DOCSLIB.ORG

Gende*-Bending Anth*Opological

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gende*-Bending Anth*Opological !"#$"%&'"#$(#)*+#,-%./.0.)(120*3,4$("5*.6*7$412,(.# +4,-.%859:*+;<*3,2;=21- 3.4%1":*+#,-%./.0.)<*>*7$412,(.#*?42%,"%0<@*A.0B*CD@*E.B*F*8G"1B@*HIII9@*//B*FFH&FFJ K4=0(5-"$*=<:*'021LM"00*K4=0(5-(#)*.#*="-206*.6*,-"*+;"%(12#*+#,-%./.0.)(120*+55.1(2,(.# 3,2=0"*NOP:*http://www.jstor.org/stable/3196139 +11"55"$:*HQRDQRQDDI*DD:FD Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Blackwell Publishing and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Anthropology & Education Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org Gender-Bending Anthropological Studies of Education AMY STAMBACH Universityof Wisconsinat Madison Anthropologicalstudies of gender have shifted focus in the past four decades. The study of gender, anthropologists have come to realize, goes beyond analysis of women, sex roles, and sexuality. We used to look at exotic kinship and marriagemodels, in which women served as objectsof exchange (L vi-Strauss1969), and we used to talk about uni- versal sexual asymmetry as though it were a basis of social structure (Leach1977). But the focus today has shifted to examine the ethnohistor- ical roots of gender ideologies and the historical and materialcircum- stancesthat shape genderrelations in marketsand families(di Leonardo 1991;Ortner 1996). Indeed, many researchersnow focus on gender as metaphor,arguing that gender reflectsother aspects of culture:general values, relationshipsof power and authority,the creation and mainte- nance of group boundaries and identities (Lutkehaus1995; Strathem 1987). We who study education have been somewhat slow in making this analytic shift. Yes, our anthropologypredecessors took gender into ac- count, but even MargaretMead and EleanorBurke Leacockargue that gender is about more than male and female social roles. Like others in FranzBoas's circle, Mead (1928)urges anthropologiststo counterwidely held assumptions aboutmale dominanceand female subservience.And Leacock(1978) argues that gender is not simply what men and women do or what boys and girls differentlyachieve in school; rather,it is a ve- hicle throughwhich people talk aboutwider formsof inequality.Several contemporarystudies frame "gender"in broad terms of social inequali- ties (see, for example, Holland and Eisenhart1990; Levinson 1998;Lut- trell 1997).But much of the currentresearch in educationaljournals and conferencestends to focus on girls' voices, women's teaching,and patri- archalauthority, themes that typicallyreproduce North Americanread- ers' cultural views about gender and education and present gender in socially static and sex-specificways.1 The problem with defining gender in terms of sex roles and sexuality is that doing so perpetuatesWestern cultural assumptions about teach- ing, parenting,and the private-publicdichotomy. Studies that examine gendered divisions of labor often cast the home as a private space, the school as public, and women and men as normativelyinvolved in either one or the other.Sex roles and sexualitymight very well be importantin Anthropology& Education Quarterly 30(4):441-445. Copyright ? 1999,American Anthropological Association. 441 442 Anthropology& EducationQuarterly Volume 30, 1999 some of our ethnographicstudies, but focusing on them runs the risk of freezing women in particularlife stages and of overlooking how boys and men are defined as age-gradedand gendered persons. Countering this literaturewith specifically"masculine-oriented" research, as is the currentturn in some areas of gender studies, reinforcesthe notions that sex is naturally dimorphic and that gender correspondswith biology, two presumptionsthat are crediblychallenged by recentanthropologi- cal researchon intersexuality(see Herdt 1994). What has happened?Are we suffering from academicamnesia? Are we forgettingthat anthropologistswho wrote about gender and educa- tion in the 1970s-and earlier-were themselves wary of conceptualiz- ing gender narrowly as "whatmen and women do"? Are we forgetting that feminist anthropologistssince the 1970shave worked hard to illus- trate how gender stands for inequalities throughout society as a whole-even for economic delocalization, as when we speak of the feminizationof poverty?Perhaps we are. But our own parochialismhas also driven us into an old-fashionedparadigm. Our narrow focus on the school has returned us to think basically of gender as what girls and boys, men and women, do. "Sexrole selection"is often the way U.S. edu- catorsand students thinkabout gender, but it may not be the best way to approachour subjectanthropologically. As a framework,sex role selec- tion may be appropriatefor sociological gender studies. I am thinking here of work that has been done on the differentialacademic opportuni- ties and outcomes for girls and boys (see Grantet al. 1994).But for an an- thropology that seeks to understandhow gender is intertwinedwith all aspects of social life, it is possibly too narrow. As BarrieThorne (1993) notes, the fact that schooling