, seducing the stereotype of the “primitive African” itself, also stuck out in the minds of her predominantly white audience.

The idea of taking (back?) control of a (frequently damaging and prejudiced) stereotype as a way of discrediting it is, I think, a tactic that’s still being employed today in various contexts. Especially today, when social media allows for the rapid and widespread dissemination of information, these kinds of social movements quickly go viral. Without trivializing the valuable racial impact of Josephine Baker’s dance, the most prominent recent example that comes to mind is the “nasty woman” phenomenon of the most recent presidential election, during which the term “nasty woman” was widely used as a form of self-identification by people (mostly female-identifying) across all social media platforms after Donald Trump used the term to refer to Hillary Clinton in a derogatory manner. One could argue that the term is still degrading – and therefore, a pointless cause – from the eyes of the opposite side, but regardless of one’s political views, the phenomenon itself – an attempt to reclaim a negative stereotype or concept by the very people it once targeted – is fascinating, and begs the question, what is the result of such an act?

For Josephine Baker, the short term outcome was her own fame and fortune. The long term outcome was a slow shift in the perception of the primitive/modern divide. Decades after her death, her influence lingers in modern social movements, and is brought to the very forefront of the public mind every so often by contemporary artists carrying on her legacy (Beyonce’s 2006 performance at Fashion Rocks!). For the “nasty women” of the world, the immediate response was a solidarity of sorts, an acknowledgment and clustering together of people with the same intention of fighting back against a perceived wrong. As for the long-term effect, only time will tell.

But for now, the lines continue to blur, and the gleaming boxes in every museum are starting to melt together under the heat of change.

Ever since I was a kid, I always loved going to museums. From the Natural History Museum to the Metropolitan Museum of Art it was one of my favorite activities to do as a kid who lived near New York City. And when I went, I was focused only of what was being displayed, and nothing else. However, this Café brought an interesting topic to my attention. How and what exactly is displayed in museums. The style that artifacts and cultures are put on display is a very standard and accepted one. With real life models in large glass cases, and various items hung up on walls to be wondered and gawked at. While no one puts much thought into this, the Café brought up an interesting point. The origins of this practice of display has a less-than-innocent place in history. It stems back to the age when countries were clamoring to conquer other, “less civilized” countries, and put their culture on display, as a sort of prize or oddity. While this may not be the connotation in museums today, perhaps we should start to figure out a new way to accurately portray the history and various cultures of the world.

Last week, I went to the Rose Cafe with GRF Sam Lagasse, where I learned about the modern primitive.  We looked at various dances and photographs, and I looked at these dances and photographs in a new light.  Before the conversation, if I looked at a painting of a train crossing water, I would have thought about how the painting was different.  But, I never would have really considered the meaning of the painting: why is the train going over water when trains usually go over land, what does the train represent in contrast with what the water represents, and what does this photograph say about progress?  I never would have thought about the train representing masculinity, over fragile waters.  I never would have thought about how the train represents travel and the journey into the future.  I never would have thought about so many different aspects of the painting.

I was really happy to go to this talk because it gave me a bit of a new perspective when analyzing certain parts of my life.  He brought up some contemporary examples, like the paleo diet (people eating like they used to because it was “healthier”) and the new push to move away from being so engrossed in technology, and I like how the idea of the modern primitive was applied to things I encounter daily.

Last week I went to a Rose Cafe where we talked about modern primitivism. It was interesting because we also talked about how some people try to avoid modern advances, and go back to how things used to be. For example, the paleo diet is very popular because people believe that that’s how we used to eat long ago, and therefore that must be healthy. I am not super familiar with the paleo diet, so I can’t comment on its health benefits, but we should avoid thinking that things should be healthy/good for you just because we used to do them long ago. For example, people used to carry sweet-smelling salts around because they thought that it would prevent them from getting the plague. We now obviously know that that is not true. On another note, some people also avoid using technology. While it is not good to always be on your phone/computer 24/7, I think that using technology is really good in moderation. You can use to keep in touch with your family/friends, learn new things, and find out what’s happening in the world. Technology helps make the world smaller. For example, you could be in Ithaca practicing your spanish online with someone from a Spanish speaking country. The world is getting more and more interconnected every day, so it’s really important to keep up with all of the new changes.

Last week’s Rose Cafe was about modern primitivism, which dived into nuances of culture and society that I had never really thought about. It was very enlightening and it was clear that GRF Sam was very passionate about the topic which made the discussion much more engaging and enjoyable. We started by looking at various pictures and watching short clips to get an idea about what is meant by words like “modern” and “primitive.” A lot of society’s perception about these things is shaped by the ideas of colonialism. One really interesting example was comparing Pablo Picasso’s racist depiction of “primitives” vs. Josephine Baker (a black entertainer of the 1920s) and her performance of the banana dance. The differences between the two remain relevant today as we have important conversations about cultural appropriation and why it doesn’t necessarily go both ways. This is due to the context of history which is filled with oppression and struggle for minority groups.

Another interesting topic discussed was about the juxtaposition of primitivism in today’s post-modern society. For example, the trend of the Paleo Diet (in which you eat only as a caveman would) seeks to return to a ‘healthier’ time when there were no manufactured and genetically modified foods. In reality, it is impossible to sustain a population of our size without GMOs and with modern technology and medicine, you are definitely better off in today’s age. A caveman’s average life expectancy was only 35 years after all. One of the take-home messages from the discussion was to be cognisant and to think critically about the instances of modern primitivism in today’s society.

Last Wednesday, GRF Sam shared his area of study with us: the modern primitive. He looks at how the two seemingly opposite ideas seem to clash in the mid 1900s. He started out by asking us to help define what we believe modern and primitive mean with the aid of pictures and stories. Many of the images shown mixed things such as masculinity and femininity, industrialization and nature , and land and water. He showed us a couple of videos that exemplified the modern primitive: Josephine Baker’s The Banana Dance and The Tiller Girls.

