#wbtca

[nellywrisource]

Worldbuilding through cultural anthropology series – #0 What is culture?

This series aims to serve as a guide for worldbuilding centered around culture and its various components, based on the theories of cultural anthropology. 

To start, let's understand what culture is. Anthropologically, we define culture as the set of acquired abilities and habits shared by a group of people; the elements of this set are called cultural facts. Culture does not encompass behaviors linked to the instinctual sphere of humans.

What are the basic facts of culture?

It is holistic, meaning that each fact must be interconnected with the others. In other words, every cultural fact should have an explanation that links to another and does not contradict it.

It is dynamic, selective, and adaptive. It means it is not immutable and does not stratify over time; instead, it changes, modifies, and adapts to the surrounding environment and historical period. Some cultural facts may be lost and thus extinguish due to adaptation. Generally, cultural facts persist when repeated over time.

It is operational, meaning it includes ingrained and automated habits and behaviors, as well as worldviews (these automated cultural facts make up a habitus [what is habitus?]).

In a globalized world, it has blurred boundaries. Cultural facts can be shared, and differences between one culture and another are subtle.

It is maintained through transmission. As we mentioned, cultural facts are acquired, and transmission is the process that allows the acquisition and maintenance of cultural facts in generations, along with forms of memorization and externalization of memory (mythologies, proverbs, poetry, etc…). Transmission can be:

Explicit: a parent directly teaching a behavior to a child or sharing a worldview.

Implicit: a child observing their mother peel potatoes in a certain way and learning to perform the same actions by imitation without explicit instruction.

When creating your cultural group, consider these fundamental traits for every aspect of its culture.

What are the cultural facts considered by anthropology nowadays?

Worldview

Cosmogonies/cosmologies

Religions

Magical systems and beliefs

Categories and forms of judgment

Values and symbols

Corporeal systems

Production systems

Settlement systems

Livelihood systems

Power systems

Social relationship systems

Forms of memorization and externalization of memory

We'll explore some of these as we continue with this series.

This blog is supported through tips here on Tumblr. If you’d like to support me, please consider giving a tip.

[nellywrisource]

Worldbuilding through cultural anthropology series – #1 Race, ethnicity and groups

Let's begin with the understanding that in anthropology, race, and ethnicity are distinct concepts, although variations of them exist in numerous cultures.

Race and racism

The concept of race is entirely cultural and lacks scientific evidence supporting the establishment of objective criteria for defining one or multiple races within the human species. In fact, the entire human species has a similar DNA (Cavalli-Sforza, 2001) and genetic divergence and consequent somatic differences, due to migrations, are a relatively recent phenomenon in human history.

When world-building, it's worth considering the timing and causes of migrations, often influenced by climatic factors (such as the early Germanic invasions along the limes — borders — of the Roman Empire in the III century BC). This understanding can provide insights into the extent of somatic differences and help grasp the development and diversification of languages — which we'll delve into further later on.

Regarding the topic at hand, the idea of race is predominantly shaped by cultural factors, including prejudices, political ideologies, xenophobia, and societal norms. Therefore, if you're contemplating incorporating dynamics of racism into your fictional culture, it's essential to recognize that its conception and underlying principles vary significantly across different cultures.

An illustrative example of this contrast can be drawn from anthropological studies comparing the perspectives on race between Brazil and the United States (Marvin Harris, 1980), emphasizing our discussion within the anthropological framework:

In the United States, emphasis is placed on descent, with the concept of bloodline passing down from one generation to the next.

In Brazil, however, physical appearance holds greater significance. The Brazilian population encompasses approximately a dozen racial categories, which can encompass various traits such as eye color, hair texture, and skin tone. Moreover, these categories are fluid, with no single category being entirely distinct from the others.

Ethnicity

The old concept of ethnicity, once prevalent, defined a human group based on shared language, customs, territory, and culture. However, this concept faced criticism for its essentialist and rigid nature, prompting revision in the 20th century. The equation “culture = language = territory” implied a natural connection between culture and lineage or “race” (Barth, 1969), which is not accurate.

Contemporary anthropology views ethnicity more as an “ethnic sentiment” — a primordial feeling of belonging to a culturally, linguistically, and territorially defined group. However, this sentiment does not imply uniform desires among group members.

In essence, while ethnicity, in the anthropological sense, may not exist, ethnic identity or sentiment does. 

To provide a clearer definition of ethnicity, it can be seen as a human way of perceiving both one's own and others' identities within a social context and historical period. Often, this perception emerges within social situations involving comparisons between different groups, such as in “ethnic conflicts” — which I can further elaborate on if desired, just ask.

In certain circumstances, the concept of ethnicity is propagated by external agents such as political ideologies, colonizers, or multinational corporations, rather than emerging solely from within the group itself.

And so?

So, if race and ethnicity are not considered, what criteria can I use to define the diverse groups of people in my fictional world?

Firstly, let's consider groups, which in sociology are understood as a gathering of individuals linked by a common objective or a shared self-identified identity, acknowledged by either the individuals or an external observer.

In line with the scale, ranging from largest to smallest, we can consider (I'm simplifying greatly):

Cultural groups: when crafting a fictional culture, defining the different groups of individuals involved becomes essential. These groups consist of people who share learned behaviors and beliefs. They can manifest within a nation, state, or continent. Later, we'll delve into the distinctions between hegemonic culture and subordinate culture.

Primary groups: these are small communities, often based on domestic and kinship ties. Examples range from «nomadic hunter bands in the Bolivian rainforest to medieval English or Swedish villages […] Sudanese cattle herding communities […] Persian shepherd tribes […] and present-day hamlets in Provence or Missouri» (Redfield, 1956).

Domestic and kinship groups: going deeper, we encounter domestic and kinship units, where the former may encompass the latter. These are collections of individuals, some related, who live together and cooperate in managing resources crucial for their physical survival and emotional fulfillment.

This hierarchy offers layers for different cultures, with intersecting boundaries and varying flexibility. Alternatively, one could focus on just one or two levels, depending on the story scope.

Exploring different types of boundaries

It's important to note that there are other types of groups, which intersect with those previously mentioned, particularly 'social' groups (e.g., castes in India, Marxist social classes, etc.) — here, we are referring to social stratification.

Building on the anthropological axiom that in environments marked by heightened competition and conflict, where human interactions are more frequent, boundaries tend to multiply. Groups essentially arise from the delineation of boundaries, with appearance and distinction serving as complementary factors.

The distinction between “us” and “them” can manifest in different ways within simple or complex societies (as per anthropological definitions):

Simple societies (with lower levels of social stratification) may simply exclude the “other” or include both “us” and “them” reciprocally.

Complex societies (with higher levels of social stratification) tend to internalize this distinction within the same social framework (e.g., Indian castes, Marxist social classes, Australian totemism).

We will discuss social stratification further later on.

This blog is supported through tips here on Tumblr. If you’d like to support me, please consider giving a tip.