Sunday, October 21, 2012

Hospitality



In this blog post, I’ll describe what happens when you go to someone’s house here in Central Uganda. (Being Central Uganda as opposed to another region is important as the customs are different in different places.) I’m doing this because hospitality is very important for the culture here.
            When you go to someone’s house, they’re obligated to give you food – usually a meal if you arrive at mealtime or a meal-like equivalent. One difference I noted between U.S. culture and Ugandan culture is that in the U.S. spending time with guests is more important than feeding them. Here it is normal to just let the guest sit there for 30 minutes or so by himself or herself while one makes the food; whereas in the U.S. leaving the guest alone would signify that they are not wanted to be there. Some of the first times I’ve been at someone’s house, I interpreted to being left alone as a sign that I should leave and tried to find a polite way to excuse myself, but this often confused and offended my hosts who were shocked that I would leave without taking food. It is improper to show the guest the food or kitchen (or area in which the cooking occurs), which is often either in a different hut than the living area or divided by a curtain. This prevents any social interaction while cooking, because while cooking, one is hidden.
            Anyways often when you’re at the house, you are taken to the sitting room/area (living room). You are always given a good seat. While one waits, usually the head male of the house will keep you company and talk to you while you wait. This is complicated by the fact that for many families here, the husband lives far away to work. Surprisingly often I visit houses in which there are no adult men there and only maybe a little boy. This means that this is often replaced by an equivalent head female (either a mother or eldest sibling). In some cases with me, the person who does this is really the one who knows English, particularly when the parents don’t but the teenagers do. I sometimes refer to this person as the company, because this person’s job seems to be to keep the guest company. Sometimes as described above, there is no such person or the work of cooking gets too much and that person is demanded part way through – the last one being one of the stories I described above – but these seem to be adaptions of the ideal.
            When the food is ready, this person eats with me as well, but often no one else in the family does. From what I can figure out, they will eat either later or in secret, in a different hut/room or behind a curtain. (Okay so keep in mind that when people are living in huts, each hut is usually one room, but a family often has multiple huts or at least two, one for the kitchen and the other for living. In some cases changing huts would be like the U.S. equivalent to rooms in our one-building homes. Huts and one-roomed houses are also usually divided with curtains, say between the sitting room and the beds.) People here consider the idea of having guests eat with the family (and even the idea of the family eating at together at the same time) strange. When I have been at people’s houses more often and seen them relax their formalities a little more, I’ve been around the children when they eat, but then usually it’s somewhat hushed.
Often the cook will present the food kneeling and then will sit on the ground with her (and less the cook has always been female) legs tucked under her kneels while you eat. In some cases, she was eating as well, and sometimes she isn’t. At first I thought the cook was kneeling because all the seats were taken – it’s not uncommon for there to be only two or three chairs, which are then taken by me, the company, and any other guests. The cook still usually opts to kneel on the ground, though, even when there’s an available seat. This is because kneeling in that situation is considered respectful. It is also similar to the fact that women and children will often greet men (especially men older than themselves) by kneeling. (This is the formal greeting at least and isn’t practiced in every case, but that’s a different topic). From what I can figure out, for example, wives rarely eat on equal footing with their husbands. At the same time though, I’ve never seen women in their 40s or 50s kneeling while they eat, partially I think because their knees won’t allow it. Often the husband is not around – in homes I visit remember the husband works and lives far away. In one case, I’ve visited a middle-aged woman with her husband frequently, in which case I notice that she is usually not around while the husband eats, but when then come and sit with him after he eats or as he finishes. But even she (or one of the daughters) will kneel while giving him his food, even if briefly. There is something unique about food and eating that requires women to kneel in front of men, even if not always followed at other times.
When I visit a house, I usually also bring some food myself, usually something snack-like or something quick to cook. If a woman does eat food both in my presence and not kneeling, it is most likely to be the food I bring. I have noticed with homes that I’ve visited more often, that the first few times I bring food, they don’t eat it in my presence and give me the first dibs, telling me to eat as much as I want, and then dividing the rest up evenly with the whole family, although they try to hide this second part from me. After visiting more times, they will eventually divide the food evenly among the whole family (with myself being another person in the distribution) and eat it in my presence.
All right, so I’ll sort of conclude by noting a few things. One I’m describing primarily formal hospitality, with a little brief descriptions of informal like in this last paragraph. The rules are clearly more lax for the latter. Second, even though I haven’t had the depth or details of experience in other parts of Uganda, I can tell that these hospitality practices are unique to rural central Uganda. Other regions of Uganda and even urban central Uganda are different (although not without their strands of similarities). Now many of the people I visit are Banyarwanda (Rwandan migrants, usually either from the 60s or mid-90s), who have different practices then the Baganda (the main ethnic group in the area). I am still trying to figure out to what extent the hospitality customs is based on practices in the area or practices taken from Rwanda. For example, I have noticed a slight more relaxed attitude towards women kneeling while eating among the Banyarwandans, although usually not the first time one visits a house.
Last one significant difference I’ve noticed between the hospitality here than in the U.S. is that U.S. hospitality is designed to integrate; whereas, Ugandan is designed to elevate. One can see this is the difference between eating with the family in the U.S. – a way of making the guest a part of the family – and the custom of making sure the guest eats separate and first – a way to honor the guest by elevating. This is reflective of an overall difference in culture that would take me well beyond the scope of this blog post to explain, but suffice to say that for now that this relates to the fact that Ugandan culture is far more hierarchy-orientated. Also, in the U.S. respect is usually expressed through integrating or becoming equal with the person; whereas, here respect is given by honoring or elevating. It took me a while to get used to this, and until then I never really understood their hospitality. 

