text version of my project piece...(the real deal ;)

Human beings have the ever so complicated predisposition of being aware of their existence. Whether this is seen as a blessing or a curse is up to individual determination and even that varies depending on a host of factors (place and time, culture, pre/post daily coffee ;). It is safe to say, though, humans have pondered their existence for hundreds of years and continue to do so in ways that are congruent with the time, place and culture in which they are operating. As basic needs are accounted for (i.e. food, shelter and overall security) more time and mental energy are available for people to questions their existence and attempt to make sense of what it means to be human.

At the core of human existence is the individual. There seems to be a common tendency for individuals to seek out their place within the larger whole, whether consistent with or in opposition to, and identifying oneself is central to this desire. In the same sense, whenever we look at society and the resulting social behavior we are also looking at its constituent parts, individuals. In regards to this “corporate behavior” Ruth Benedict says, “It is the world with which each person is severally presented, the world from which he must make his individual life” (Benedict, 1934, p. 251). It is the fashioning of this individual life that calls for the need to create one’s own unique identity.

Identity has become a buzz word today in the field of anthropology and with good reason. The word has been designated to carry a hefty load and is bound to be used in the multi-purpose fashion it’s inclined to. Webster’s Dictionary describes it for our purposes as “the distinguishing character or personality of an individual: individuality; the relation established by psychological identification.” Dictionary.com defines it as “the condition of being oneself or itself, and not another.” Simply put, and a bit more applicable here, identity is the way(s) in which a person is, or wishes to be, known by certain others (Cohen, 1993, p. 195). This last definition is most appropriate because it alludes to the fact that identity is dynamic and doesn’t necessarily reveal a truthful representation and it also accounts for the fact that specificity matters when dealing with who is witnessing this identity.

Two components are of utmost importance when discussing identity and how it is created and upheld by individuals: culture and symbols. In his 1993 article, Cohen describes the two ideally as “the means by which we make meaning and with which we make the world meaningful to ourselves” and “inherently meaningless, pragmatic devices which are invested with meaning through social processes of one kind or another,” respectively. He goes on to say that symbols are the vehicles of culture and that they are potent resources in the arena of identity because culture is represented as identity through symbols: simple in form, complex in substance because of their malleability, imprecision, and multivocality (p. 201). These descriptions depict for us why identity is such a dynamic entity and they set the stage for our discussion of the complex relationship between identity and anonymity.

The Structuralist belief of binary opposition is appropriate in our
discussion because identity and anonymity can be viewed as such. While binary opposites assist us in organizing human thought, a bias is often present, giving privilege to one term over the other. In general, throughout history and in the present, anonymity has been the one to obtain a negative reputation. The reasons for this vary but an association of anonymity with socially “unacceptable” behavior (as defined by society) and the mere fact that people often fear the unknown, are at the top of the list for putting anonymity on the negative side of the fence.

Some of the earliest examples of how identity has been privileged historically can be linked not with identity as a subjective psychological process of finding “one’s self” but as an objective means of strict identification of a person; “who is this person?” (the latter) in contrast to the former,“what kind of person is this?” (Caplan & Torpey, 2001, p. 3). Caplan and Torpey note that the need for authentification and identification increased toward the end of the 14th century as the expansion of information exchange and use of written documents in administration accelerated well into the 15th century. This was demonstrated in the use of badges for pilgrims and the poor, need for journeymen and beggars to carry letters with them issued by a priest or bishop, and diplomats being required to carry patents of appointment and letters of recommendation. This highlights the second of the two fundamental categories of identification: 1) the individual concerned is absent; by what means can others recognize him and 2) he is present; who is he, and is he really who he claims to be (Caplan et al., 2001). Our current investigation into anonymous behavior will expound on the first category.

Stepping away from the objective aspect of identification for a moment we focus on the importance of creating an identity, whether its creation is conscious or unconscious. For our purposes the subjective aspect is essentially what matters most because as one becomes grounded in the identity they have created for themselves we are able to see relationships between the individual and their behavior. Although it does not give a direct cause and effect link between the two, a substantial amount of overlapped can be derived from these relationships. This provides useful for us because the reasons why people choose to be or not to be anonymous are of interest.

