Download ANTHROPOLOGY 4400E ANTHROPOLOGICAL THOUGHT (HOW

ANTHROPOLOGY 4400E
ANTHROPOLOGICAL THOUGHT
(HOW TO THINK LIKE AN ANTHROPOLOGIST)
SEPTEMBER 2012
INSTRUCTOR:
OFFICE:
OFFICE HOURS:
PHONE:
E-MAIL:
TIME/PLACE
T.A.:
E-MAIL
OFFICE HOURS
Regna Darnell
Social Science Centre 3329
Monday 1-2:00
(whenever office door is open or by appointment)
519-661-2111 X85087
[email protected]
Monday 2:30-5:30, UCC 60
Joshua Smith
[email protected]
Monday 1:30-2:30
REQUIRED TEXTS:
I have ordered the following texts:
Edmund Leach, Political Systems of Highland Burma (London School of
Economics and Political Science 1954)
E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande
(Oxford 1937)
Robert Desjarlais, Shelter Blues (Pennsylvania 1997)
E. Valentine Daniel, Charred Lullabies (Princeton 1998)
Julie Cruikshank, Do Glaciers Listen? (UBC 2005)
Harry West, Ethnographic Sorcery (Chicago 2007)
Michael Fischer, Anthropological Futures (Duke 2009)
Some of these may be available on-line.
Further shorter readings may be made available as we proceed.
PLAN OF THE COURSE:
This is a heavy reading load, particularly in the first semester, both in quantity
and in density of argument. These ethnographies are all magnificent books
that repay careful and critical reading. You should aim to develop expertise in
figuring out what the author is up to rather than trying to recall every detail.
To “read” a book is to extract from it what you need to know for your own
purposes, including those of this course. Note that the “critical” in critique or
critical theory is not necessarily negative, although is it usually addressed to
changing the way things are done or thought about, whether in the academy
or in the world beyond it. Contemporary theory across the social sciences and
humanities can be FUN, especially in its deliberate use of unconventional and
nonliteral forms of representation. Anthropologists have had to learn how to
read such material as well as to write more lucidly and playfully themselves.
We will develop these skills of critical thinking in both reading and writing,
during the first semester through class discussion and three short papers (5-8
pages) based on the readings. Each ethnography will be discussed for two
class sessions. A paper on one of each pair of ethnographies will be due in
class one week after the discussion on the set is completed. You are not
expected to read additional materials for these papers, although you may
incorporate (with proper citation) anything else that you think is relevant to
your argument.
The first two readings (Evans-Pritchard and Leach) are ethnographic classics
that set out the relationship between ethnography and theory for modern
professional anthropology. The second pair deals with the ethnography of
violence (Daniel) and marginalization (Desjarlais), allowing us to explore the
foundation of our discipline in relation to issues of social justice. The third set
(Cruikshank and West) raises issues of cross-cultural differences in what and
how we know (epistemology) and the status of superficially incommensurable
belief systems as reality (ontology).
The reading of these ethnographies will set up the second term work of
integrating interdisciplinary theory with anthropological thought by means of
the ethnographic enterprise at the core of our discipline. We will take for
granted that anthropology itself is always already interdisciplinary. In
considering how to write ethnography that interrogates the assumptions and
conclusions of other social scientists and humanities scholars, we must also
address the history of anthropology (both the strengths and weaknesses of its
national traditions, theoretical paradigms, institutional frameworks, scholars
and their social networks). All of these ethnographies engage in dialogue with
theories and theorists as well as with ethnographic subjects. Anthropology
today is not isolated from other scholarly and public discourses. Familiarity
with the terms and the players is essential to joining this ongoing
conversation.
We will be concerned with reading skills, close textual analysis, and coherent
argument in developing your own personal critical standpoint. There are few
right or wrong answers. The exceptions are racism, sexism, homophobia and
any other positions overtly or implicitly disrespectful of individuals or groups.
We will attempt to identify the unwanted baggage from prior theories, e.g, of
social evolution or environmental determinism, and judgments implicit in
what linguistic anthropologist Jane Hill calls “everyday racism.” This openendedness may be frustrating initially, but it is the only way to empower your
own critical voice. I will, of course, attempt to persuade you of my own point
of view, but you are encouraged to resist. I have been known to change my
mind, and I respect a well-honed argument even if I disagree.
