Seminar Table
My team for the seminar table was myself, Annie Boyden, Norah Thornton, Jasmine Wong, and Jelissa Vega. For roles, I took on the role of the connector, Annie was the Zoom Out, Norah was the Engine, and Jasmine and Jelissa were the Includers. When we came up with these roles, we talked about what our personal strengths were in the classroom and what we thought we would contribute best to the seminar. I think the MVP on our team was Annie. Annie not only prepared and helped a lot when putting together the seminar table, but during the seminar she was able to really do her job well and zoom out to bigger concepts and ideas. I think that role is really crucial when talking about something as broad as clothing and modesty. Making those connections and piecing things together as a group is vital to the seminar. I think MVP class wise was Samantha. Samantha talked quite a bit during the seminar and brought in her own connections and asked questions. She was really engaged and helped keep the conversation going which was helpful to the class but also to us as hosts. With this being only the second seminar table we were a little nervous people weren’t going to contribute or talk much, but I was pleasantly surprised with the energy of the group.
Our goals for this seminar were:
Understanding how different clothing relates to the body, and the mind
Understand how points of view shape religious practice
Understanding how clothing is a form of expression [religious or personal]
Relating these texts to our world and understanding what religious clothing represents.
Our group met up twice before our seminar so that we could fully and thoroughly communicate about what we wanted to get out of the seminar and what we wanted the group to learn. Coming up with our learning goals was one of the things that took the most time. We wanted the goals to correlate with each other and to complement the readings and our major takeaways. When we met up, we walked about goals, structure of class, having two questions on the board so people could chime in whenever, opening activities, theme, core elements, etc. We color coordinated things so it would be easier to make sense of the doc. I felt that we prepared for it very well. We talked about the readings with each other and what we thought they meant, we came prepared with questions and ideas. We all wanted to succeed and succeed together.
Class in my opinion went really well. People were very passionate and talkative about our topic. When it got quiet we were able to rally up a filler question or bring the class back to talking about something. There were rarely any moments when it was silent or awkward. I think the opening activity kind of brought everyone together and got everyone to be active and awake for class. After that, everyone was ready to talk. I think we achieved our learning goals. I think we hammered it home on all of them. We had a really well rounded conversation about the topics, even if they were difficult to talk about or were uncomfortable. I think I know we achieved all our goals because we covered all the topics and went in depth to each one of them. There wasn’t just one opinion about these topics, there were multiple. I think at first, the opening activity was awkward and no one really knew what to do, but we just kept asking questions and soon enough people chimed in. This was also my job as the connector. When things went quiet or no one spoke, I connected ting either back to the texts or to my own personal experience to see if anyone else had the same experiences or could relate. The trick we learned was asking questions that related back to people in the class made the conversation easier to start, that is why we started with a few questions that related back to the class and were about themselves. It made it easier to talk about the questions that were serious and factual rather than experiential. I honestly didn’t think there were uncomfortable parts. Some parts were sad and shocking to hear about, like the hijab in the olympics, but there was never a time I felt uncomfortable.
I think the readings and podcasts were really eye opening this week. I have always felt strongly towards clothing and the expression of oneself through clothing and these readings and podcasts deepened that feeling. The podcast on clergy was so relatable to me. I have always been amazed and in awe of the priests and the clothing that they wear, so to hear the reasoning and the backstory behind it was really amazing. When they were describing the clothes in the beginning, I could visualize the garments and could see so clearly what was being described. Then with Mahmood, when shyness was talked about, I learned a whole new meaning of the word. It was used differently but reminded me of my definition as well. Mahmood as a whole put into perspective why modesty is practiced and why it is so important to islamic people. I always sort of understood why, but now I fully understand.
Bibliography:
Avery Trufelman. Articles of Interest. Clergy. 2024
Avery Trufelman. Articles of Interest. Modesty. 2024
Saba Mahmood. Politics of Piety. Agency, Gender, and Embodiment. 2004