WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 3 | 4 || 6 |

«Planet M : The intense abstraction of Marilyn Strathern Martin Holbraad and Morten Axel Pedersen Anthropological Theory 2009 9: 371 DOI: ...»

-- [ Page 5 ] --

As explained earlier, the logic of intense abstraction refers to how things-cum-scales transform themselves in specific ways. As we depict in Figure 2, the ‘ethnographic moment’ can be said to constitute just one such abstensive transformation, namely a selfscaling of the ethnographic fieldwork observation or, more accurately perhaps, fieldwork encounter. This is what the holistic method (or its lack) implies: the fact that the wouldbe ethnographer vaguely senses that unknown future connections could one day appear transforms her ‘field of information’ from being a historical artefact confined to a certain point in time (when the fieldwork took place) to a trans-temporal scale of comparison (from which analogies may be drawn at any given time). In that sense, the ethnographic moment is both more and less than the fieldwork encounter. As a postplural, abstract event, it simultaneously effectuates a ‘sharpening’ of the anthropologist’s field of information (on account of drawing on what is only an insignificant amount of her data), and a ‘widening’ of the fieldwork material at hand by making its ‘less evident’ aspects visible.

Now, if trans-temporal comparison involves an act of intensification in which some ‘thing’ (the fieldwork observation) is ‘scaled’ into a different version of itself (the ethnographic moment), we may also ask: Which scale is being ‘thinged’ in the same process? We suggest: time itself. One radical implication of Strathern’s analytics is that it undermines the transcendent – or even, in Kantian terms, transcendental – status of time in Western knowledge traditions. As noted, ‘time’ is not different from ‘flutes’ in

–  –  –

its capacity to act as a conduit for comparison: both can act as postplural scales that allow for specific kinds of relational transformations. So, on the abstensive logic of trans-temporal comparison, time is reduced to just one of many (in fact, countless) possible scales for the elicitation of analogies between actual and virtual forms, and, more generally, for man’s perception and conceptualization of the world and his place in it (one could imagine an alternative universe where apples and pears are invested with the same a priori nature as time and space in Western epistemology). Thus the medium of time is brought down from its Kantian pedestal. If the ethnographic moment is a certain scaling of a ‘thing-like’ observation, then it is also a certain thinging of (otherwise ‘scale-like’) time.8 Thus time in Strathern’s work assumes a rather different role than in other forms of anthropological analysis. If it makes sense to say that on Planet M the only time is ‘now’, then this is because of the ethnographic moment’s self-scaling capacity to extend itself to any event of the future (or indeed the past), along a transversal, trans-temporal vector with no end point, yet bursting with directional thrust. It is the inherent tendency for intensive interpretative proliferation in one’s fieldwork material that makes it so important to obey what seems to be a key lesson of Strathern’s trans-temporal approach: that of cutting away all the most evident relations in one’s ‘field of information’ to ensure that all one is left with are odd pairings of phenomena (‘uncommon denominators’), which would otherwise be separated by history. For the same reason, anthropological analysis requires unusual interpretative patience – the cultivation of a sort of ‘deep hesitation’, which enables the anthropologist to not make connections (start comparing) before the moment is right.

Deep hesitation This requirement for hesitation also expresses itself in Strathern’s peculiar way of writing, and the challenges this style presents to her readers – the second ‘remainder’ of our discussions in Part I about the role of comparison in her work. As we shall now show, Strathern’s notoriously difficult writing style can be seen as a reflection of the realization that the capacity to add to thoughts by narrowing them down is not an ability that the anthropologist is automatically imbued with. On the contrary, refraining from drawing the most obvious connections from one’s material requires constant abstract work.

Why is it so difficult to read Marilyn Strathern? Musing over this same question, Alfred Gell recalls how he ‘used to think it was her writing style, and that something could be done by dividing each sentence in half, then attaching the first half of each sentence to the preceding one, and the second half to the succeeding one, and in that way one could produce a series of sentences each of which was on the topic, rather than each being precariously suspended between two topics’ (1999: 30). Although Gell eventually ‘changed [his] mind’ and concluded that it is ‘not the manner in which [Strathern] writes, but the content of what she says, that is difficult to understand’ (p. 30), we believe that his original and only half-serious comment about Strathern’s writing style was, in fact, onto something important. There really is a sense in which Strathern’s sentences are ‘precariously suspended’ between two poles: surely we are not alone in often having to pause after finishing one of her sentences, unsure about whether we can move on to the next.