It is helpful to refer to the Utilitarian Philosophy (i.e. moral worth of an action is solely dependent on utility, or its contribution to happiness), particularly to the work of John Stuart Mill, when discussing why individuals take the actions that they do. In particular, he presents the idea “that which gives us pleasure may be opaque to us until we have experienced a range of alternatives” (Mill, 1921, p. xiii). Based on his idea that happiness is found typically in activity, and not merely sensations, we can say that the autonomous choice to partake in certain actions are more valid if the individual has experienced a range of options. After many reviews of Utilitarianism, Mill affirms in On Liberty “that our natures are diverse and complex, so that there is no one form of life, no one set of pleasures, in which we can all find happiness” (p. xiv). The implications of these statements are huge when taken in the context of the desire and practice of individual identity on the one hand and anonymity on the other, they allow for a reasoning behind the differentiation of individual's desires to be or not to be anonymous.

It is important to clarify what is meant when we use the word anonymity, or better yet, its parent adjective anonymous. It was brought into English from Greek and literally translates as “without name” but is further defined by Webster’s Dictionary as 1 : not named or identified, 2: of unknown authorship or origin, and 3 : lacking individuality, distinction, or recognizability. The implications go way beyond these clean cut definitions, though. They account for the possibility of identity to be concealed in a variety of circumstances but do little to exemplify the profoundness of a felt sense of anonymity, something we will come to shortly.

The state of being anonymous was put into practice long before the word appeared in English; through the works of Plato, in religious doctrines, and the like. It wasn’t until the invention of Europe’s first printing press by Gutenberg that we see it highly associated with authorship. In the midst of a communication revolution initiated by the printing press, anonymity becomes enveloped in, and at the same time a determining factor of, a major cultural shift spanning over hundreds of years. The “typographical fixity,” coined by Elizabeth Eisenstein, provides the opportunity for “scholars, artists, and scientists [to] increasingly take their dignity not from their ability to reproduce the old, but from the ways in which they introduce new articulation of meaning within the established forms” (Leed, 1982, p. 420). The ability to fix knowledge in print form allowed for the focus to be taken off the preservation of knowledge and freed those assigned the responsibility of preservation to focus their efforts on other endeavors. This was the revolution. This is what perpetuated “such a model, one that describes the ways in which a new means of communication alters the modes in which human beings fix, appropriate, and disseminate the resources of meaning provided them by their culture” (Leed, 1982, p. 414). How individuals view their place in the world and organize their symbols to produce meaning was changing.

The opportunities to contribute to the knowledge base, and have your name go down in the historical/academic record, provided the conditions for identification to be desired. At the same time the foundation that was being laid to exponentially advance European society academically and technologically would eventually lead to a desire for identification in an entirely different context. In contrast, this time period fostered an environment where anonymity is, what Anne Ferry calls an “aesthetic ideal”.

In her 2002 article, Ferry gives a brief historical time line of the uses of anonymity. Starting in the late 16th century it was considered socially unacceptable for people of rank to publish poetry, so in order to advance in courtly circles they would publish under pseudonyms that were easily seen though (Ferry, 2002). As we move into the mid-17th century there is a need for purely anonymous authorship as women begin to publish written works more often and individuals have an increasing desire to express their opposing political views. In all three instances anonymity, or pseudo-anonymity in the first case, serves the purpose of protection, allowing authors to publish controversial material (i.e. their identities, or lack thereof, of rank and gender and the written material itself). But as the 18th and 19th centuries approach there is a use of anonymity in a much different sense.

