Introduction
The actualization of racial identity, which absolutizes anthropological distinctions between people, in the modern era was mainly due to European expansion and colonialism. European cities and new nation-states began to expand by including other parts of the world in the international trade system, which led to their colonial settlement.
Not only are anthropological differences the basis for racial identity, but also a comparison of the cultures of different peoples and countries and their achievements with other peoples’ cultures. Racial identity formation occurs not only based on practical experience gained from direct contact with the peoples of other regions. Mary Lorena Kenny’s book does a great job of highlighting the characteristics of people who define its identity.
The Contribution of the Book to Identity Studies
The author of this book acts as an outside observer in the study of races and cultures while creating the most important notes that ultimately led to the book’s creation. At the same time, the book reveals aspects of slavery in Brazil and the destructive causes to which it led. Moreover, in an anthropological sense, the book reveals the multiple causes of this state of affairs, justifying the motives and actions of certain racial groups. For example, the novelty of the author’s developments may lie in the fact that she introduces the definition of Quilombo identity into the science of anthropology (Kenny 47).
Thus, it becomes clear to readers that this design was created to expand a particular racial group’s powers while leveling all other people’s rights. The author uses many third-party developments and articles to confirm some of his thoughts. This is a positive side of the book, as the reader is always left feeling that the words and theories did not appear anywhere.
Every aspect shown or developed in the book relates in one way or another to confirmed anthropological concepts. This correlates with some course sources, such as McIntosh (9), who argued that whites tended not to recognize their privileges. This correlates with what happened in Brazil and with what Kenny writes in his research.
The book uses an anthropological research methodology to explore how the creation of the Quilombo identity has made a positive contribution to society. This question contains many subgroups of topics and theories, and the author successfully guides the reader through all possible coherent conclusions. Thus, this book section carries out a scientific and anthropological development primarily correlated with the course readings.
The question of Quilombo’s identity thus becomes one of the author’s main motives for ethnographic research (Kenny 19). Here, we can consider another similarity with course readings since the author uses all the same methods to develop his research. An integrated approach and typological analysis are essential parts of ethnography and find their application in this book. The author manages to cover the fullness of the relationship between different races and compare how some individuals had a detrimental effect on certain ethnic groups.
The study of transatlantic slavery occupies an important place in the work. Revealing the essence of Brazilian slavery, it becomes clear how diverse ethnic groups were united in oppressing them. The author has done a great job revealing the identity of different peoples, such as maroons, simons, mambises, and quilombos (Kenny 29). All the unique features of character traits and personalities appear before the reader openly and clearly due to the research conducted to write this book. The etymology of the word quilombo is successfully revealed by analyzing its origin through various ethnic features of the language (Kenny 80).
For this, the reasoning in the book is directed towards a careful historical analysis carried out in relation to the representatives of the studied peoples. The author confirms her idea by analyzing various social, historical, and ethnic ties that together determine the identity of the quilombo. However, due to the many complications in defining the identity of the quilombo, it becomes difficult to follow the many connections the author makes between different fields of activity.
The author describes the social construction of heritage and identity as a component formed on a breakthrough experience. This experience, however, does not necessarily have to be preserved until modern times. It must be of paramount importance in shaping the image and distinctive features of the people. An example of this can be called the reasoning that the author makes about quilombo and ceramics (Kenny 83). This part of the culture of the people was a significant factor in the formation of their uniqueness.
The people use pot making more not as a need but as a tribute to the past and are essential for shaping the quilombo experience (Kenny 85). Thus, the author concludes that the structure of the heritage of identity is some past actions that have passed into the present. Experience has played an essential role in shaping the national identity of the quilombo, which is significant in the sense that it is impossible to ignore what distinguishes this person.
Conclusion
It should be noted that identity analysis is a difficult task for ethnographers because it requires a multilateral approach. This, in turn, can ensure the achievement of new definitions for the public of those constructs everyone is accustomed to treating as ordinary.
Thus, the research conducted by Kenny makes a significant contribution to the development of ethnographic research. Quilombo is a complex and complex example of how one can demonstrate the identity of a people by immersing themselves in their past and analyzing their existing customs. Thus, the author concluded that the social construct of the national heritage is more than just a way of forming a nation.
Work Cited
Kenny, Mary Lorena. Deeply Rooted in the Present: Heritage, Memory, and Identity in Brazilian Quilombos. University of Toronto Press, 2018.
McIntosh, Peggy. “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” and “Some Notes for Facilitators“. 1989. Web.