medievalpoc: A Heart Like An Artichoke: The Interdisciplinary Perspective At first glance, all of th

medievalpoc:A Heart Like An Artichoke: The Interdisciplinary PerspectiveAt first glance, all of these books and the ideas expressed in them seem completely and utterly unrelated.After all, what could a children’s book of “African Tales” have to do with a Botticelli art book? What could the biography of Sitting Bull have to do with 101 Myths of the Bible? What does Grimm’s Grimmest, an illustrated book of the lesser-known European tales, have to do with Sovereign Erotics, a collection of contemporary Native American LGBTQ literature?One thing I’ve mentioned over and over on this blog is how there is a dominant narrative of “History” that pervades the U.S. education system. This dominant narrative is often shaped more by forces other than historical accuracy; it’s decided by politicians and corporations rather than historians or educators. I have also said that the myth of objectivity in history, in education, in art, and even science, is a very damaging concept. We are all biased, because we are all human. We all have different experiences and perspectives.The answer to bias is not “objectivity”. The answer, in my humble opinion, is diversity of bias.Each person looking at this array of books would be drawn to some, and put off by others. Which aspects of who you are draws you to some of these, and is put off by others? When you see Jack Zipes’ Don’t Bet on the Prince, do you think of it as a role reversal, or do you wish you were the one getting rescued for a change?Is El Arroyo de La Llorona y otros cuentos in a language you speak, and do you know what the title refers to? Which of these books is about you, or someone like you? If they are, do you think you are able to understand what they say about you? Is the author of the book someone like you?Which ones are “real” books? Maus: A Survivor’s Tale, a graphic novel on the Holocaust written by cartoonist Art Speigelman? Bitch Magazine, a feminist analysis of popular culture? A cheap paperback ACLU guide to the Rights of Mental Patients from the early 1980’s?Which books are the most important? A biography of Queen Elizabeth I of England? An undergraduate Sociology textbook? The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks? Fiction like N.K. Jemison’s The Killing Moon, or More Than Human by Theodore Sturgeon?What is Medievalpoc supposed to be about?The answer to that question depends on who you are.Let’s pretend each of these books is a person, and the book represents their perspective. Each of them would come here with that framework, that particular expectation. What would their expectations be of what a blog called “Medievalpoc” is supposed to be about?Nearly every time I post an image or an essay, there is someone who is outraged or just disappointed because it doesn’t align with what they believe this research project is supposed to be about; that I’ve left out something they expected to be here, or included something they think is irrelevant.Art Historians complain about the absence of focus on technique and methods; Historians criticize the conversational tone and ‘speculation’; Global/non-Western studies majors question the Eurocentric focus; European studies would find my dithering on details and exceptions obnoxious;  Political science might find it shallow and indulgent; Linguists grate at categories that don’t align with theirs; psychologists find the meta-analysis inaccurate, and let’s not even get started on biology, anthropology, sociology, archaeology, chemistry, or philosophy.People who say that I am a Bad Historian, Art Historian, Linguist, Anthropologist, Scientist, Psychologist, and so on, probably have a point, in the same way that saying a dromedary makes a very subpar pigeon is probably correct.Something I see with students (and professors) I work with is a hard time understanding that their individual experience is not universal. They often make value judgements on others based on their assumption that this or that person has had the same opportunities, setbacks, resources, or abilities that they themselves have.And I think is something we all tend to carry with us. Every single one of these books was written by a human being or beings, each of whom carries with them their thoughts, experiences, worldviews, and contexts. If you need glasses, your optometrist will try as many different lenses as possible to find out which ones are the best for you.  But at the same time, it’s important to remember that prescription glasses aren’t new eyes-and even an advanced degree in Anthropology doesn’t make you more of an “expert” on a culture than someone who actually belongs to it.What I’m trying to do here a bit is shake people out of the dichotomous thinking that’s pretty pervasive in American thought. What dichotomous thinking means in this context is the (false) idea that there are only two choices, one or the other. Everything or nothing. How this works in practice is that people think that the answer to “everyone was white in Medieval Europe”, is, “everyone in Medieval Europe was a person of color”. Here is a concrete example of what I just said.The dichotomous flipside of “something for everybody” is “not quite enough for anyone in particular”. Or, if you can shift your perspective *just* a bit, and ask instead, “Is it better to be an advanced specialist, or to be ‘well-rounded’? Is it possible to be both? Is a ‘Jack of all trades’ of necessity a master of none?”Is an idea better when it’s made appealing to ten people, or when it’s made comprehensible to 200? Can it be both? Or does an idea’s relative validity or “betterness” exist independently from opinions on it?Is it possible to value something you got for free?If Medievalpoc is a kind of artichoke that has a leaf for everyone but makes a meal for no one, I hope it leaves you hungry to find out more. If you look at the picture above and see an overwhelming variety, pick a book that draws you in immediately, AND one that puts you off. Diversify your bias. Promiscuous borrowing from many different disciplines for a very specific purpose and synthesis of the ideas (called ‘cherry-picking’ by some, called ‘the academic process’ by others) is the hallmark of the Interdisciplinary perspective.Considering I’ve been in the position of pitching (convincing them to enroll in) a 9-credit undergraduate honors interdisciplinary history of Western Civilization course at 8am for qualifying students who were quite literally asleep in the lecture hall, merely by yelling and waving my arms around, you should be aware that I have a great deal of bias and personal investment in this perspective. (And I have it on good authority that not only is the program still thriving, but that some of the materials I developed are still used in the curriculum.)No matter if this artichoke isn’t the meal you were looking for, I still gladly invite you to take a leaf. -- source link

More pics about