Compare Geertz's Ethnographic Writing On The Balinese Cockfight

QUESTION: Compare Geertz’s two essays to answer the following question: does Geertz’s

ethnographic writing on the Balinese cockfight convincingly succeed in achieving his

theoretical position, as outlined in ‘Thick Description’?

INTRODUCTION:

Geertz is famous for his influence in the field of symbolic anthropology, which focuses on

the role of symbols in society that guide action. Culture, according to Geertz, is “a system of

inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate,

perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life.” According to him,

the function of culture is to impose meaning on the world and make it understandable.

Geertz has two most popular ideas that he propagates in the

ANALYSING “DEEP PLAY: NOTES ON THE BALINESE COCKFIGHT”:

Clifford Geertz through this essay has recorded his observations and conclusions about the

role of Balinese cockfighting in their society. Geertz departs from objectivity and speaks

from the first person perspective and thus making his writing personal.

Clifford Geertz propagates the idea in this essay that people’s culture is an ensemble of

rituals which are in themselves ensembles, and these texts are what the anthropologist is

trying to decipher. Geertz in his essay shows how the Balinese cockfight serves as a cultural

text which embodies, at least a portion of, what the real meaning of being Balinese mean.

Geertz reports that Balinese people deeply detests animals and more specifically animal-like

behavior. However, they have a deep identification with their cocks and in identifying with

his cock, the Balinese man is identifying not only with his ideal self, or even his penis,