387

–  –  –





Does this reflect a deliberate strategy? Certainly, Strathern is deeply reflexive about her own and others’ writings, even if she considers the ‘literary turn’ associated with the crisis of representation to be an impoverished alternative to the obsolete conventions of modernist anthropology (2004: 7–16; see also Reed, 2004: 19). In the foreword to the updated edition of Partial Connections, she explains how it was composed with the intention that ‘every section is a cut, a lacuna: one can see similar themes on either side, but they are not added to one another’ (2004: xxvii). Note the characteristic sense of ‘cutting’ here, which is used not in the sense of reducing complexity (its conventional, ‘plural’

sense of making a generalization), but as a particular conduit for (scale of ) complexity:

Partial Connections was an attempt to act out, or deliberately fabricate, a non-linear progression of argumentative points as the basis for description... Rather than inadvertent or unforeseen – and thus tragic or pitiable – partitionings that conjured loss of a whole, I wanted to experiment with the apportioning of ‘size’ in a deliberate manner. The strategy was to stop the flow of information or argument, and thus ‘cut’ it. (p. xxix) While denoting a particular experiment, this rare self-description might be extended to Strathern’s entire oeuvre. Indeed, one may speak of a distinct aesthetic form – which might be called creative cutting – that is replicated, fractally so to speak, at every scale of her work, ranging from the partial connections between her books to a certain irreducible friction between her sentences, if not between her words.9 This might explain Strathern’s tendency to reason indirectly for using what sometimes comes across as unnecessarily cumbersome syntax. If her style accords to the criteria of a postplural aesthetic that dictates that self-similar ‘cuttings’ must recur across all dimensions of text, she could perhaps be said to be always writing the same sentence twice (Riles, 1998). Is there a sense to which invisible ‘remainders’ are always present within or between her sentences, like propositional shadows whose ghostly clauses are themselves not quite replications of their visible doubles?

Recalling the lacuna-inducing strategy that informed the composition of Partial Connections (‘one can see similar themes on either side, but they are not added to one another’), and inspired by Adorno’s metaphor of the colon as the green light in the traffic of language (cited in Agamben, 1999: 223), we may say that, on Planet M, there are only orange traffic lights, the latter image indicating the doggedly persistent, obviously deliberate and sometimes unpleasant hesitation that Strathern’s writings provoke in readers like Gell and, indeed, the two of us.10 Between Strathern’s sentences, a gap must be crossed that is much wider than in the pleasant breathing space produced by a conventional full stop (let alone the impatient thrust of the colon); indeed, it is here, in the intensive passage created by cutting all the most obvious implications of the previous proposition away, that Strathern’s abstensive thinking most clearly shows in her manner of writing.11 CONCLUSION This article has explored what the ‘crisis of representation’ debate in anthropology might have looked like had it had not remained trapped within a pluralist metaphysics, but had instead unfolded according to the postplural alternative developed by Marilyn 388

–  –  –

Strathern. To fully understand the radical character of Strathern’s anthropological project, as well as the subversive (if not downright disturbing) analytical and rhetorical forms this entails, we may return to the contrast between Strathern’s work and the ‘crisis of representation’ literature, with which this article began.

One could understand the ‘crisis’ of anthropology in the 1980s and 1990s as an attack on self-consciousness. Imagining earlier generations of anthropologists (and not least the British tradition of social anthropology) as having ignored in the name of positivistic objectivity the irreducible influence of their own personal, cultural, political (etc.) outlook on their research, the idea was to re-invent anthropology by making these influences explicit. After all, it was recognized, anthropology is itself a socio-cultural practice, and hence belongs to the same order of phenomena that it purports to study. What was called for, therefore, was an anthropology imbued with a double vision: one eye on the object of inquiry, the other on the inquirer. What made this move a ‘crisis of representation’ was that it had the potential to bring down the entire project of modern anthropology, understood as the endeavour to arrive at accurate representations of social and cultural phenomena which could provide the basis for theoretical generalizations: no more modernist naïveté, was the message. But for its detractors (not least in Britain), the real crisis resided in the reflexivist remedy itself. As with sundry forms of scepticism, the call to problematize the conditions of possibility of anthropological knowledge is subject to an apparently debilitating infinite regress. If these conditions of possibility are themselves to become part of the object of knowledge, then what are the conditions of possibility of that? Which is just a quite formal way of expressing the habitual quip against the reflexivist ‘turn’ in US anthropology since the 1980s: ‘navel gazing’.