structuressocial life along sex dimorphic lines is a phenomenon for us to explain, not a startingpoint for anthro- pological research. In a 1984 special issue of Anthropologyand EducationQuarterly, the in- spirationfor this currentissue, GeorgeD. Spindlernotes thatthe focus of "currenteducational anthropology has been so exclusively on the class- room, or at least on the school, thatthe culturalcontextualization, as well as the immediate community contextualization,is not developed in most published works"(1984:7). His point might be extended to anthro- pological writing on gender/education in the interveningyears, though it need not speak for all of it, nor for all of what is to come. It is not too late to carry Spindler'spoint even furtherinto gender/education stud- ies. Doing so would connectour works to anthropologists'work in other cornersof our field. In light of changes going on aroundus, it seems timely and excitingto contemplatehow we might link gender and education to more general values embedded in social organization.We might, for instance, con- sider how the teacher-studentrelationship reflects gendered relationsof authority, discipline, and knowledge that operate in other social do- mains-the neighborhood,government, and home, for example. What Stambach Gender-BendingStudies 443 are the workings of power at local, state,and nationallevels, and how do they link to gender inequalitiesin schools?What are the competing gen- der arrangementsin North American families, and how do they inter- twine with conceptualizationsof students' roles?Answers requirelook- ing at social life beyond the classroom. They may even involve consideringthat culturaltendencies to emphasize gender differencesin schools conceal other inequalities;material inequalities between social groups may be hidden by a culturalemphasis on inequalitybetween the sexes. We might also ask how the past 30 years of strugglefor gender equity in U.S. educationreveals changing culturalideas about personhood and identity-a theme that moves us out of classroom ethnography yet keeps us firmly rooted in issues of education.Why, for instance,has the subjectof sexual orientationrecently eclipsed questions of educational equity? Why are campuses and the media churningwith LGBTQissues but comparatively quiet on education and affirmative action for women?2Answers, I suspect, have to do with demographicshifts and with the representationof women in higher education,yet they also re- flect culturaltendencies to identify genderedpersons in termsof sexual- ity and to think about sexuality in terms of power. This could be ex- plored in connectionwith universitycampus culture. Finally, we might extend gender and education to the international scene and ask, How does gender provide a category by which we de- fine-and defend-international human rights?How does the law pro- tect women's rights,and how are universalgender rights understood lo- cally? How do schools contribute to these understandings?Looking abroadwould furtherthe comparativeapproach that Mead and Leacock so effectivelydeveloped. Genderdoes not go away with these questions, but neither does it stop with what men and women do. All of this is anotherway of saying that anthropologistsof education are well poised at the excitingcrossroads of genderand educationtoday. We are in positions to look at the ways gender links to conceptualiza- tions of the educated citizen, the formationof human rights, and local discourses of power
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Before and After Gender Hau Books
    BEFORE AND AFTER GENDER Hau BOOKS Executive Editor Giovanni da Col Managing Editor Sean M. Dowdy Editorial Board Anne-Christine Taylor Carlos Fausto Danilyn Rutherford Ilana Gershon Jason Throop Joel Robbins Jonathan Parry Michael Lempert Stephan Palmié www.haubooks.com BEFORE AND AFTER GENDER SEXUAL MYthOLOGIES OF EVERYdaY LifE Marilyn Strathern Edited with an Introduction by Sarah Franklin Afterword by Judith Butler Hau Books Chicago © 2016 Hau Books and Marilyn Strathern Cover and layout design: Sheehan Moore Cover photo printed with permission from the Barbara Hepsworth Estate and The Art Institute of Chicago: Barbara Hepworth, English, 1903-1975, Two Figures (Menhirs), © 1954/55, Teak and paint, 144.8 x 61 x 44.4 cm (57 x 24 x 17 1/2 in.), Bequest of Solomon B. Smith, 1986.1278 Typesetting: Prepress Plus (www.prepressplus.in) ISBN: 978-0-9861325-3-7 LCCN: 2016902723 Hau Books Chicago Distribution Center 11030 S. Langley Chicago, IL 60628 www.haubooks.com Hau Books is marketed and distributed by The University of Chicago Press. www.press.uchicago.edu Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper. Distributed Open Access under a Creative Commons License (CC-BY ND-NC 4.0) The Priest Sylvester, in Russia in the sixteenth century, writes to his son: The husband ought to teach his wife with love and sensible punishment. The wife should ask her husband about all matters of decorum; how to save her soul; how to please the husband and God; how to keep the house in good order. And to obey him in every- thing.
