But Where Are the Cattle? Popular Images of Maasai and Zulu across the Twentieth Century

Sobania, Neal

doi:10.1080/08949460213915

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…O’Barr uses the term “photographic colonization” for the belief that people elsewhere constitute the raw material for travel images that may be freely appropriated (p. 41). These observations have been replicated repeatedly: in travel postcards (Albers & James, 1988; Cohen, 1993; Edwards, 1996), coffee table books (Kratz & Gordon, 2002; Sobania, 2002), and tourist advertising in print and on the Internet (Britton, 1979; Dann, 1996; Dorsey et al, 2004). Similarly, previous studies of Survivor show how representations of Americans in remote destinations emphasize their differences from and relative power over host cultures (Delisle, 2003; Hubbard & Mathers, 2004; Miller, 2000).…”

Section: Commodificationmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…The “pastoral myth” is especially evident, defining the other by the link between nature and culture, paradoxically denying such a link in the cultures that supply tourists (Robinson, 1999a, p. 381). Idealized images of well‐known tribes such as the Maasai and Zulu are abundant in these texts (e.g., Dorsey, Steeves, & Porras, 2004; Kratz & Gordon, 2002; Sobania, 2002). Additionally, “depeopled” photographs of landscapes and wildlife occur frequently both in advertising and in programs sponsored by the ads (Delisle, 2003; O'Barr, 1994).…”

Section: Commodificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Commodifying Africa on U.S. Network Reality Television

Steeves

2008

Communication, Culture &Amp; Critique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on postcolonial studies, hegemony theory, Marxian commodification, and previous critiques of Africa’s portrayal in colonial narratives, Western news, and tourism advertising, this qualitative study examines Africa’s representation through January 2008 on three U.S. network reality television programs: the CBS hits Survivor and The Amazing Race and the FOX talent contest American Idol in its “Idol Gives Back” fundraiser. Specifically, I ask whether representations reveal Africa’s continued colonization via commodification in three ways: by erasing or including African specificity, by relying on static voiceless images or allowing Africans agency, and by placing American visitors in varied hybrid encounter roles revealing their complicity with or resistance to colonial and neocolonial Western dominance. As cultural mixture is a central feature commodified in these programs, the postcolonial concept hybridity is a particularly useful analytic tool. The notion of “hybrid encounter” is proposed to more accurately describe the contact represented in the texts. I argue that Africa’s representation on reality television reveals old narrative patterns as well as new ways of commodifying the continent. The programs also reinforce Western political economic dominance at a time of greatly increased tourism to developing countries alongside global product advertising aligned with the trendy lifestyle values of adventure travel.

show abstract

Section: Commodificationmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Commodificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Commodifying Africa on U.S. Network Reality Television

Steeves

2008

Communication, Culture &Amp; Critique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Popular portrayals have long treated South Africa's largest ethnic group, the Zulu, as “cattle people” (Sobania ). Airport gift shops sell coffee table books and posters picturing Zulu cattle and the terms for their variations.…”

Section: Cars As Supreme Form Of Propertymentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Cars the New Cows? Changing Wealth Goods and Moral Economies in South Africa

Jeske

2016

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In much of sub-Saharan Africa, cattle have played a central role in maintaining social cohesion by binding people of various means into mutual obligations. Today, among South African Zulu communities, as in much of the world, the social obligations attached to wealth are fiercely contested. To trace conflicts in emerging moral economies, I compare in this article the social roles of cows versus those of another wealth good: cars. Unlike cattle, cars are not given to in-laws, are not shepherded in communal pasturelands, and do not multiply communal wealth through reproduction. Both cattle and cars measure status, but cars measure an individualized status that protectively hedges itself from others' demands. As a minimally fungible investment, a vehicle for independent movement, and a tool for financial independence that is increasingly accessed by both women and men, cars offer a vantage point onto the ways that people navigate between diverging old and new moral economies. [morality, inequality, Africa, cattle, wealth goods]

show abstract

“…179 More than one century later, the same title appears on an illustrated publication clearly designed for touristic consumption. ;Sobania 2002, pp. The multiple dimensions of problems facing the Maasai and other groups in similar conditions only caution against oversimplifications and shortcuts in addressing the said-problems.…”

Section: The Indigenous Pastoralist Maasaimentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenousness in Africa

Ndahinda

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

But Where Are the Cattle? Popular Images of Maasai and Zulu across the Twentieth Century

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Commodifying Africa on U.S. Network Reality Television

Commodifying Africa on U.S. Network Reality Television

Are Cars the New Cows? Changing Wealth Goods and Moral Economies in South Africa

Indigenousness in Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About