No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Wancho Animation Workshop: Interpreting Local Folklore for Animation in North-East India
Abstract
This article reviews the topic of indigenous knowledge, addressing the ethical and knowledge gaps in Eurocentric education, research, and scholarship based on examples from a participatory media venture in collaboration with people of the Wancho community of North-East India. The objective of the project is to represent the cultural insights that are integral to the local traditions through contemporary media practices and to engage a group of people from various disciplines, outlooks, and ways of life in the decolonization of indigenous representation and media practice.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
India has had a wonderful history of teaching music and through various mediums like the Gurukul, Guru-Shishya Parampara, Institutional, University etc. Ancient Gurukul System was an effective medium to teach and learn music from experts who were highly knowledgeable in both practical and theoretical study of music. Has the same trend of teaching and learning music being continued or there are accepted changes bringing in new trends of teaching music in the Guru-Shishya Parampara style.
This article examines the evolution of Maori filmmaking since the 1980s and explores this Indigenous cinema in the context of developments in the New Zealand film industry. With Barry Barclay’s idea of ‘Fourth Cinema’ in mind, it focuses on the predominantly statefunded production of Maori feature films. The article is divided in three parts. The first part traces the beginnings of Maori cinema back to the 1970s and introduces the first three feature films directed by Maori filmmakers: Ngati (Barry Barclay, 1987), Mauri (Merata Mita, 1988), and Te Rua (Barry Barclay, 1991). The second part discusses the mainstream success of Once Were Warriors (Lee Tamahori, 1994) and the film’s paradoxical contribution to Maori cinema in the 1990s. The third and final part explores the intensified course of state-funded Maori filmmaking since the 2000s and addresses some of the opportunities and challenges facing Indigenous New Zealand cinema in the current environment of institutional and commercial globalisation.
This article introduces and defines the notion lingua receptiva (LaRa) as a mode of multilingual communication in which interactants employ a language and/or a language variety different from their partner's and still understand each other without the help of any additional lingua franca. The quintessence of lingua receptiva is discussed in terms of pragmatic, psycholinguistic and language psychology approaches to multilingualism. Moreover, the occurrence of this mode is documented across various language families throughout time and in various discursive intercultures which it creates. Furthermore, three central characteristics are discussed, namely ideological barriers resulting in asymmetry, 'inference-making' mechanisms and the function of idiomatic expressions. Finally, lingua receptiva is compared to other multilingual modes, especially with English as lingua franca.
This article discusses the author's experiences in teaching a new course at Dickinson College, a four-year liberal arts college in Pennsylvania serving around 2,300 undergraduates. The course emphasized newer and emerging media and technologies such as satellite television, the Internet, and mobile telephony. To better understand the read-write web and social media, students were required to write blogs as well as follow blogs using an aggregator. The course was delivered via a wiki rather than a learning management system, to offer a more open learning environment. The author also encouraged students to use Diigo for social bookmarking. In a class of 21, there was naturally a range of responses to the different technologies used, from enthusiastic embrace through indifference to active resistance. But student feedback, formal and informal, was overall more positive than negative, and in some cases strongly supportive. Several students have continued to use tools introduced in the course. The author expects to apply the lessons learned in future iterations of this course and in others, including how to better serve students who do not readily embrace all the techniques and technologies used. (Contains 3 figures and 4 endnotes.)
This article is about moving past the debates and arguments concerning public anthropology and how students can realize public engagement via collaborative research (i.e., between and among researchers and local communities of collaborators). I suggest that students should be aware of at least the basics of the current debates surrounding public anthropology; that they should appreciate, as many have argued before, that these debates represent only a point of departure in a much larger anthropological project; and finally, that although students can engage in applied, publicly oriented work (regardless of what you may call it) in many different ways, collaborative research practice presents a special opportunity to do so. I thus begin with a very brief statement about moving past public anthropology, follow this with some of my own ideas about collaborative ethnography and public engagement, and suggest some general advice for doing collaborative research.
