by Kurt Cendana, 4 AB Development Studies, Minor in Sociology
If you look at the Loyola Schools calendar for SY 2010-2011, you will see that graduation is on March 25 and 26, 2011. That’s exactly 9 months from now. Your philosophy teacher joked the other day that you are similar to a woman conceiving and eventually giving birth, which is the culmination of four amazing years spent in Ateneo. In a lot of ways, that’s true. But on graduation day, you will also be a liminal being.
Liminality is a term made popular by anthropologist Victor Turner which means being in a transitional stage or being “in between.” Therefore, the status of the liminal individual is unsure and ambiguous. For example, an 18 year old female who is celebrating her debut tonight can be considered a liminal being – she is not anymore a girl, but not yet a woman (yup, like the Britney Spears song). Having a lucid dream can also be considered liminal – you’re dreaming but at the same time you’re awake (and you know that you’re dreaming).
In nine months, you have had finished all requirements that the Ateneo wants from you, but at the same time you aren’t detached from this institution that you have grown to love. If you’re in the Ateneo High School covered courts on March 25 or 26, you’re not anymore a student, but you are not yet part of the labor force. You are asked to go down that hill between the earth and sky, but the view from the top is too good to let go. You are asked to be a professional-for-Others, but you want to stay in the comfortable arms of Loyola. You are asked to be a light in the darkness, a hope in despair, or courage amidst fear.. But somehow, you aren’t sure. Parang kahapon lang, high school graduation mo.
When you think of all these on graduation day, think of liminality. And when you think about liminality, think of its positive function: it can make you move, it can make you act. Realizing that this ritual (graduation) is a sign of you being in between and of you transitioning is a good step towards meaningful action. Maybe action for you means saying yes to the company who wants to hire you, or maybe going to graduate school, or maybe updating your resume before submitting it to an organization.
On graduation day, you’re not here anymore, but you’re also not yet there. Ateneo has given you the proper tools to avoid being stuck in the liminal phase; I hope you use it for the improvement of the lives of your family, friends, and neighbors. It does not have to be big, but strive for the Magis, Ad Majorem dei Gloriam. Nine more months until you go down the hill, make them worthwhile.
This is me talking to myself, but I hope I reached you somehow. :)
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
FILIPINO WEDDINGS: BEYOND BRIDE AND GROOM
by Ricardo Abad
The two weddings I attended this past month again brought home this thought – that a Catholic Filipino wedding ritual has ramifications beyond the union of bride and groom. It’s a celebration of family solidarity, an event to strengthen alliances with friends and colleagues, an occasion to forge community ties, and a time for Holy Mother the Church to make sure the Lord becomes a partner in the couple’s wedded life. But enough of these manifest functions. The wedding ritual also asserts the primacy of heterosexual unions; the primacy of public rituals over private affairs; the indissolubility of marriage (and the distaste for divorce); the desirability of procreation; the superiority of men over women, and the dependence on families of orientation, now with godparents included, for guidance and support. In short, the ritual -- staged in relatively plush settings to symbolize one’s status – affirms the power of family and church to direct the couple’s life and to propagate an ideology that will sustain that power. So much for latent functions. The point is: weddings enable and constrain, and I feel most couples prefer a ceremony that’s more enabling than constraining. The choice of some couples to defray all wedding expenses (as was the case in the two weddings I attended) is a subtle attempt of bride and groom to lessen that constraint, wield a little power, and assert their independence. I wish the couples good luck! The power of social institutions is not as easy to break as the wine glasses we tinkled to get the groom to kiss the bride.
Friday, June 11, 2010
"Silence" in the Workplace
By Czarina Medina
I found this interesting read from the Harvard Business Review discussing the reasons behind employees being silent in the workplace – their silence meaning, they keep their suggestions to themselves. In summary, the article identifies the following factors:
(1) The narrative of the heroes and the villains: Media and the public sphere have portrayed “whistle-blowers” as villains. They are scrutinized and challenged, sometimes even to a point of retraction. (This case is even more relevant to the Philippines, wherein those who speak up are usually measured based on their ‘personality’ rather than the issue being surfaced. For instance, if you bring up something controversial, chances are the public will dig up any form of “baho” in your past which can discredit you as a speaker, and often miss the point of the issue.)
(2) Feedback is often regarded as trivial – a sour-griping of the lower employees.
What is interesting to point out that even if the study was conducted in the US, the findings are very much observable to our culture. This becomes a difficult working environment for employees. It is the recurring case of disempowerment in the workplace.
Sociologists who specialize in issues of work in other countries would definitely have something to say about the issue. But nuancing the issue in the Philippine experience, we can identify different sociological concepts as themes in analyzing the phenomenon. Here we identify a few:
A. Blurring of the public and the private sphere.
The public is not well-developed in the Philippines, such as most of “public” discourse are really just private issues made public. In local terms, kadalasan chismis ang pinag-uusapan. Look at the local newspapers (not even the tabloids) and content analysis will show you that most articles are not even public issue-based. They are hyped-up showbiz-oriented “news”. The human interest angle of journalism has been dangerously played up such that it frames private troubles as public issues.