As a former English major, I was expecting something very different walking into the talk. John Steinbeck and books like The Wasteland immediately popped into my head, but Sam’s scope of study was a pleasant surprise. I got to experience a new field of study none of my classes have touched on. I especially like how Sam was not hesitant to point out the appropriation of some cultures and the colonization that goes with imperialization. The dichotomy between those thought to be primitive and those who are modern was abundantly clear.

The video Sam showed at the end was my favorite part. First and foremost, it again showed how we seem to distance ourselves from what we see in places like museums; but in reality, we are part of the same, and the only thing that separate us is our point of view. Everything that has helped us gain knowledge has been a loss to someone else, and we should appreciate those who gave to let us gain. And the LGBT museum looked amazing, and it is somewhere I’d like to now visit.

Last Wednesday’s Rose Cafe session with GRF Sam Legasse was a lively conversation on how the modern and the primitive are defined and the implications that come with them, particularly in how they are juxtaposed. Because I didn’t have any experience with this before I appreciated Sam’s use of very visual examples and discussion based breakdown of these concepts. I enjoyed talking about the roots of these movements and how they certain people used them as vehicles for different ideas. This, above all else, showed that though one idea may dominate the times, artists constantly reinvent and put different spins and connotations on the same idea, adding to it and complicating the question of what it means to be human. It was especially interesting to me because I was able to learn and talk about the humanities even though it isn’t what I’m studying or taking any classes on.

At this week’s Rose Cafe, GRF Sam Legasse, who is working towards an English Ph.D, discussed the idea of Modern Primitives. He first discussed with us the meaning behind the word modern and the meaning behind the word primitive. They at first seem to be simple ideas, but actually have many nuances and interesting concepts behind them. He showed us a video of the Tiller Girls and other images to illustrate what modernity is. In the video of the Tiller Girls, he explained that juxtaposition of masculinity and femininity is an example of what modernity is.

I also thought the discussion of our society today in relation to primitivity and modernity was very interesting, especially with regard to technology. People sometimes try to reject modernity, such as not using technology and attempting the paleo diet, in order to show appreciation for the primitive. After hearing about this, I noticed more examples of rejection of modernity in my everyday life. For example, people that choose to stop using social media or to take notes only on paper. It shows how the concepts of primitivity and modernity can be applied to everyday life. Hearing more about Sam’s work was very interesting, since it is a topic that I am unfamiliar with as a STEM major. It demonstrated to me some of the virtues of my Cornell education and how I can learn about many different areas of study. It can also help us understand more about our society today, which I also believe is important to be more aware of the world around us. I am looking forward to hearing about more about the other GRF’s work and research in future Rose Cafe events, which definitely have strong applications to my everyday life. 

At our first GRF-led Rose Cafe this week, Sam Legasse shared with us his interests in modern primitives as a second-year PhD student in English. I found his juxtaposition of masculinity versus femininity through the Tiller Girls dance performance particularly interesting. As a student whose interests are totally different from those of Sam, I was excited to come to this event to hear and see how another student at the same institution as me can have an entirely different educational experience. I enjoyed analyzing visuals through Sam’s perspective and thought the overall discussion was novel and thought-provoking. I would love to learn what other GRFs are currently studying as well.

Being in the Social Sciences, I am often exposed to analytical thinking, but not in a Humanities context. The Rose Cafe with Sam Legasse allowed me to explore the analytical side of Humanities, as well as learn about the Modern in relation to society’s definition of “Primitive”. First of all, I think it is very important to acknowledge the work Sam is doing, without which racial and cultural biases and discrimination may lay subconscious and remain rampant.

Opening by defining “Modern” and “Primitive” was very tactful, as one cannot have a discussion on the two without framing their specific and unique definition in reference to Sam’s research. Using real-world examples and works definitely helped make the seemingly convoluted material more palpable and real. When Sam introduced the concept of “primitive” in museums, however, I was shocked by how much I had neither realized nor considered. I definitely agree with the statement that museums are an avenue for the rich to fetishize what they deem “lesser” and, in a patriarchal dichotomy, “feminine”. And the clip from the LGBTQIA+ Museum in Berlin presented an often ignored, even concealed, reality: what are museums but a dampened display of suffering? If museums really mean to celebrate culture, then they must respect it first, and not label it “primitive”.

Prior to attending the Rose Café with Sam Legasse, I did not know what modern primitives were. Being in a major where we never discuss these terms motivated me to attend the Rose Café this week and see what I can learn from an entirely different field. The first concept Sam discussed was the modern, where he portrayed this idea by showing a clip of the Tiller Girls, as their regimented performance represented what it meant to be modern. Sam also demonstrated the modern by showing a picture of a train moving across the ocean, with one interpretation being how global communication and transportation had become modern with the increase in technology. Second, Sam showed a picture of a museum, where the old artifacts served to represent the primitive. Finally, he brought together the modern and the primitive by discussing colonialism, starting with a picture of a Belgian officer comparing his height to a slave’s height in Africa. This picture, according to our discussion, showed how the modern, or the Belgian officer and the Belgian “modern” lifestyle, intersected with the primitive, or the slave who lived the “primitive” lifestyle. The more we spoke about colonialism and the global slave trade in context with modern primitives, I became more disgusted about this part of world history, where millions of African slaves died.

I was also intrigued during our discussion about how modern primitives are found in our lives today. Sam used the example of the Paleo diet, where people eat like the cavemen because it is more real, and what we eat in modern times is artificial and manufactured. Thus, not only did I learn more about where modern primitives fit in with world history, I learned how today, some of us also use the concept of modern primitives in our daily lives.