    [Show full text]
  • Out of Context: the Persuasive Fictions of Anthropology [And Comments and Reply] Author(S): Marilyn Strathern, M
    Out of Context: The Persuasive Fictions of Anthropology [and Comments and Reply] Author(s): Marilyn Strathern, M. R. Crick, Richard Fardon, Elvin Hatch, I. C. Jarvie, Rix Pinxten, Paul Rabinow, Elizabeth Tonkin, Stephen A. Tyler and George E. Marcus Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 28, No. 3 (Jun., 1987), pp. 251-281 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2743236 Accessed: 16-03-2017 13:41 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, The University of Chicago Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology This content downloaded from 164.41.102.240 on Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:41:13 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Volume 28, Number 3, June I987 ? I987 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. All rights reserved OOII-3204/87/2803-0002$2.5O This is the confession of someone brought up to view Sir James Frazer in a particular way who has discovered that Out of Context the context for that view has shifted.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Anthropology'?
    Anthropology? What ‘Anthropology’? written by Mateusz Laszczkowski January 24, 2019 In September 2018, Jarosław Gowin, Poland’s Minister of Science and Higher 1 of 8 Education, abolished anthropology as an academic discipline by an executive decree. The much-protested new law on higher education entered into force on 1 October 2018. Amid mounting outcry, this post attempts to outline the significance of this decision, identify its practical consequences and situate it against a background of our discipline’s more general crisis. In a famous scene from the 1980s Polish comedy film Miś (‘Teddy Bear’) a man walks into a post office to make a long distance phone call. ‘London?’ the jaded clerk behind the counter replies. Checking the thick register she responds, ‘There’s no such place called “London”. There’s only Lądek, Lądek Zdrój.’ To a Polish ear, Lądek, pronounced ‘Londek’, is phonetically similar to ‘London’. The man patiently explains that he means ‘London, a city in England’, to which the clerk angrily exclaims: ‘Why didn’t you say it’s abroad?! Gotta look it up!’ The scene ridicules the ignorance and parochialism of Polish public institutions in the declining years of ‘real socialism’. But with Minister Jarosław Gowin’s recently introduced academic reform, foreign anthropologists seeking collaboration with their peers in Poland may soon expect to be confronted with a similar response: ‘Anthropology? What anthropology? There’s no such discipline.’ October 1 is the inauguration of the new academic year in Poland. It was on that day that the new law on Higher Education and Science entered into force.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinship and the New Genetic Technologies: an Assessment of Existing Anthropological Research
    Kinship and the New Genetic Technologies: An Assessment of Existing Anthropological Research A Report compiled for the Commission of the European Communities Medical Research Division (DG-XII) Human Genome Analysis Programme Ethical, Social and Legal Aspects of Human Genome Analysis No. P L 91 01 041 Marilyn Strathern, PhD, FBA Sarah Franklin, PhD Project Director Research Coordinator Department of Social Anthropology University of Manchester Manchester M13 9PL England KINSHIP AND THE NEW GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES: AN ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING ANTHROPOLOGICAL RESEARCH 1.1 While genetic sciences and technology have developed rapidly in recent years, investigation of the social, ethical and legal dimensions of these developments have been less vigorously pursued. Considerable public concern now surrounds the subject of human genome research, resulting in the recommendation that such studies be undertaken as part of the European Human Genome Analysis Programme (hereafter HGAP). 1.2 The study described here was concerned with identifying one area of the social aspects of human genome analysis: the place where knowledge about the transmission of characteristics interacts with definitions of the constitution of ties between persons. Anthropologists demarcate the area as kinship. This is distinct from family, which within anthropology would be considered a particular type of kinship formation. Apart from the particularity of their formation, kinship ties form a domain of their own, concerning relationships formed through procreation (involving shared bodily substance, known as consanguinity) or marriage (known as affinity). 1.3 In modem European society, knowledge about transmission of characteristics is taken to be knowledge about the natural facts of life (biology), so that kin relations are seen as based in natural processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnomusicology Or Transcultural Musicology?
