This article is interesting because it provides a twist to the normalized power dynamic. The article points out that those we think have the power in the society are not always the ones that actually have the power over in which direction society will head. It raises the question of who has the power in society? Is it the people who seem to currently have the control or the people who control what the society will look like in the future? This article answers the question by stating that those who actually control society are the ones who point shape the society of the future. Those are the people who will be most successful. In this case, the grocer was treated as an outcast, but as society modernized, the grocer became the example by which most people in society lived by. In this way, the article also brought up the point of the progression of society and how society is continually shifting to make room for new ideas and the most modern ways of living.
Another issue this article raised for me is the role that outsiders have in commentating and passing judgements on a society. The first and second visitors to Balgat had contrasting views on many things, including the chief. However is it their place to pass judgements on these people?
I also found the power dynamics in this article very interesting. Though the Grocer did not have the power to change his life the way he wished to, he appears to have had influence on other people’s lives as he gave advice to some Balgati on what to do when they traveled to Ankara. I question whether the Grocer was actually a prophet predicting the future of Balgat. Rather, he seems a pitiful character who longed to live in a time that was so near. Saying that the Grocer had power over the direction of his society suggests that it could have gone in a different direction. I would suggest that neither the Chief nor the Grocer had power over the direction of Balgat, but that the private desires of a number of the villagers allowed for a smooth process of change when the opportunity presented itself.
I find your question on judgement of a society to be quite thought-provoking. This is obviously a complex issue as each person carries their own biases, whether these are prominent or perhaps unconscious. The way the interviewers frame this society may end up reflecting their own lives and upbringings more than actual aspects of the society in question. It makes it extremely difficult to assess a society then if different people have different standards and expectations. What works for one society may be considered backwards or unthinkable in another society. How can we separate valuable research and comparison from judgments purely based on differences between cultures?