Crossroads is the name of a new blog by anthropologist Fadjar I. Thufail, currently completing his Ph.D. at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In an interview (from 2001), he tells us that Indonesian anthropologists continually attempt to link themselves to the non-academic world - and they succeed. When anthropologists in Indonesia are interviewed by newspapers, their comments are not squeezed into tiny sound bites, instead they are written up in long, detailed articles. Anthropologists often appear on television or on radio:

What makes anthropology as a discipline different than the discipline in the United States is that from the beginning, Indonesian anthropologists are supposed to be able to talk to the public and get involved in development practices.

The first anthropology department in Indonesia was established in 1957 and that was after the Indonesian independence when the people were eager to develop the country. Part of the institution of Indonesian anthropology is that the anthropologists were asked to contribute to development practices and that makes what in the U.S. called “applied anthropology” a part of Indonesian anthropology. There is no distinction like in the U.S.

He also explains the differences between "public anthropology" and "applied anthropology":

Public anthropology is supposed to involve in a critical position. It should be a reminder, no…not a reminder. It should involve engaging the public, but by criticizing projects or challenging the dominant paradigm.

To me, applied anthropology is not the same as public anthropology because they (applied anthropologists) do government development and journal writing etc. Applied anthropologists are just technicians or sponsors of the government and hence are not ‘public anthropologists’ because there is not a critical component to it.

In Indonesia, most of the anthropological scholars are engaged in such a critical function. (...) That is why lots of anthropologists in Indonesia are invited to various seminars, give public talks, probably invited to TV talk shows, or interviewed by newspaper journalists.

So, basically, in Indonesia, it’s not only the scholars who want to go public, but also the journalists. A connection exists between the community of scholars and the media. That I don’t see in the United States where academics are beyond the reach of the public.”

This has to do with the specific Indonesian context:

Most of the media think of themselves as opposed to the government. They have a function to criticize the government. Most of the scholars also think of themselves as critics. They [the scholar’s] use media to launch critiques of the government, especially the ‘New Order’ [Suharto’s regime - 1966-1998]. So that is why whatever scholars say, the media accepts it without saying ‘too difficult’ - nothing is ‘too difficult’ for the story…they feel this is something we must publish because we must criticize.”

Therefore, anthropology is much more involved in politics in Indonesia - that's why it's so relevant for people:

Anthropologists in the U.S. think of politics as separate from academics. To do academic work, one must be free of politics. I think this is a legacy of colonialism, of the Enlightenment or something.

(...)

In Indonesia, as I said earlier, Anthropologists from the beginning actively pursued involvement in public/political events. Some chose to be part of the government, some put themself against the government.

(...) I think that is the most important message I want to get across. Anthropology is political - I want to remind you that as an anthropologist you must talk about politics. You can’t talk about culture as separate from politics. In order to put yourself in a more public sphere, you must discuss politics. There are different ways to do this. One is by not talking about cultural systems anymore, or semiosis, but instead discussing politics. Then realize that anthropology has critical power.

>> read the whole interview

>> visit Fadjar I. Thufail's blog

SEE ALSO:

More and more anthropologists, but they're absent from public debates - "Engaging Anthropology" by Thomas Hylland Eriksen (1)

Why anthropology fails to arouse interest among the public - Engaging Anthropology (2)

Riots in France and silent anthropologists

"Anthropologists Should Participate in the Current Immigration Debate"

Bush, "war of terror" and the erosion of free academic speech: Challenges for anthropology

Anthropology of Food is one of the few anthropological Open Access Journals. In their new edition, we'll find five articles on food and religion in English (two in French), among them:

Michelle Lelwica: Redefining Womanhood (?): Gender, Power, and the “Religion of Thinness”
Although women who are devoted to losing weight do not constitute a “religious” group in the traditional sense of the word, the symbols, rituals, and beliefs surrounding their pursuit of thinness have come to function much like a religion.

Adele Wessell and Andrew Jones: Reading religion and consuming the past in the feast of Guadalupe
Food is integral to the religious expression and community identity of the fiesta, echoed in its translation as the feast day of the Virgin of Guadalupe. In this paper the meal served in the Casa de Comida will be used as a historical text, as a form of communication or representation of the community and its history. Attention is directed to the interdependence of indigenous and immigrant histories expressed in the preparation and consumption of meals, as well as to the legacies of colonialism inherent in the feast.