The works covered in the first semester are ethnographic, i.e., they are
descriptions of particular cultures as an anthropologist comes to know them
through participation-observation fieldwork (albeit some of that fieldwork is
archival). The standpoint and identity of the ethnographer highlight the
reflexive intersections of theory and ethnography, description and
interpretation or explanation. Experimental ethnographies abound these
days, as unconventional forms of writing explore the nature of representation,
the situated subjectivity of the ethnographic process, and the storied
narratives whereby cultural knowledge is articulated and conveyed to an
audience outside the fieldwork site. This particularity of subjects and
contexts, the position of a particular case as a necessary component of
responsible generalization, is one of the most important things distinguishing
anthropologists from colleagues in other disciplines.
In the second semester, each student will present a seminar discussion as part
of a team dealing with one or more interdisciplinary theorists, with each
disciplinary cluster assigned to a team. Students will divide the work so that
each student reads a different theorist. Each team will meet with the
instructor at least once to discuss how the presentation will hang together.
You are expected to become familiar with the oeuvre of your theorist and to
consult primary sources as well as critical commentary. After the class
presentation, each student will write a 20-25 page paper based on his or her
research, to be handed in during or before the last class. Related theorists
may be added on consultation with the instructor.
The majority of these theorists are not, in the narrow sense, anthropologists.
Indeed, many of them could benefit from a more sophisticated cross-cultural
perspective. Disciplinary boundaries are breaking down these days, yet
anthropologists continue to bring a unique perspective to the human and
cultural sciences. The anthropological approach has been profoundly
misinterpreted by literary critics, philosophers, educators, and even other
social scientists. To counter their critiques, we must clarify for ourselves what
it means to think like an anthropologist – and consider what the real-world
consequences might be.
You will receive a combined mark of 30% for the oral presentation and the
written paper. The percentage allotted to each is not set because the timing of
presentations affects the relationship between the two parts of the
assignment. Weighting, therefore, legitimately varies between one student
and another. I will apply this weighting to give benefit of doubt to the student.
More polished presentation is expected later in the semester. There may be
an advantage to presenting early, leaving time for revision in the written
version. The two versions may differ substantially (though they need not).
Each panel will prepare a biographical sketch (hopefully with a picture), basic
bibliography and glossary of key terms for each theorist they are responsible
for (one double-sided page per theorist). These materials are to be presented
to the class one week in advance of the presentation. Each student should
prepare a file or binder of this material. This material is an essential resource
in studying for the final. It addition, it provides an intensive guide to a range
of material that you could not possibly read yourself within a single course.
A brief portion of each class in the second term will be devoted to discussion
of assigned readings (TBA) in Fischer. This text is designed to frame the
interdisciplinary theoretical approaches within the changing landscape of
information access and capacity to communicate effectively to public as well
as disciplinary audiences. Barriers between home and field, “informant” and
co-investigator/collaborator, expert and member-of-culture expertise are
breaking down rapidly – providing new challenges and opportunities.
Class discussion will constitute 10% of your mark. This is not a
correspondence course and learning is not a passive process. You are unlikely
to do well on any of the assignments if you do not attend class regularly and
participate actively. Students are responsible for anything said in class, not
factual details but theorists, their works, concepts, and lines of argument. You
are expected to learn from your fellow students as well as from the instructor.
The final exam will explore issues of critical theory in anthropology and
related disciplines (based on reading and discussion of the text (Fischer) plus
second term class materials, including your classmates’ presentations). It will
include both short answer/identification and essay questions. There will not
be trick questions. Students who have attended class regularly, done the
readings, and followed the discussions, will be able to identify and compare
the theorists, concepts and major works.
This course is intended as the culmination of the Honours Anthropology
degree at Western. It is not supposed to be easy but I hope it will be fun. It is
designed to pull together things you have learned over the years of your
education and to increase your confidence in your own control over the
substance and significance of anthropology as a discipline. Professional
socialization is integral to continuing study beyond the undergraduate level.
For those of you who move directly to employment or switch disciplines, this
is your chance to try out the role of social science critical scholar. Our society
desperately needs an informed intelligentsia, both inside and outside the
academy. This is the goal of your education and of my teaching. Its value is
not restricted to those who aspire to become academic anthropologists.