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Children of God


A man was giving a talk, and he had a very interesting point that I decided to share in a blog post. He read the following three Scripture passages, and he said that these are the only three passages in all four Gospels where Jesus gives the criteria for how to be a son or daughter of God and gives a description for what such a thing would look like. Read them below:
           
Matthew 5:9 – “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.”
Matthew 5:44-45 – “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.”
Luke 6:35 – “But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.”

You can probably see a common thread between them. In all of them, the description of how to be a child of God is primarily based on how one relates to those we don’t like. In the last two this is most explicit: we are expected to love our enemies and even pray for those who wrong us. In Matthew 5:9, Jesus elevates those who build peace, which, if one thinks about it, also involves coming together with one’s enemies. This love is not just to those who are different, but specifically for those one is in conflict with.

When I’ve read these verses before, I already noticed this call to love our enemies, but the interesting insight presented to me that I felt like sharing is that such a love is the way in which Jesus described sons and daughters of God. The man who was talking said that these were the only instances in which Jesus described what the children of God would look like, and in each the main feature is how one relates to those with whom one is in conflict.

The Luke verse does mention another theme, lending, which I doubt is completely unrelated to conflict. At least some readings I was doing seem to indicate that because in Palestinian society at the time there was a big gulf between the rich and the poor with the latter indebted pretty seriously to the former,  lending is not completely separate from conflict. Also, Jesus in the Luke verse also introduces a reward, unlike the other two, which may correspond more directly with the lending. I.e. proper lending conduct may have caused a great reward primarily, and the loving one’s enemies may relate more with being a child of God. This would make sense of the obvious parallels between the second and third verse, which could suggest that they are different accounts of the same statement. If they are from the say statement, Matthew 5:44-45 removes both lending and a reward, and only includes loving enemies and being a child of God, signaling that the four ideas may be paired into these two pairs.  

Growing up my father often pointed out the elevation of the peacemakers in the Beatitudes: they are the only ones given the title son or daughter of God, which is a significant jump to the others (not to say the others are significant themselves, but to be the very child of God is a more powerful thing). As a matter of fact, peacemakers are the only ones (in Matthew’s version at least) who become something or are given a title. All others receive something in return (comfort, fulfillment, the kingdom of heaven, seeing God, etc.).

The new insight that he presented was that these are the only times when Jesus describes what a child of God would look like. I have no reason to doubt this, unless someone comes up with another verse where Jesus describes a child of God (if one finds one, be sure to reply in the comments as I would be rather interested). How one treats those one doesn’t like then is of supreme importance in determining whether one is of God or not. This reminds me of the famous hymn with the title and line: “And they will know that we are Christians by our love.” 

Friday, October 5, 2012

Can't Afford


            I know I haven’t really written any HNGRish blogs that have been on “tough” topics like poverty, justice, etc. There have been reasons for that, of which I won’t go into the details now. I decided to break that slightly in this blog to discuss something that has been frustrating me.
            The major way that I have seen “poorness” has not really been through seeing people who have been traumatized or starving or anything like that – which contrasts with other HNGR interns who are engaging with them directly. My primary experience of this sort of thing has been people unable to purchase what are for me relatively cheap things. It’s not uncommon for a $2 purchase – say for transport, food at a restaurant, etc. – to be simply out of my friends’ price range, too expensive for them to afford except infrequently. I have seen similar things for even more elaborate expenses that may cost somewhere around $8-$10. Now my friends don’t present this as a crisis or horrendous but as simply normal life. Nor is this what I am told by people who I later find out are trying to hit me up for money.
I know the cost of living is cheaper here, but this still seems to me to be a little excessive. The people I am talking about are not desperately dying or clearly living “in poverty.” They look healthy, seem to have good lives, etc. These are the everyday people and my friends. What do you do with this? Usually when I see people who can’t afford what I consider cheap purchases, I don’t know what to do.

Something I never realized about the Olympics


Something I never realized about the Olympics
            Okay I did not get to watch the Olympics given that there’s no TV where I am. Actually there is a TV, but it’s only used for movies with limited reception and electricity. I did see a few minutes of it once when I was waiting for a haircut, though. I doubt that counts. Hearing about the Olympics here in Uganda is surprisingly different than in the U.S., which is the topic of this blog.
            There was a continued hope that Uganda would win something. And I mean literally win something. This year, one runner won a gold medal, and it created a national stir. This was the first time Uganda had won gold in two decades. He was on the front cover of both major newspapers, and a buzz surrounded this for the next several days. The U.S., though, won quite a bit of medals, more than other country as a matter of fact. (Because I don’t have internet when I type this, I can’t look up how many, but if someone who does have internet can and provide this in a comment or email it to me so that I can add it, that would be helpful. This and possibly amount of money each country puts in.)
Uganda sent a small, significantly less funded team to the Olympics than the U.S., and guess who gets all the medals. My friend was talking about this. Here it is special when anyone wins anything, and in the U.S. it is not really that big of a deal when an individual athlete/team comes back with a gold. I don’t mean to belittle U.S. winning celebrations – clearly many care – but there aren’t mass celebrations, front page (and the whole page at that) articles, or monetary prizes for winning like there were here. It just goes to show you the unequal international system that makes us a superpower and other countries significantly less off.