The traditional reasons for anonymity are still present but to a much lesser extent. New appearances are attributed more to fashion, publishing tactics, or private caution. This indicates to us that social changes are shifting and authors are also shifting what they believe to be important. The latter attribute of private caution sheds light on a new aspect of anonymity that takes away from the traditional purpose of poetry as objective and moves more in the direction of poetry as personal expression and confession. This becomes more prominent in the early 20th century as the “desire to escape over-personal interpretations of their poems added new reason for anonymous publication when the old ones were fading or had virtually disappeared” (Ferry, 2002, p. 197); with poetry taking the form of personal expression, anonymity as an aesthetic ideal still reigns and maybe in an even deeper sense. Individuals are now using anonymity to (re)create their identities with the only intent being for their own personal enjoyment, since the viewers are unaware of the author. Still in the 20th century we see another use for anonymity coming to the fore. “The Cult of Anonymity”, an article published in the Nation in 1930 by a group of unidentified writers in Paris, exemplifies this movement of withholding the author(s) name in order to emphasize the importance of the idea, or as Henry Hazlitt (1930) put it, “to curb the exploitation of personalities, and to establish ‘the art as an ideal, not the ego’”.

There are other cases of anonymity being the aesthetic ideal sprinkled throughout history. In her 1886 book, Terry Castle discusses the masquerades of the 18th century which functioned to break barriers of class, gender, and ethnicity by challenging social norms; like many anonymous happenings, both written and enacted, the masquerade had strong and vocal opponents. Thought to be a gathering of immorality attended by lower class, such as "Chamber-Maids, Cook-Maids, Foot-Men, and Apprentices" (Castle, 1986, p. 96). During the same century, social conflicts in rural England represent anonymous authorship in a more sinister light. E. P. Thompson (1976) writes on the “Black Act” (a package of laws designed to squelch poachers, timber thieves, and other rural misbehaviors). Practitioners of these anonymous acts wore masks and delivered threatening letters to landlords, wardens, and gamekeepers who they felt were unfairly gaining possession over land and crops.

Many of these examples demonstrate reasons for anonymity that are still present today; they have just taken a slightly different form, if at all. But what is strikingly interesting is that at the same time all of this “aesthetic idealism” is taking place (i.e. late 18th century into the 19th and 20th centuries) another type of anonymity is developing. This sense of anonymity that is counter to the aesthetic ideal, Ferry refers to it as a cultural motif, may also be thought of as a forced anonymity. We start to see this with the rise of the Industrial Revolution and continue to see it perpetuating itself today.

The drop off in anonymous writings seen in the 20th century can be attributed to the fact that the industrial revolution brought with it a sense of what Henry Seidel Canby in his 1926 article “Anon is Dead” describes as the longing for “escape from the deadly anonymity of modern life,” which generates the, “passion for nonanonymity” in the “general man who feels his personality sinking lower and lower into the whirl of indistinguishable atoms to be lost in a mass civilization.” (Ferry, 2002, p. 199-200). What he is describing here is the anonymity that is being forced upon people as they become cogs in the machine of mass production; anonymity as a “social evil”. Ferry references Canby’s (1926) description of this new way of life as “City living” which is “essentially impersonal,” but also with “standardized” feelings, with “science” and its “laws that…ignore individuality completely,” with all that to the writer constituted “mass civilization” (Ferry, 2002, p. 200). This shift from anonymity as “without name” to a “cultural phenomenon” completely transforms any definition of the word since documented. The turn of the century not only brought a revolution in the industry of production but a revolution in how individuals perceive themselves.

Anonymity as a cultural motif means that the desire for anonymity has taken a complete downturn and that the need for individual expression is at an all time high. This brings us full circle to where we first started with identity. At this point in time though it is more about personal expression of self, as in the “what kind of person is this” sense, more than it is about straight up identification, as in the “who is this person?” sense. This is fitting because if you consider the societal circumstances that were in place hundreds of years prior to the 20th century there was not as much time, if you will, for things of this nature (i.e. development of self as unique from the whole). Not to say it wasn’t happening, because it’s difficult to do ethnography in a time period that has passed with people who are no longer living, it calls for much speculation and imagination on my part, which is more difficult than it seems because proper representation is of utmost importance. What I’m trying to say here is that individuality was not as much of a concern in the past and if it was it was definitely not nearly as attainable as it is today. Those who sought out to be markedly different from the masses were often ridiculed if not persecuted. In this way it is easier to see how identity has transformed right along side anonymity and is doing so as I type this.

