Search results

ABSTRACTThis essay reviews work produced in predominantly US cultural anthropology publications throughout 2017. It asks: What makes an anthropological inquiry timely, what sorts of relationalities command anthropological attention, and to what end? Noting our ongoing methodological commitment to long‐term ethnography alongside increasingly important online forums for reaching broader publics and responding quickly to emerging issues, it expands the range of work surveyed to include some online‐only short essays alongside the larger collection of traditionally published research articles. Characterized by empathic inquiry, frequently drawing on years of ethnographic and personal experience with the places, people, and other entities that we write about, and often attentive to histories at multiple scales, cultural anthropology of this moment, however published, grapples with dark times while it also offers ways of imagining other, better futures and ways of being in relation to others. Two thematic clusters organize this essay: the first considers temporality alongside mobility and sovereignty, and the second considers relationality alongside subjectivity and mediation. Together, all of these concerns—that are both of the moment and long standing—build a varied body of work that grapples with the interrelationalities that constitute power, place, and possibility. I argue that what makes an anthropological inquiry timely is the extent to which it is relationally informed and attuned to care for worlds that we inhabit and imagine, together. [year in review, sociocultural anthropology, temporality, mobility, sovereignty, relationality, subjectivity, mediation]

Faisant appel à la littérature d'études culturelles, cet article suggère que la condition de post‐modernité crée de nouveaux challenges pour le domaine d'anthropologie culturelle qui vont au delà du problème pourtant significatif de la représentation ethnographique. Explorant le projet post‐moderniste comme l'un de ceux qui impliquent une approche particuliere des phénomènes culturels dans une économie globale, l'article pousse les anthropologues à reconcevoir le concept de culture et à explorer les politiques culturelles de la vie quotidienne dans le contexte d'une representation globale du capitalisme.Drawing upon cultural studies literature, this article suggests that the condition of postmodernity poses new challenges to the field of cultural anthropology that go beyond the (still significant) problem of ethnographic representation. Exploring the postmodernist project as one that involves a particular approach to cultural phenomena in a multinational global economy, the article urges anthropologists to reconceive the concept of culture and explore the cultural politics of everyday life in the context of the global restructuring of capitalism.

The essay uses the theoretical-methodological strategy of notes and listing (following the practices of Susan Sontag and Umberto Eco, among others) to illuminate particular, unique historical and cultural-anthropological aspects of the Jerry Sandusky-Penn State scandal/tragedy. Special attention is devoted in the essay to critique of depictions of the Catholic Church, ancient Greece, the "unsayable," and social memory in regard to their links to the Penn State tragedy. Tribute is paid to those such as Murray Sperber, Michael Bérubé and Cary Nelson, whose scholarly activism foresaw and attempted 0to prevent such a scandal. Influenced by ideas about ritual forwarded by Seligman, Weller, Piett and Simon, ultimately the essay seeks to forward a distinctive understanding of the nature of sport that goes against common scholarly and popular beliefs.

The authors draw on their 40 years as anthropologists and educators to illustrate through a narrative-style text and photographs what it is like to be an anthropologist and to 'do' anthropology - the problems encountered as well as the pleasures and rewards of living in other cultures and learning from other people. Through accounts of their lives and work in varied cultural settings, the authors describe the many forms fieldwork can take, the kinds of questions anthropologists ask, and the common problems they encounter. From these accounts and the experiences of their students, 'In the Field' makes a powerful case for the value of the anthropological approach to knowledge

Although it helps to be aware of what philosophers think about knowledge, anthropologists can neither simply relegate their epistemological problems to, nor find solutions in, philosophy. In anthropology, knowing what and how we know is a practical, not just a theoretical, problem, one we face in all phases of our work, from field research to writing (and teaching). Historical recollections of debates since the 1960s are followed by consideration of two aspects of the knowledge question in our discipline: 'Knowledge of what?' and 'Whose knowledge?' Guided by reflections on knowledge and survival, the article ends by addressing the question of ethnographic evidence in the context of a current project.RésuméS'il est utile de savoir ce que les philosophes pensent de la connaissance, les anthropologues ne peuvent pas se contenter de déléguer à la philosophie pour leurs problèmes épistémologiques, ni d'y chercher des solutions. En anthropologie, le problème de savoir ce que l'on sait et comment on le sait n'est pas seulement théorique mais pratique ; nous le rencontrons à chaque phase de notre travail, des recherches sur le terrain à l'écriture et à l'enseignement. L'auteur fait suivre ici les rappels historiques des débats qui ont eu lieu depuis les années 1960 d'une analyse de deux aspects de la question des connaissances dans notre discipline : « connaissance de quoi ? » et « connaissance de qui ? » Guidé par une réflexion sur le savoir et la survie, l'article s'achève par l'examen de la question des preuves ethnographiques dans le contexte d'un projet en cours.

The Anthropology of Globalization: Cultural Anthropology Enters the 21st Century. Ted C. Lewellen. Westport: Bergin and Garvey, 2002. 282 pp.