Summary, Concepts & Main points.

Bibliography Clifford Geertz (1972): Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight. Daedalus, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 1-37
Summary
The article by Clifford Geertz describes the explicit procedure and context in which Balinese cockfighting is performed. His first established presence in this unfamiliar country exposed him to an unwelcoming depiction of how the Balinese ignored foreigners. When fleeing with the locals upon a police raid from a cockfight, they overcame the biased expectations of the Balinese and were finally able to engage with the locals. His studies comprised primarily on cockfighting due to its diverse analogies associated to the Balinese every day life. The symbolic representation of the cock as an extension to the man, the importance of betting as a representation of their status and their approach to village rivalries through birds tearing each other apart demonstrates cockfighting is as significant a cultural expression to the Balinese as is baseball to Americans.
Main Concepts
Anthropological fieldwork is information collection outside of an office or laboratory where research on given subjects are conducted (Geertz, 1972, p. 2).
Visitor status is social standing or perception on someone who does not come from their “home” (Geertz, 1972, p. 2).
Narcissistic ego is the excessive interest in self-importance and status (Geertz, 1972, p. 3).
Platonic love is a none sexual but intimate relationship with something or someone (Geertz, 1972, p. 4).
Deep play means something that goes into a more deep profound level. (Geertz, 1972, p. 7).
Status gambling is betting using one’s status. Winning promotes one’s status just as losing hinders it (Geertz, 1972, p. 7).
Social hierarchy is a ranking system using social standings (Geertz, 1972, p. 7).
Social matrix is the various elements within a society, such as culture, society and politics (Geertz, 1972, p. 8).
Group kinship is the blood relationship through a group of people (Geertz, 1972, p. 9).
Ethnography is the research and description of people’s culture and worldviews (Geertz, 1972, p. 9). Main Points Raised by the Author
Geertz exposes the reader to understanding cockfighting by eliminating any ethnocentric views he might have. He places himself as an outsider to the situation just as the reader might feel. As Geertz reaches his point of acceptance within the community the reader follows him into his ethnographic research, taking a cultural relativist approach in order to fully understand what cockfighting symbolizes. The titillating personification between the cock and the owner as an extension of his male anatomy, his ideal self, his kin and village demonstrates a strong platonic relationship with the animal (Geertz, 1972, p. 3). This symbolic representation of the human by the cock was also a portrayal of the Balinese status within the male community and among rival villages. During Geertz’s ethnographic research, he discovered through participant observation multiple key symbolic accounts in regards to cockfighting. He exhibits the degree of importance “deep” fights have over “shallow” fights as they are often spectated by “superorganisms” and represent higher political and social rivalries (Geertz, 1972, p. 1). Geertz shows the reader a clear class division in the Balinese community, while having the elites who believe it as being primitive and unprogressive in regards to the betterment of their country, the lower-class workers participate in cockfighting for its strong social, cultural meaning and origins. The concepts that Geertz bring up are primarily symbolic associations of cockfighting to a greater picture of Balinese society, primarily male. The author points out that the “status gambling” was not only constricted to the owners but also to the audience (Geertz, 1972, p. 7). To the Balinese, money was of great importance considering they did not have much of it, but in public events placing higher bets exhibited their level of confidence, their masculinity and their poise. To lose one week’s wage in one bet was devastating but having their status shot was equivalently as atrocious (Geertz, 1972, p. 10).

Critique Once Geertz is accepted into the community and beginning to collect data through participant observation, he never really explains his methodology in collecting information. Talking to community members is important but as to how he brought up these issues and to who the information came from, we do not know. While reading through the article it is apparent that Geertz is suggesting that Bali is a male dominant society, there is missing valuable information on the female input in cockfighting. Their perspective is never really presented by the author only that they were secluded to participate in frowned upon gambling activities. Also I noticed inconsistency within the legal system. I am curious as to why on certain days, cockfighting is legal? If the elites truly believed it to be “primitive” than there shouldn’t be any room for exceptions. Now previous to having read the article, I was in the dark when it came to the significance of cockfighting, but Geertz’s interpretation shows the audience how cockfighting to the Balinese is reflective to baseball or football to an American (Geertz, 1972).