It is important to note, though, that despite the cultural shifts that have taken place over time there is an telling resemblance to the conditions and resulting phenomena that have manifested in our recent past and present. The events banned in the “Black Act” are similar in purpose and portrayal as the group Anonymous is doing today both in the virtual world and in “real life”. The use of anonymity as a tool for private caution by poets writing for self expression and confession, resemble the ideas behind PostSecret. Nothing is more apparent today than anonymity as a cultural phenomenon. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution we have done nothing but increase the desire for self expression as it seems we are loosing our sense of significance more and more each day. Hence the creation of the multitude of social networking sites that allow individuals to post their life story in profile format and the continual obsession with “reality” TV shows and those that are formatted as contests to determine who is the best at this or that. Bombarded with millions of choices in every aspect of our lives individuals strive to make meaning out of anything that allows for it.

This does not mean that anonymity is dead though. What differentiates this time period today from that of the Industrial Revolution is that anonymity and the need for individual expression are almost balanced. There is more opportunity to be anonymous today because of the internet and more reason to embrace it because of all the opinions we are able to formulate outside of the norm thanks to our endless array of intellectual choices. So at the same time we are striving for individuality we are also embracing a sense of anonymity, some more than others. What the internet allows us to do is create our persona into what we want it to be. Whether this matches up to what we really are is another story. So does this constitute anonymity? If I can create myself in the image that I want to be and I am no where near that in actuality does that mean my pseudo identity is essentially anonymous? The internet has created an obvious need to delve deeper into the working of our cultural framework and how it is manifesting itself in our global society in order to rework the definitions of not only anonymity but identity itself.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Benedict, R. (1934). The individual and the pattern of culture. In Patterns of culture (pp. 251-278). New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Caplan, J., Torpey, J. C. (2001). Documenting individual identity: the development of state practices in the modern world. Princeton University Press.

Castle, T. (1986). Masquerade and Civilization: the Carnivalesque in Eighteenth-Century English Culture and Fiction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Cohen, A. P. (1993). Culture as identity: An anthropologist’s view. New Literary History, 24(1), 195-209. Retrieved from JSTOR database.

Ferry, A. (2002). “Anonymity”: The literary history of a word. New Literary History, 33(2), 193-214. Retrieved from JSTOR database.

Hazlitt, H. (1930). “The cult of anonymity”. Nation, 131, 350. Retrieved from Anne Ferry’s Anonymity: A Literary History of a Word.

Mill, J. S. (1921). On liberty and other essays. London: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Leed, E. J. (1982). Review: Elizabeth Eisenstein’s the printing press as an agent of change and the structure of communications revolutions. The American Journal of Sociology, 88(2), 413-429. Retrieved from JSTOR database.

Thompson, E. P. (1976). Whigs and hunters: The origin of the Black Act. Allen Lane.

text version of my project piece...(outline)

identity
- what is it?
- what does it mean?
- why it's important
- how do we create/express it?
>description of how culture and time period shape identity

anonymity
- binary oppositions: identity~anonymity
- history of the word
> what is it?
> what does it mean?
> why it's important
(communication revolution:printing press)

identity & anonymity
- discuss relationship between the two & why it's important
- desire to be identified/anonymous reflects the culture @ the time

anonymity as an aesthetic ideal
- when is this applicable?
- what purpose does it serve?
- examples here

cultural anonymity
- when is this applicable?
- why does it happen?
- examples here

So now what? (where we stand today)
- simultaneously seeking anonymity and self-expression
- conflict of interest sets the stage for multiple platforms of expression
both in the anonymous sphere and the celebrity sphere

>>mention few examples of other project pieces here

class presentation of research to date...

So if we go back to the beginning, before anonymous had even been coined as a term…

And move towards the present, where anonymity penetrates multiple aspects of our lives…

We see the concept of anonymity bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball…

It does this in various aspects, including people’s desire to be anonymous as well as how & why people choose to be anonymous.