Those who do, however, will be well-prepared to perform as scholars with
theoretical breadth and anthropological sophistication.
The emphasis is on socio-cultural anthropology but the issues and methods
raised by the ethnographers and theorists we are reading can be applied
easily to problems of archaeology and biological anthropology. The emphasis
will be placed on qualitative methodologies essential to the experience of
doing fieldwork, regardless of the formal methods employed to organize the
materials gathered. What literary critic Kenneth Burke called “the
representative anecdote” is often the most effective way to understand
another culture and to convey that understanding to a broader audience.
SCHEDULE OF TOPICS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
10 September
Introduction: Theorizing Ethnography
17 September
Evans-Pritchard
24 September
Evans-Pritchard
1 October
Leach
8 October
THANKSGIVING
15 October
Leach
22 October
Desjarlais
FIRST PAPER DUE IN CLASS – 10%
29 October
Desjarlais
5 November
Daniel
12 November
Daniel
19 November
Cruikshank
SECOND PAPER DUE IN CLASS – 10%
STUDENTS CHOOSE INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAMS
26 November
Cruikshank
5 December
West (a short book, one week should suffice)
7 January
From Theory to Ethnography
THIRD PAPER DUE IN CLASS – 10%
14 January
Sociological Approaches (Pierre Bourdieu, Louis
Althusser, Raymond Williams)
21 January
Literary Criticism (Roland Barthes, Paul Ricoeur,
Walter Benjamin, Mikhail Bakhtin)
28 January
Linguistic Approaches (C.S. Peirce, John Searle,
Ludwig Wittgenstein)
4 February
Historical Approaches (Hayden White, Frederick
Jameson, Marshall Sahlins, Louis Dumont)
11 February
Philosophical Approaches: Deconstruction (Michel
Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Francois Lyotard)
18 February
READING WEEK
25 February
Philosophical Approaches: Radical Deconstruction
(Gilles Deleuze, Jean Beaudrillard)
4 March
The Frankfort School (Hannah Arendt, Antonio
Gramsci, Theodore Adorno, Jurgen
Habermas, Herbert Marcuse)
11 March
Activist Approaches (Stuart Hall, Edward Said, Gayatri
Spivak, Paulo Friere, Vine Deloria)
18 March
Feminist Approaches (Julia Kristeva, Judith Butler,
Donna Haraway, Simone de Beauvoir)
25 March
Evolutionary Biology (Stephen Jay Gould, Richard
Dawkins, Stephen Pinker)
1 April
Complexity and Chaos Theories (Isabelle Stengers, Ilya
Prigogine, Richard Lewin, James Gleick)
7 April
The Anthropological Metanarrative?
FINAL PAPER DUE IN CLASS – 30%
(one week extension for March 25 and April 1 teams)
(paper mark includes team work & oral presentation)
FINAL EXAM AS SCHEDULED BY THE UNIVERSITY – 30%
NB: 10% class attendance and participation, including team preparation.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS:
Late papers will be marked down by 2% each day or 10% per week for two
weeks. Papers will not be accepted thereafter. All exceptions require
documentation of accommodation confirmed by the Dean’s Office.
Extended absences (including failure to participate in team preparation and
presentation) and late essays or assignments require documentation. Please
consult the Policy on Accommodation for Medical Illness:
(http://studentservices.uwo.ca/secure/index.cfm). Request for medical or
non-medical accommodation should be directed to the appropriate Faculty
Dean’s office and not to the instructor.
No electronic devices will be permitted during the final exam. Laptop
computers may be used in class for purposes of taking class notes or relevant
information retrieval only. Cell phones should be turned off.
Academic offenses are taken seriously and students are responsible for
reading and understanding the definition of scholastic offenses:
http://www.uwo.ca/univsec/handbook/appeals/scholastic_discipline_underg
rad.pdf)
All required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review
to the commercial plagiarism detection software under license to the
University for the detection of plagiarism. All papers submitted for such
checking will be included as source documents in the reference database for
the purpose of detecting plagiarism of papers subsequently submitted to the
system. Use of the service is subject to the licensing agreement, currently
between the University of Western Ontario and Turn-it-in.com
(http://www.turnitin.com).
Student support services and student development services can be found at
http://www4.registrar.uwo.ca.