This has serious repercussions, as alluded to by the study. If we are used to this kind of ‘dialogue’, then we assume that every talk falls within the framework. There are times, however, when important issues which merit professional attention are raised, and yet they are treated as chismis.
This also means that our institutions (even the supposed bureaucracies) are not accustomed to dealing with professional feedback. When feedback is expressed, employees usually talk about it among themselves – over and over again until the criticism transforms into a theme of hate towards a manager. Our institutions usually do not have mechanisms for receiving, documenting, and processing feedback. Oftentimes, feedback is labeled as a ‘complaint’, which misses the point of why the issue was raised in the first place.
B. Power
Communication can be framed as a power struggle. Those who wield less power – by virtue of a ‘lesser’ social capital or social position – are often marginalized in discussions. Hence, as the article points out, the fear of the repercussions take over the value of the insight that an employee has made.
This raises the following questions: Must every conversation be framed as a debate? Should somebody always win, and another person always lose? Don’t we have the capacity to think in terms of systems and issues, and organize our thoughts to surface a common vision?
The problem of communication then becomes more than just a power issue. It becomes a reflection of how we relate to one another, in both the private and public spheres. It poses a challenge to our culture of dialogue.
---
What other sociological concepts and theories can you apply in the scenario?
I found this interesting read from the Harvard Business Review discussing the reasons behind employees being silent in the workplace – their silence meaning, they keep their suggestions to themselves. In summary, the article identifies the following factors:
(1) The narrative of the heroes and the villains: Media and the public sphere have portrayed “whistle-blowers” as villains. They are scrutinized and challenged, sometimes even to a point of retraction. (This case is even more relevant to the Philippines, wherein those who speak up are usually measured based on their ‘personality’ rather than the issue being surfaced. For instance, if you bring up something controversial, chances are the public will dig up any form of “baho” in your past which can discredit you as a speaker, and often miss the point of the issue.)
(2) Feedback is often regarded as trivial – a sour-griping of the lower employees.
What is interesting to point out that even if the study was conducted in the US, the findings are very much observable to our culture. This becomes a difficult working environment for employees. It is the recurring case of disempowerment in the workplace.
Sociologists who specialize in issues of work in other countries would definitely have something to say about the issue. But nuancing the issue in the Philippine experience, we can identify different sociological concepts as themes in analyzing the phenomenon. Here we identify a few:
A. Blurring of the public and the private sphere.
The public is not well-developed in the Philippines, such as most of “public” discourse are really just private issues made public. In local terms, kadalasan chismis ang pinag-uusapan. Look at the local newspapers (not even the tabloids) and content analysis will show you that most articles are not even public issue-based. They are hyped-up showbiz-oriented “news”. The human interest angle of journalism has been dangerously played up such that it frames private troubles as public issues.
This has serious repercussions, as alluded to by the study. If we are used to this kind of ‘dialogue’, then we assume that every talk falls within the framework. There are times, however, when important issues which merit professional attention are raised, and yet they are treated as chismis.
This also means that our institutions (even the supposed bureaucracies) are not accustomed to dealing with professional feedback. When feedback is expressed, employees usually talk about it among themselves – over and over again until the criticism transforms into a theme of hate towards a manager. Our institutions usually do not have mechanisms for receiving, documenting, and processing feedback. Oftentimes, feedback is labeled as a ‘complaint’, which misses the point of why the issue was raised in the first place.
B. Power
Communication can be framed as a power struggle. Those who wield less power – by virtue of a ‘lesser’ social capital or social position – are often marginalized in discussions. Hence, as the article points out, the fear of the repercussions take over the value of the insight that an employee has made.
This raises the following questions: Must every conversation be framed as a debate? Should somebody always win, and another person always lose? Don’t we have the capacity to think in terms of systems and issues, and organize our thoughts to surface a common vision?
The problem of communication then becomes more than just a power issue. It becomes a reflection of how we relate to one another, in both the private and public spheres. It poses a challenge to our culture of dialogue.
---
What other sociological concepts and theories can you apply in the scenario?
Thursday, June 3, 2010
WORLD EXPO 2010: SHOWCASING NATIONS AND A WORLD
by Ricardo Abad
Impression management is the name of the game. In the World Expo 2010, staged in Shanghai, each country boasts in its pavilion the best that their nation can show the world – its “idealized self,” so to speak. Forget the backstage of financial woes, corruption, electoral fraud, unemployment, and gross inequalities. It’s time to put the best front stage act a country can muster, and in so doing win the respect and admiration of other nations. Some countries showcase their advances in technology, others their efforts to clean the environment. Still others display their magnificent arts and crafts, and some dwell on its people. Host China has the largest and tallest pavilion, towering over others at the center of the vast Expo grounds, a monument asserting the country’s strength, power, and grace -- a nation impressing the world of its great influence in world affairs. Indeed, the entire Expo is a gigantic front stage assertion as well: a league of nations telling the world that diverse countries can work together in harmony for the survival of planet Earth. The rhetoric is inspiring and the sights awesome, but as Goffman points out, one must learn to take these assertions with a little grain of salt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