Regardless of which way the ball bounces, it is an indicator of a cultural shift taking place…a shift significant enough to produce a change in the behavior of the culture.


anon·y·mous
(ə-nä-nə-məs)
Function: adjective
Etymology: Greek anōnymos, a- + onyma name
1 : not named or identified
2 : of unknown authorship or origin
3 : lacking individuality, distinction, or recognizability


Now if we look at the definition of anonymous we find that 1 & 3 are all encompassing, while #2 is more specific, pertaining solely to anonymity as it refers to written works.

This makes sense because written/print media provide ideal conditions for being anonymous…the author’s ideas are able to be present with out them being physically present, therefore concealing their identity.

This focus on authorship emphasizes the importance of the creation of Europe’s first printing press by Gutenberg



We know that print exponentially increased the time and place over which people could share ideas.

We also know that the communication revolution accompanied the creation of the printing press is a reference point for the development of the internet and mass media in general.

Basically, the printing press magnified the aspects of anonymity that already existed & at the same time created A new context for anonymity to be explored in.

We can look at anonymity in three broad categories...



TAG CLOUD: links; politics; views; expression; hierarchy; freedom; culture; identity; norms; importance; value; gender; opinions; associations; rank; biases; ideas; context


Voluntary anonymity is exactly as the definition implies: individuals are choosing to be anonymous for one reason or another.

These reasons provide insight into what is happening within the culture at that time

-If we go back to the 16th century we have people of rank unable to write as poets

-While others seek anonymity because their ideas fall outside the social norm

-Some just feel like the idea is more important than the identity

Voluntary anonymity encompasses a wide range of possibilities, making it one of the most common forms of anonymity.










Humble anonymity is a type of voluntary anonymity that does not receive as much attention.

Similar to the concept that the idea is more important than the identity, some forms of humble anonymity attribute that importance to the teacher.

In his writings, Plato didn’t disclose his name and even took a position that the story he was telling wasn’t his own. Some scholars see this as a type of discipleship towards his teacher, Socrates.

The Pythagoreans, followers of Pythagoras, embraced a worldview that was dominated by mathematics but was also profoundly mystical. They too shed their identities in order to pay homage to those who opened the door to knowledge.

Anonymous financial donors are a non-discipleship example where the cause is more important than the contributor.



Forced anonymity comes about as we approach the industrial revolution…when individuals are becoming just another cog in the machine of mass production.

This strips them of their identity and they receive no recognition for their contributions…

So people are looking for recognition in other places; anonymity is not desired in the same way it once was.

This type of anonymity is apparent now because of the internet…

The ultimate platform for anonymous identity!

Even with profiles you are still creating yourself to be whoever you want to be, giving an anonymous sense.

So not only is this type anonymity forced, if you will, it is often unrecognized.




To re-cap:

We see a desire for anonymity both pre & post printing press both as a freedom of expression and as a means of protection.

We then move into the industrial revolution where there is a desire to be known amidst a cultural collapse of individual identity.

And today, in our “convenience oriented” lives we have time to think & ponder ideas and a desire to speak our minds.

Some situations call for anonymity while others renounce it.

People seek that freedom and protection

that anonymity Initially gave us (ANONYMOUS)

But there is also a strive for individual expression that calls for a burgeoning of our individual identities (MICROCELEBRITIES)



Basically I have identified the soil that is our anonymous history

and planted the seeds for everyone's projects.

These seeds, which are the main concepts within our project,

will sprout into a detailed analysis of how anonymity is manifesting itself in the present and future.

Collectively our projects build upon and support one another and collectively they grow into an abundant garden.

links for presentation~

my post is acting ridiculous...here are the links I could not add in my previous post:

Platonic Anonymity by Ludwig Edelstein
Anonymity: The Literary History of a Word by Anne Ferry
Review: The Printing Press as an Agent of Change by Eric J. Leed

presentation!

A brief outline of my presentation follows and the materials I used are included at the end *:D

A game of ping pong:As we follow anonymity throughout time we see these ideas existing,falling from the fore, then resurfacing again...

