8/13/2019 budaya mariginal

1/2

The fringes of society is a society that lived in suburban areas whose lives are always tinged with

anxiety and poverty as well as earning their living by working as a scavenger . ( Syafrudin : 2009) .

Greater Jakarta in Indonesia in particular section , there is a lot of the lower class or the so-called

periphery . This set of people , who of course has a variety of cultures are positive and negative in the

sense that there are habits that impact society both good and bad for the environment . We take the

example in some of the areas around the capital such as Jakarta , Bogor , Depok , Tangerang , and Bekasi

, fifth this area certainly has a variety of cultures , respectively . Broadly similar cultures dilima this area ,

such as the culture of mutual cooperation . Mutual aid is an original Indonesian term that means

working together to achieve a desirable outcome . He said came from gotong = work , mutual = shared

Together with deliberation , rhymes, Pancasila , customary law , divinity , and kinship , mutual assistance

to Indonesian Philosophy basis as proposed by M. Nasroen . Mutual mutual culture is usually done on a

Sunday or on Saturday , where residents there were already off from work , they worked together to

wash the roads , gutters and drains of trash around their neighborhood , culture of mutual cooperation

usually is done in some activities and community events that happens in the area , such as weddings ,

the person dies , build a house of worship , clearing roads , drains and so forth .

Historic Origins of the Cultural Marginality ConceptThe concept of the marginal man originates with Robert E. Parks work during the1920s. Park asserted that interactions between different groups of people and culturesinitially took the form of forceful invasion. However, through the impact of modern-daytransportation and communication infrastructures such as the railroad and especiallyairplane travel, this migration of peoples has increased in both frequency and quality.Migration has been both facilitated by the aforementioned infrastructures and it hasassumed the character of peaceful penetration.1

One u ndeniable result of these types of migrations, both forceful and peaceful, is the

emergence of the marginal man. As Park states, the marginal man is a man living andsharing in the cultural life and traditions of two distinct peoples; never quite willing tobreak, even if he were permitted to do so, with his past and his traditions and not quiteaccepted in the new society in which he now sought to find a place.2

While both Park and Everitt V. Stonequist, Parks student at the Chicago School, hadsimilar definitions of the marginal man, their views on the effects of marginality onidentity were divergent. According to Park, the culturally marginal individual becomesthe individual with thekeener intelligence, the wider horizon, and the more detachedand rational viewpoint.3

Thus his overall view concerning the effects of marginality was positive. In contrast,

Stonequist saw the effects of cultural marginality as predominantly negative. Anindividual in this condition is a manpoised in psychological uncertainty between two ormore social worlds ; reflecting in his soul the discords and harmonies, repulsions andattractions of these worlds, and never quite fitting in witheither culture by which he has been influenced.4

The dominant attitude in mainstream American society towards minority cultural groupswas in accordance with Stonequists assessment of the marginal man as an outsider,

8/13/2019 budaya mariginal

2/2

lacking a firm sense of identity and essentially troubled by his cultural composition. Thisattitude is seen in the widespread acceptance of the model for ethnic groups. Under thismodel, the degree to which entrants into a new culture are accepted is determined bythe degree to which the characteristics of the old culture are shed and replaced bythose of the dominant mainstream culture present in society. For example, historically in

the United States there was primarily aone-way flow from the Old to the New World.As immigrant children entered the public.education system, they gave up the culture of the Old World including its languages,

class assumptions, perceptions, and ways of dealing with the social and physical

environment.

5

Often, the old culture was viewed as a hindrance to successful adaptation in the NewWorld, and therefore would be disposed of under the context of the assimilationistmodel. For a society operating under this sort of model, culturally marginal individuals --immigrants, in this case -- were viewed in a similar negative light because they oftenhad not incorporated the status quo culture present in the United States into their lives.However, more recent studies in the field of intercultural communications, sociology andpsychology indicate a transition away from the more negative view ascribed byStonequist and Park towards the marginal man