One way of articulating the contrast between Strathern and the reflexivists is to point to the way she avoids this latter charge of navel gazing (that she avoids the first charge of naïve modernism is self-evident). The key difference relates to how Strathern decouples a pair of binary oppositions that the reflexivist argument conflates, namely the epistemic distinction between subject (as knower) and object (as known), and the identity distinction between self (or the ‘us’) and other (or the ‘them’). For the charge of infinite regress depends on confusing these two levels: on taking the call to examine the self as tantamount to examining the epistemic subject as such (and thus to raise epistemological concerns about the conditions of possibility of its knowledge). Strathern avoids this solipsistic trap. The self can certainly be the object of ethnographic scrutiny, also when this ‘self ’ is anthropological reasoning itself. However, in coming under scrutiny in this way the self must cease to be the epistemic or hermeneutic ‘subject’, which was the centre of the reflexivist turn. For if the ‘self ’ is to be scrutinized in the same way as all other things are scrutinized, then it cannot be scrutinized as a subject, since to scrutinize things is to treat them, precisely, as objects – the old philosophical chestnut.12 So, instead of the well-tried (and we would submit impossible) ‘inter-subjective’ method of reflexivity, where the purported subjectivity of the self is turned into an ever more transparent object for its own introspection, Strathern offers an ‘intra-objective’ alternative, where the ‘objectivity’ of the self is transformed onto less stable – and thus less transparent – intensifications of itself. Unwilling to partake in disciplinary autotherapy, Strathern’s analytics allows for the ethnographic self to be studied through a logic of sustained ‘extrospection’ (our term), which, to paraphrase from the final pages 389

–  –  –

of Partial Connections, works by letting ‘the centres of others become centres for [the self ]’ (2004: 117).13 These reflections about the eccentricity of the position from which Strathern conducts her comparisons takes us back to Planet M, and our introductory comments about the half-comical, half-serious intent of this metaphor. In a sense, our subsequent argument in the article has left this initial image in a somewhat battered state. After all, we have argued, Strathern’s ‘position’ (inasmuch as it makes sense to say that she takes one at all) hardly can be described as a specific place (not even a shadowy one in permanent, postCopernican eclipse). Rather, as we have sought to demonstrate, Strathern’s thinking amounts to a particular form of controlled movement, which we have tried to convey by introducing concepts like postplural comparison, the internal ‘removal’ of abstension, deep (trans-temporal) hesitation, and sustained extrospection. But perhaps, then, there is also a sense in which, as an ironic effect of the motility of our object of analysis, the planetary metaphor now comes back with a vengeance, full orbit. Only now Planet M does not so much refer to the vanishing point from which Strathern conducts her analysis, but rather to a position we have needed to occupy in order to carve a comparative scale out of her.

Notes 1 This article is the result of many hours, if not years, of sustained collaborative friction between the two authors. A shorter version has appeared in Cambridge Anthropology. We thank Morten Nielsen for insightful and challenging comments on an earlier version, as well as Anthropological Theory’s anonymous reviewer.



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 3 | 4 || 6 |


Similar works:

«Doctoral Thesis 博士論文 Data assimilation of satellite-borne lidar aerosol observations and its validation with Asian Dust (衛星搭載ライダーによるエアロゾル観測のデータ同化と黄砂による検証) Tsuyoshi Thomas Sekiyama 関山 剛 Department of Geophysics, Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University 東北大学大学院理学研究科 地球物理学専攻 論文審査委員 岩崎 俊樹 教授(主査) 青木 周司 教授 早坂 忠裕 教授...»

«Distribution Agreement In presenting this thesis or dissertation as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree from Emory University, I hereby grant to Emory University and its agents the non-exclusive license to archive, make accessible, and display my thesis or dissertation in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known, including display on the world wide web. I understand that I may select some access restrictions as part of the online submission of...»

«Teorías Feministas de la Tecnología: Evolución y principales debates. Núria Vergés Bosch Grupo COPOLIS. Departamento de Sociología y Análisis de las Organizaciones. Universitat de Barcelona. Sumario Las teorías feministas de la tecnología se constituyen como la expresión teórica de una serie de diversos y controvertidos movimientos sociales y políticos, filosofías y prácticas que tienen como común denominador la oposición y la voluntad de superar el sexismo y el androcentrismo...»