• desire to be anonymous
• how people are anonymous
• why people are anonymous

Definition of anonymity: #'s 1 & 3 are more general, yet #2 is more commonplace...why?

anon·y·mous
1 : not named or identified
2 : of unknown authorship or origin
3 : lacking individuality, distinction, or recognizability

~ emphasis on #2 indicates that anonymity and script/print go hand in hand, which
demonstrates the impact of the printing press on an already existing phenomenon

The Printing Press:

~ magnifies the concepts (i.e. desire, how, why) encompassed within anonymity 100x's because print exponentially increases the vastness of time and place when it comes to sharing ideas, knowledge and the like

3 Perspectives of Anonymity:

~ "voluntary anonymity": choosing to be anonymous for one reason or another

• freedom of expression

• opinions & ideas spill outside of cultural norms
• rank and gender limit people on what they can “say”

(don’t want to be associated with their works for these reasons)

• some feel the idea is more important than their recognition

~ "humble anonymity":

* Plato
* Pythagoreans
* Anonymous $$$ donors

“to stamp out self-love…to share everything with others…
is the highest aim of moral life”
- Plato

~ "forced anonymity": exactly like it says ;P

* first apparent as we approach industrial revolution and people become cogs in the machine of mass production, seeking recognition where they can because of this forced anonymity

* apparent now because of the internet and its inclination towards anonymity

>are people in either of these situations even aware this is happening?

So where has our ping-pong game taken us?

* pre/post-Gutenberg: a desire for anonymity as freedom for expression as well
as protection
* industrial revolution: a desire to be known amidst a cultural collapse of
identity
* present: a desire for both


Planting the seeds:

I have identified the soil that is our anonymous history and planted the seeds for the projects that are to follow. With their watering cans of research, my classmates will hydrate these seeds so they sprout to reveal the various perspectives that constitute our garden of anonymous possibilities.


Resources:

Anonymity by Ludwig Edelstein (1961)
Anonymity: The Literary History of a Word by Anne Ferry (2002)
Review: The Printing Press as an Agent of Change by Eric J. Leed (1982)
­

my proposed research methods (definitley tentaive)

I'm trying hard over here to propose something...it's not working (>o<)/ Let me start with what I know. The articles I have been reading are more than interesting and definitely informative, so I am for sure proposing that I continue to reference them as I form the structure of my final video. It is not as clear, though, how I will use the information I am gathering. To me this indicates that my research needs some serious guidance. I feel like I am at a point now that I can begin to narrow down my focus and come up with some, as Wesch put it "knock your head off" ideas to provide a skeleton for my research. As I move full force into my research I can use this skeleton to build upon and expand the "KYHO" ideas that I come up with resulting in five minutes of aawsumness :D Coming up with the KYHOI's is another story. I think it is super important that I review what direction the rest of the class is moving in to make sure that our video is integrated and streamline. The blog aspect of our class makes this ultra simple and our time spent in class is also very telling of what everyone is thinking. A combination of both these sources will provide me with the aspects that we are focusing on and I can then look back in history to see if, when and under what circumstances these aspects manifested before. This will definitely highlight the common, as well as not-so-common, threads that run through our projects collectively. Once I have a good grasp on my KYHOI's I can start building the musculature for my skeleton. I will primarily do this using the articles I have already read in addition to others that I find relevant to the direction I am heading. I currently have the FABULOUS article by Anne Ferry (Anonymity: The Literary History of a Word) and a review of Elizabeth Eisenstein's AMAZING work (The Printing Press as an Agent of Change). As of right now these two articles are my platform from which I will launch my research. Both articles encapsulate the fundamental ideas that give "anonymity" life and have much to offer in terms of the actual word "anonymity" as well as the cultural conditions that it has existed within and as a result of.