    EDITED BY FRANCESCO GIANNATTASIO GIOVANNI GIURIATI Perspectives on a 21st Century Comparative Musicology: Ethnomusicology or Transcultural Musicology? stems from the ‘International Seminars in Ethnomusicology’ that F. Giannattasio conceived within the activities of the Intercultural Institute for Comparative Music Studies of the Fondazione Giorgio Cini, devoted st to a wide reflection on aims, methods and objects of study of PERSPECTIVES ON A 21 CENTURY ethnomusicology in the light of the profound changes occurring in COMPARATIVE MUSICOLOGY: this field at the beginning of the 21st Century. It concerns a radical rethinking - at a theoretical and epistemological level - of the history of the discipline, due to the contemporary profound transformation ETHNOMUSICOLOGY OR of the object of study. The volume has the ambition of offering new (EDS) GIURIATI GIOVANNI FRANCESCO GIANNATTASIO views on what a comparative musicology could do in its enquiry into TRANSCULTURAL MUSICOLOGY? contemporary music making processes. Scholars coming from different parts of the world, and from different fields of study such as W. Welsch, L.-Ch. Koch, T. Rice, S. Feld, J. Guilbault, J-L. Amselle, contributed to the volume presenting theoretical approaches as an implicit or explicit reaction to the CENTURY theoretical issues presented by Giannattasio. Together with them, st some Italian scholars (G. Giuriati, C. Rizzoni, G. Vacca, R. Di Mauro, M. Agamennone, F. Gervasi) present their thoughts drawn from research in two contexts identified as case studies: the area of BOOK IM05 Naples and its surroundings, and the Salento. MUSICOLOGY: COMPARATIVE ETHNOMUSICOLOGY OR PERSPECTIVES ON A 21 PERSPECTIVES MUSICALI ioni ez TRANSCULTURAL MUSICOLOGY? rs inte 30,00 € BOOK IM 05 Intersezioni Musicali BOOK IM05 Series editor: Giovanni Giuriati Editorial board: Francesco Giannattasio, Maurizio Agamennone, Vito Di Bernardi, Serena Facci Editing: Claudio Rizzoni Translation: Ruggero Bianchin (chapter 10), David Kerr (chapters 12-15), David J.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinship in the Pacific As Knowledge That Counts ♦L♦
    Introduction Kinship in the Pacific as Knowledge that Counts ♦l♦ Christina Toren and Simonne Pauwels his book has its starting point in Unaisi Nabobo- Baba’s observation that, for the various peoples of the Pacific, kinship is generally understood to Tcome under the heading of ‘knowledge that counts’ (Nabobo- Baba 2006). Needless to say this is also the case for the analyst, from whose perspective kinship is at once a heuristic domain and a material, historically structured reality that is lived by the people whose ideas and practices are the object of analysis. The book’s objective is straightforward: to provide case studies of contemporary Pacific kinship, and in so doing arrive at an understand- ing of what is currently happening to kinship in an area where deep histori- cal links provide for close and useful comparison. The ethnographic focus is on Fiji, Tonga and Samoa, with the addition of three instructive cases from Tokelau, Papua New Guinea and Taiwan. There is no question but that kinship remains central to the anthropo- logical project.1 Indeed, the editors would argue that an understanding of kinship is always essential wherever anthropologists are working – whether it be ‘down the road’ in their own native places or somewhere far away from the land where they were themselves ‘born and bred’.2 If there was ever any doubt about this, it has certainly been laid to rest by the work of Eduardo Viveiros de Castro (2009) and others for Amazonia – Peter Gow (1989, 2000, 2001), Cecilia McCallum (2001), Vanessa Lea (1995, 2001, 2002), Laura Rival (1998, 2001), Fernando Santos-Granero (2007), Anne 2 Christina Toren and Simonne Pauwels ♦ Christine Taylor (2000), Aparecida Vilaça (2002, 2005) – and of numerous Pacific specialists, especially Mac Marshall (1981), Marshall and Cougghey (1989), Marilyn Strathern (1985, 1988), Jadran Mimica (1991) and, more recently, Rupert Stasch (2003), James Leach (2003), Sandra Bamford (2004) and Bamford and Leach (2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Strathern’S Redescription of Anthropology