«ФІЗИКА ЯКІСНІ ЗАДАЧІ ЯК ЗАСІБ РОЗВИТКУ В УЧНІВ СПОСОБІВ ЕВРИСТИЧНОЇ ПІЗНАВАЛЬНОЇ ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ У ПРОЦЕСІ НАВЧАННЯ ФІЗИКИ Благодаренко Л.Ю., доктор пед. наук, професор, Національний педагогічний університет імені М.П.Драгоманова Лозова І.В., магістр, Національний...»

«HONORS PROGRAM COURSE GUIDE FALL 2015 UPDATED: August 17, 2015 HONORS ANALYTICAL READING & WRITING CITIES OF THE UNDERWORLD (ENGLISH 0902.02, CRN: 3568) 5 FRAGMENTED: THE NON LINEAR NARRATIVE (ENGLISH 0902.03, CRN: 3569) 5 ECHO LOCATION: PLACE & DISPLACEMENT IN LIT (ENGLISH 0902.04, CRN: 3570) 5 HONORS LIT/READING/WRITING (ENGLISH 0902.06, CRN: 5049) 6 ANCIENT IMAGINATIONS (ENGLISH 0902.07, CRN: 3572) 6 UNLIKE COMPANIONS (ENGLISH 0902.10, CRN: 3575) 6 AMERICAN GOTHIC (ENGLISH 0902.11, CRN:...»

«355| A Publication of the Defense Acquisition University http://www.dau.mil EMBRACING UNCERTAINTY IN DoD ACQUISITION 1SG David E. Frick, USA (Ret.) Uncertainty is an inherent, unavoidable aspect of life that has a significant impact on program or project management, and acquisition in general. The treatment of risk management within the Department of Defense (DoD) as a formal element of acquisition is a topic discussed extensively in the acquisition profession. DoD fares no better than industry...»

«Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López © 2005 by CIFOR All rights reserved. Published in 2005 Printed by SMK Grafika Desa Putera, Jakarta Design and layout by Eko Prianto and Gideon Suharyanto Cover drawing: detail of painted bark paper by Silvestre Adán from San Agustín Oapan, Guerrero,...»

«(1 of 115) Case: 16-16698, 11/04/2016, ID: 10186580, DktEntry: 70-1, Page 1 of 9 FILED FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 04 2016 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 16-16698 LESLIE FELDMAN; LUZ MAGALLANES; MERCEDEZ D.C. No. 2:16-cv-01065-DLR HYMES; JULIO MORERA; CLEO District of Arizona, OVALLE; PETERSON ZAH, Former Phoenix Chairman and First President of the Navajo Nation; THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE; DSCC, AKA Democratic Senatorial...»

«Diamondback Terrapin Paired Crab Trap Study in the Mission-Aransas Estuary, Texas Publication CBBEP – 92 Project Number – 1335 July 10, 2014 Prepared by Aaron S. Baxter, M.S., Principal Investigator Center for Coastal Studies Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Drive, Suite 3200 Corpus Christi, TX 78412 Submitted to: Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program 1305 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 205 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not...»

«UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA FACULTY OF ARTS THEATRE DEPARTMENT Milligan’s Accordion: The Distortion of Time and Space in The Goon Show Richard Cousins Thesis supervisor: Daniel Mroz, Ph.D. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts (M.A.) (Theatre Theory & Dramaturgy) -“ SEAGOON:.looking for the lost year has made me a weak old man. BLUEBOTTLE: Ohyou hear that, Eccles? ECCLES: What? BLUEBOTTLE: He's only a...»

«Maintaining the Integrity of the Public Library Building in the Digital Age Alexander J. Engle 1 2 Maintaining the Integrity of the Public Library Building in the Age of Digital Media A Design Thesis Submitted to the Department of Architecture and Landscape Architecture of North Dakota State University By Alexander J. Engle In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture Primary Thesis Advisor Thesis Committee Chair 3 4 Permission Rights NON-EXCLUSIVE...»

«FERMILAB-PUB-15-634-E Silicon timing response to particles and light. Anatoly Ronzhin*, Maria Spiropulu+ Fermilab*, Caltech+. Abstract It is observed growing interest to fast timing detectors in high energy physics, related, for example, with collider luminosity increase (LHC) [1]. The options of CMS [2] calorimeter upgrade based on silicon detectors renewed interest to the timing study of this type of detectors. The article is devoted to study of silicon timing response to particles and light....»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.