I am also finding articles that refer to anonymity in aspects other than poetry, which is the main focus of Ferry's article. Eisenstein's work focuses more on the conceptual aspects of communication revolutions and not so much on anonymity in and of itself. Therefore, I have found articles spanning throughout the 19th and 20th centuries that talk about anonymity in other forms of literature (i.e. literary criticism, memoirs and religious texts). This variety in content as well as time periods will allow me to spread my research over a wider base of literary aspects to get a better understanding of how people have used anonymity and for what reasons.

The final aspect of my research that I am working on would include a deeper look into uses of anonymity outside of the literary realm. This is not as likely, though, because anonymity outside of the literary realm is a much harder thing to grasp and document. This would be where true participant observation would come in handy. Even if I could find people that lived during the time periods discussed in some of the articles and could obtain a vicarious account of the sense of anonymity often experienced during the climb to industrialization it would never be the same as if I were experiencing it myself. This could be a good thing, though, because I would carry with me my own biases that would cloud my judgment. As of right now I am trying to determine the best approach to moving away from articles as my only source of information. As I continue to read and have discussions about my research I am confident I will come to one conclusion or another about how to broaden my perspective of anonymity.

my first literature review :)

It is not an everyday practice of most individuals to immerse themselves in the catalog of symbols that constitutes their being, or to even think about the impacts of their culture and how it shapes their mere existence through this set of symbols. Some may attribute this to our face paced lifestyles and our preoccupation with never-ending responsibilities, but this lack of awareness for what makes us who we are has been present in societies for hundreds of years. And rightfully so! Having the ability to pull back from one's self, and essentially one's own existence, requires a state of mind that must be cultivated differently for each individual. What makes sense to one person does not always resonate with another, which demonstrates that we all have our own individual culture as a subset of the larger culture we are a part of. Every variable that constitutes our culture(s) produces a function that allows us to operate in the context of our own lives. Therefore, it is safe to say that the structure of our culture(s) determines the functions that carry us through our lives.

The idea of structure and function can be seen throughout nature and in numerous disciplines. The human body exemplifies this concept in the purest form. When we look at the intricate processes that take place in order to keep our bodies functioning there is no doubt that it could not be possible without the specific structures that make up the systems carrying out these processes. The same is true of culture. Like a HUGE organism, culture is comprised of hundreds of thousands of structures that work in unison, as well as opposition, to produce functions that carryout in our every day lives. The work of Elizabeth Eisenstein addresses this as a problem in the sense that it is often overlooked, which can be detrimental when trying to assess the impact of cultural change.

In Eisenstein's most famous work, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change and the Structure of Communications Revolutions, we are brought to the roots of fundamental change via a handy little contraption known as the printing press; brought into use in Germany by Johannes Gutenberg in approximately 1439. This was the first movable type printing device in Western Europe and was responsible for the wide spread dissemination of knowledge. During the Renaissance period knowledge spread across greater distances because of the "fixity" print gave it, making it easier to share work on a standardized basis. As Eisenstein puts it, "print institutionalized this classical revival, fixing it and making it a Europe-wide phenomenon."

Being able to fix knowledge allows for all types of advancements. The structural features of oral communication which serve to obscure the details of tradition are diminished by writing and utterly effaced by print (Leed 1982). By having standardized text to refer to, scientists, historians and the like were able to add to the database of intellectual findings in a manner that contributed to the preexisting works as opposed to merely replicating it. For one of the first times in European history there was a concrete method to "distinguish between the reproduction of their culture and those alterations of the basic motifs and schemata which constitute a personal addition, an "original" contribution to that culture." (Leed 1982)

Where though, does this leave us in terms of identity. In a review of the literature there is little to be found regarding how individual's felt about having their identity associated with their contributions. It is easy to assume a few things: 1) people will be proud of their contribution, feeling as though they must be correct in their findings, and hope to be noted in print so they may be recognized even after their departure 2) people will take a more humble stance and want their ideas to prosper, not their identity, and therefore want to suppress their identity all together 3) being unsure of their works or possibly afraid of being persecuted for their findings/beliefs, people will want to remain anonymous for the sake of their dignity. In either scenario the importance of identity is not mentioned here (i.e. within the review of Eisenstein's work), and it is worth further research to find the links between the era of "fixity" and identity in relation to the specific ideas Eisenstein presents in her work.