    Introduction Strathern’s Redescription of Anthropology Ashley Lebner E In 2007 a seminar was held at the Centre for Research in the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences to discuss Marilyn Strathern’s Huxley Memorial Lecture ‘A Community of Critics’ (2006), with the author there to answer questions. At one point, it was asked whether or not she was arguing that individual academic disciplines generate better critical debate than interdisciplinary work.1 Strathern smiled, raised her eyebrows slightly and pulled subtly at the audience with her hands. ‘I am trying to draw people into the conversation’, she said. Although the remark may have seemed offhand or even evasive, Strathern was in fact directing the audience to the centre of her text and her anthropology more generally: ‘Critics find themselves drawn – precisely by their own interest – into other people’s agendas . To argue with an idea is to be captured by it. In this kind of engagement, one can be captured more than once. This is where I see hope for interdisciplinary endeavour’ (2006, 203 emphasis added). Thus Strathern was not so much discounting the value of interdisciplinarity as noting that the terms of any field or debate are learned through repeat encounters. What cultivates creative scholarly criticism, she states, whether within or between disciplines, is to be able to engage and re-engage ideas as well as ‘to re-multiply, re-divide, the outcomes of any one particular argument’ (Strathern 2006, 199). It is fitting to begin this volume with an image of scholars being drawn in, re-engaged, remultiplied and redivided.
    [Show full text]
  • Feminist Reflections on the Anthropology of Women in Pacific Island Societies
    PARADIGMS OF POWER: FEMINIST REFLECTIONS ON THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF WOMEN IN PACIFIC ISLAND SOCIETIES by Sharon W. Tiffany University of Wisconsin-Whiteiwater Working Paper #79 January 1985 Abstract: This article addresses the epistemological problem in anthropology of woman as Other--the subordinate, the muted, the peripheral-­ with particular reference to the ethnographic literature on Oceania. The ideas and images that form the value-loaded premise of woman as Other reflect oigoing controversies about power, sex, and gender i. the West-­ controversies that influence the discipline o; anthropology in ways that feminists have yet to consider systematicaily. My purpose is to examine, from a feminist perspective, the paradigmatic problems of gender and politics in anthropology and tc illustrate these problems with selected works tnat have influenccd anthropological theory and Pacific ethnography. This discussion will help provide feminists in other disciplines with backgro,.nd necessary for understanding the diverse contexts of gender relations across cultures and for assessing the epistemological problems confronting current anthropological r2search and discourse about women. About the Author: Sharon W. Tiffany, Professor of Anthropology ond Women's Stud-es at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, has written extensively on Pacific Island anthropology and feminist studies. Her books include Women, Work, and Motherhood (Prentice-Hali, i982). She is co-editor (with Denise O'rien o R inng Women's Roles: Perspectives from the Pacific (University
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropology in Cyberland: Exploring Virtual Teaching Formats Ann H. Kelly1
    A. H. Kelly Inspiring Academic Practice Anthropology in Cyberland: exploring virtual teaching formats Ann H. Kelly1 Anthropology, College of Social Sciences and International Studies, University of Exeter (Received 2014) Abstract This paper explores the use of multimedia technologies in the creation of effective learning environments for Anthropology. With particular reference to the ‘Anthropology of Africa’, a new module designed and first taught in the spring of 2012, I critically reflect on the possibilities and challenges of implementing a web- based forum. Of particular concern is how to enthuse students for the subject material by encouraging a sense of responsibility for learning, while also cultivating an appreciation of anthropology’s core methodologies. To conclude I consider how engaging with the pedagogic development of this course supports my professional development in anthropology, my role in the educational context of Exeter and in UK Higher Education more broadly. Keywords: e-learning; multimedia; anthropology Introduction In a recent essay entitled, the ‘The End of Anthropology, Again: On the Future of an In/Discipline’, John Comaroff, a prominent Africanist, suggests that Anthropology’s epistemological unease ensures its continued existence. Rather than the discipline’s demise, the cyclic rejection and revision of empirical foundations, theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches is a source of ‘animation and emancipation. To the degree that ours is a critical practice, then…it will always be imbricated in crisis. Perhaps intermittent iterations of the End of Anthropology do not portend oblivion so much as prevent it’ (2010: 525). Having survived the onslaught of postcolonialism, Marxism, deconstruction, feminism, queer theory, post-structuralism and post-humanism, anthropology exemplifies the resilience of grounded theory; it is a discipline, Comaroff argues, not circumscribed by particular topics or methodological operations, but propelled by the dialectical relationship between its critical concepts and the concrete world.
