Darla D.

Florendo

I-SLP

1) Why is it entitled Shakespeare in the Bush? (Explain main argument) Before leaving for Oxford to travel to the Tivs of Africa, Bohannan had a discussion with a friend who claimed that Shakespeare is a very English poet and different cultures (more particularly, Americans) could easily misinterpret Shakespeares literal meanings. Bohannan, now, proposed a counter-argument saying that Shakespeares tragedies could be understood everywhere for she believes in the universal truth that human nature is apparent and the same the whole world over, with the aid of explanation and detailing on certain customs and traditions. As a parting gift, she was given a copy of Hamlet to study in the African bush in the hopes that she would fully understand the literary piece and achieve the grace of correct interpretation. During her stay on the African homestead of the Tiv, she was given an instance to prove whether or not her counter-argument stands true or falsifies based on the understanding of the said tribe on the timeless literary tragedy, Hamlet, embarking that this is her chance to prove that this classic tale of tragic revenge is universally intelligible, convinced that it only has one interpretation, one that is universally obvious. 2) Give a summarized description of the conflict of ideas in the article. Throughout the text, you could clearly see conflicting ideas influenced by linguistical quagmires and cultural barriers (European vs. African) as Bohannan struggles to educate the Tivs on the literary piece, Hamlet. Starting with the apparition of Hamlets father, the tribesmen couldnt quite grasp the concept of a ghost and would often call it an omen sent by a witch throughout the essay . The second conflicting idea was depicted when the Tivs were appalled by the fact that Hamlets father only had one wife, Queen Gertrude. The statement, But a chief must have many wives! How else can he brew beer and prepare food for all his guests? implies that the women of Tiv are encouraged to serve their husbands, cook and serve the members of their homestead as well; whereas the European culture supports monogamy and the employment of servants to perform work in addition to the enforcement of taxes as labor fee, with which the tribesmen strongly disagreed upon, saying, It was better, for a chief to have many wives and sons who would help him hoe his farms and feed his people; For everyone loved the chief who gave much and took nothingtaxes were a bad thing. The case of Hamlet and Ophelia brings us to the third conflict where the great divide between royalty and commoners greatly affects the love between the couple, and therefore, marriage is forbidden. The Tivs disagreed to this saying that Hamlet could have offered g ifts and presents to give Polonius (Ophelias

father) a change of mind and allow the marriage. Bohannan simply shunned this idea and told the tribesmen that the European culture wont simply allow it, discussing the morality governing the decision. The fourth conflict arose when Hamlets madness came into play, for according to the Tivs, only witchcraft can make anyone mad, unless of course, one sees the beings that lurk in the forest; In contrary, the European culture believes that madness is simply an unstable state of mind that could be triggered by tragic life events, or poor mental health (Shapiro, 1991), losing the theme and main plot of the story as sorcery came into topic altogether. Moving on to the fifth conflict, Polonius death also defied one of the Tivs beliefs that one should not attempt to kill or harm his elders. Accordi ng to them, If your fathers brother has killed your father, you must appeal to your fathers age mates; they may avenge him. No man may use violence against his seniors. Bohannan couldnt simply explain on this part that familial relationships play no bearings especially regarding the extremity of the action done. The next conflict was introduced during the falling action phase of the storyOphelias suicide and Laertes wrath over Hamlet for the death of their father. The people of Tiv were opposed to the idea of Ophelias drowning for only witches can make people drown. Also, they tried to twist the story to give it a more applicable approach to the African culture by saying that Laertes killed his sister by witchcraft, drowning her so he could sell her body to the witches. The concept in play here is not opinionated but an application to their world view. The Tiv may be wrong on a demonstrable fact, but I do believe that its cause is only misunderstanding and nothing else. 3) Critique the article through Foucaults theory According to Michel Foucaults Genealogy of Power theory, Those who have more power have more dominance over knowledge and truth, and in this case I believe that the more dominant group would be the African tribe of Tiv over Bohannnan, who is a mere representative of another culture. The concept of Foucaults theory also includes the further understanding of many sub -concepts, and I believe that we could apply some of them in critiquing this article, specifically: Ethnocentrism, Dominant Culture and Culture Shock. Ethnocentrism is "the technical name for the view of things in which one's own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it. (Sumner, 1906) Going back, we could clearly see Bohannans difficulty in trying to explain the different European customs and beliefs to the Tiv for culture, as described by Laraia (2008) influences social behavior, and, in the view of the examples presented in the essay, has its own logic. Quoting the latter part of the essay, an elder said:

You tell the story well, and we are listening. But it is clear that the elders of your country have never told you what the story really means. No, don't interrupt! We believe you when you say your marriage customs are different, or your clothes and weapons. But people are the same everywhere; therefore, there are always witches and it is we, the elders, who know how witches work. This statement clearly describes that Bohannans experience entails how the indifference of the Tiv towards European customs and beliefs led to a great misunderstanding as to what the story should be about and who the real hero is--showing how ethnocentrism greatly influences dichotomy among different cultures. Dominant culture, according to Gordon Marshall in his book Dictionary of Sociology, is described as a culture that is the most powerful, widespread, or influential within a social or political entity in which multiple cultures are present. In some cases, one culture becomes the dominant one for it is the culture of a majority of people. Reflecting now on the essay, this was what exactly happened in Bohannans experience. She was trapped in the situation where she was in the minority against Africans who had a completely different view on things, meaning that on that particular moment and situation, the Africans had more superiority over knowledge and truth as described by Foucault. In the concept of Culture shock, one must imagine Bohannan in a state of frustration upon realizing the extent of difficulty in trying to explain how the story of Hamlet goes despite cultural differences, and being bombarded with completely different ideas and speculations as she goes on telling the story. Not only is she frustrated with the distress shes having in trying to interpret the story Hamlet, but she also had to cope up with the different African traditions and customs that are new to her such as the concept of madness. 4) Personal Reflection Going back to the argument which fueled this essay, Bohannans friend was clearly correct. Cultural differences play a big role in defining what the real interpretation of Hamlet is, adding to that the agony of Bohannan in not being able to express herself due to the non-existence of equivalent words in our English language to the local language of Tiv, therefore blurring the real meaning and concept of Hamlet as told by Shakespeare. Since linguistical barriers and the difference on cultural perspectives were at bay, a whole new interpretation where Hamlet turned out to be an unfit hero and the antagonist Claudius prevailed as the protagonist in their eyes was how the tale Hamlet ended for them, inserting certain concepts of sorcery and witchcraft here and there, of course. In the end, I know realize that Bohannans

concept of universality does not stand true since the whole point of this article is to prove or disprove whether you have to be in the same cultural milieu with Shakespeare to be able to understand Hamlet, and by now we know that that answer to that is a, Yes. And now I conclude that, people have enormous differences, but they do have similarities as well. Recognizing and analyzing these differences among us would lead to less misunderstandings everywhereand maybe, a better Hamlet for everyone too!