As I continue through various literary sources, though, there is more talk about a concern for identity in general during the Renaissance era. Anonymity: The Literary History of a Word, written by Anne Ferry, gives us insight into how identity was approached over a vast time period (i.e. 16th century - 20th century) and their is time spent discussing the cultural "why's" that lead to the variance we see throughout history. In the late 16th century the word anonymous is brought into English from Greek indicating that the idea was in existence and being employed to some extent regardless of whether or not the actual word "anonymous" was being attached to it.

It is well known that in this period it was thought of as improper for "gentlemen and persons of rank to appear in print as poets..." and because these individuals were forced to employ anonymity for sake of their dignity, "...others who wanted to display their wit as a way of advancing themselves in courtly circles were driven to publish verse unsigned but under fancy disguises that could be seen through." (Ferry 2003) Politics is another instance where embracing anonymity could prove beneficial. But as we move into the late 17th century we start to see the word being employed as a means of "fashion, publishing tactics, or private caution." The use of the adjective "anonymous" does not abruptly change, rather it transforms slowly in relation to the cultural changes that are taking place.

Coming into the 19th century we see poetry becoming a form of personal expression as opposed to a "skillfully made object fashion according to formal conventions." The led to the birth of the actual noun "anonymity" from it's parent adjective "anonymous" born a couple hundred years earlier. The need for protection takes a different form here, as authors are concerned about how people will view the personal inner workings of the mind. This continues on throughout the 19th century in the midst of a growing concern for poetry as a form of personal expression & a desire of some for a "return to the literary past", that E.M. Forster describes as a time when "writers and readers...did not make a cult of expression as we do today. Surely they were right, and modern critics go too far in their insistence on personality."

What strikes me as even more interesting is the ping-pong effect that is beginning to take place. Amongst the shifts in perception of what poetry should be used for there is also a shift in how anonymity is used within poetry. As we approach the mid-1900's there is an ever growing feel for anonymity for what Ferry calls a cultural motif. Henry Seidel Canby addresses it in "Anon is Dead" written in 1926. He talks about how city life sets the stage for the desire to "escape from the deadly anonymity of modern life," generating the "passion for nonanonymity" in the "general man who feel shis personality sinking lower and lower into the whirl of indistinguishable atoms to be lost in a mass civilization." So here we have people wanting to move out of the idea of anonymity based on what is happening culturally. Essentially this brings us back to where I ended with Eisenstein's work.

All the talk of anonymity based on Ferry's article refers to poetry in particular. I am interested to know where people in the Renaissance era stood in terms of identity and publishing academic works. During this time period we have theologians and scientists adding to the commonwealth of knowledge in the most influential of ways and it would be fascinating to determine how anonymity was viewed in light of these subjects outside of the literary arts. I realize that my review of the literature is minuscule in comparison to what is available, so this is definitely accounted for as I write this, and it does not mean my search is over...it has only just begun!

Because printed media is so appropriate for the use of anonymity I would also like to look into different cases where anonymity is used. Aside from the poetic approach that Ferry embraces I have found some literature that may direct me towards the use of anonymity in religious works, which would take us back before the Renaissance (woohoo!) as well as the use of anonymity by Plato found in Platonic Anonymity by Ludwig Edelstein, which would also take us back farther. Other, more recent, literary works that address the different uses of anonymity include memoirs of Holocaust survivors (e.g. The Psychological Impact of War Trauma on Civilians: An International Perspective by Stanley Krippner and Teresa M. McIntyr), Curiosities of Criticism by Henry J. Jennings (1881) and The Writer: A Monthly Magazine for Literary Workers, referenced in the previous blog post.

In addition to looking at how and why people have used anonymity in past literary works and delving deeper into the cultural shifts that cause the ping-pong effect regarding the use of anonymity, I am interested in finding a common thread that runs through history right up to the point where my fellow ethnographers take over...the digital age. This will be exciting to meet up with them and, through their work, follow the thread that has run throughout history.