    [Show full text]
  • Cutting the Network Author(S): Marilyn Strathern Source: the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol
    Cutting the Network Author(s): Marilyn Strathern Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Sep., 1996), pp. 517- 535 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3034901 . Accessed: 13/08/2013 14:59 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 169.229.32.136 on Tue, 13 Aug 2013 14:59:47 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions CUTTING THE NETWORK MARILYNSTRATHERN Universityof Cambridge New technologieshave stimulatedthe rehearsalof old debatesabout what is new and what is old in descriptionsof social life. This articleconsiders some of the currentuses to which the conceptsof 'hybrids'and 'networks'are being put. It could be seen as followingLatour's call for a symmetricalanthropology that gatherstogether modern and nonmodernforms of knowledge. In the process,the articlereflects on the power of analyticalnarratives to extend endlessly,and on the interestingplace that property ownership holds in a worldthat sometimes appears limitless.
    [Show full text]
  • Between Bio-Genetic and Kinship Rarefaction Scenarios
    New Family Relationships: between Bio-genetic and Kinship Rarefaction Scenarios SIMONETTA GRILLI AND ROSA PARISI* Abstract Since the ‘90s, there has been a renewal of interest on kinship studies pro- duced by emerging topics within research into gender, personhood and particularly, the construction of kin relationships through Assisted Repro- ductive Technologies. The deconstruction of kinship as “a natural fact” has definitely questioned and challenged the genealogical dimension of kinship, which was traditionally based on the link between heterosexuality and pro- creation. The first part of this paper briefly reconstructs the new theories toward Euro-American kinship perceptions in anthropology. The focus is on the changes resulting from new assisted reproduction techniques, low fertility in relation to changes in genealogical space; and finally, issues relat- ing to biopolitics. In the second part, starting from the ethnographic work that proponents have been conducting for years on homo-parental (same sex) families in Italy, the paper explores the way in which “new forms of family” are currently creating new textures of social cohesion and “related- ness”. The reflections of this paper focus on one hand, the different forms of procreative constructions and parenthood/intentional parenthood, and on the other, the production of “multiple genealogies”, new forms of related- ness and a new lexicon of relationships. Keywords: Kinship, Genealogical Space, Homoparental Filiation, Lexicon of Relationships, Italy Introduction “Kinship is dead. Long live kinship”, wrote James D. Faubion in 19961. This * [email protected]; [email protected] 1 We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for the precious suggestions. Many thanks to Rainbow Families Associations, to Agedo Association and to all participants in our ethnographic research.
    [Show full text]
  • Artifacts of History Events and the Interpretation of Images
    |Appendix I| Artifacts of history Events and the interpretation of images Marilyn STRATHERN University of Cambridge It has been something of a surprise for Europeans to realize that their advent in the Pacific was something less than a surprise. A number of accounts give the sense that their coming had been expected; that they were previously known beings “returned” or manifest in new form. Such ideas certainly fueled the millenarianism of cargo cults in Papua New Guinea. A further return was indicated in the future. So the one event encapsulated both past and future; indeed the two were conflated in so far as the second coming would bring not the gen- erations unborn but generations already deceased, in the form of ancestors. Or if not the ancestors themselves, than their “cargo.” What triggered this recovery of the past in the future was the actual advent itself: the appearance of Europeans, and the stories that circulated about them. In this chapter, I argue that at least as far as much of Melanesia is concerned, and especially Papua New Guinea, Europeans initially presented a particular kind of image. Images that contain within them both past and future time do not have to be placed into a historical context, for they embody history themselves. It follows that people do not therefore have to explain such images by reference to events outside them: the images contain events. And here Publisher’s note: We are very grateful to the Finnish Anthropological Society for giving us the permission to publish this reprint of Strathern, Marilyn. 1990.
    [Show full text]