Meritxell Martín-i-Pardo: Colombo Cabri or vegetarian meal: wherein lies the power?
“Colombo Cabri or Vegetarian Meal” argues that certain foods are used to configure two competing sectarian Hindu groups in Guadeloupe, French West Indies. What are appropriately identified as “traditionalist” and “globalist” Hindus define a rhetoric for legitimating their different claims by appropriating or rejecting “colombo,” a curry of meats simmered in this sauce, as the ritual meal for the sect whose narrative rightly claims to define the correct path for the Hindu community on the island.

>> overview over all articles in Anthropology of Food nr5/2006

Anne Kirah, a senior Microsoft anthropologist, says IT staff believe they’re supporting workplace productivity by limiting private use of the Net. But they may be doing the opposite. Companies that filter Internet access or block IM communications are going to find it harder to hang on to staff, she told at a recent conference.

In an interview with the APC Magazine, Kirah talks about how this new generation of employees is turning the traditional notion of productivity on its head. They’re using the Net to stay in touch with their social circle and do personal tasks during work hours, but also logging on and working from home after hours. For them, the 9-5 work day no longer applies and IT managers may be dealing with nothing short of a revolution that’s based on universal availability of Net access:

The conflict arises because the employers’ benchmarks of productivity are based on something that doesn’t exist anymore. In the old world we measured productivity by just sitting your butt down 9 to 5. We were coming to work 9 to 5, what else would you do at work except work? (...)
I think the whole point is that there’s a cultural change going on. We’ve really moved from this 9-5 world to ‘just give me the deadlines and I’ll decide when I want to do it’…

This is especially true for the younger generation, she says:

What’s happening is that society has placed a lot of limits on children today. We don’t have free play any more, it’s gone. So free play has gone onto the Net. (...) What’s happened in the world today is that activities after school are all orchestrated by adults. There’s always an adult in there somewhere. (...) In terms of the social, in terms of the child-to-child, the internet is Mecca; this is the place where they can be.

>> read the whole interview in the APC Magazine

>> Anne Kirah: Unlock work internet or risk losing staff

SEE ALSO:

Another interview with Anne Kirah: Lead design anthropologist (Monsters and Critics)

E-mail has become the new snail mail - Text Messaging on Rise

Popular IT-anthropologists: Observe families until they go to bed

How written language and technology are changing work place culture between two generations of people (Anthropology.net)

President Evo Morales, Bolivia's first indigenous head of state, is holding up indigenous values of common ownership and consensus decision-making as a model for his country, the Miami Herald / Latin American Post reports. Morales frequently spells out what he sees as the differences between indigenous and traditional governments:

"For the leaders of the indigenous communities, their democracy is of consensus," he said during a speech in Sucre, the country's traditional capital. `"There are no majorities and minorities. Majorities and minorities are a democracy imposed on our country."

(...)

His speeches are full of phrases from the Aymara and Quechua languages, which more than 34 percent of Bolivians speak. He's refused to wear a suit and tie at official functions, opting for a casual brown jacket adorned with indigenous designs.

Even the playing of the national anthem at ceremonies has been revamped. At the opening of a constituent assembly earlier this month at which delegates are to rewrite the country's constitution, thousands waited in the blazing sun while a choir sang the anthem in Spanish, Aymara, Quechua and Guaraní, another Indian language.

>> read the whole story in the Latin American Post

MORE ON EVO MORALES AND BOLIVIA:

Evo! (Savage Minds, 19.12.05)

Morales Predicts 500 Years of Indigenous Rule (IPS, 23.1.06)

BOLIVIA: Indigenous President Chalks Up Impressive Early Results (IPS, 31.7.06)

BOLIVIA: Indigenous woman to lead new assembly (Green Left Australia, 9.8.06)

Bolivia Begins to Rewrite Constitution (Washington Post, 6.8.06)

An indigenous revolution brings hope to Bolivia (rabble.ca)

Coca, Land and a Farmers’ Market Provide Hope, Not Long-Term Solutions in Chulumani, Bolivia (Upsidedownworld.org, 22.8.06)

Current news from Bolivia (Globalvoices)

I've received an email by Bill Jackson, the webmaster of www.storyofmyhome.com/ He hopes that this website will become a resource for academics and historians. On www.storyofmyhome.com people can submit their stories about the houses they've lived in:

The Story of My Home lets you become your own historian. You can document your life and leave a record for old friends, family and even historians to use when piecing together a history of your life, or of your neighborhood's development. This is a cultural preservation tool that lets a family's experiences live on even if a home becomes a teardown or infill development candidate.

(...)

Students of history understand that 90% of real history goes unrecorded.
A home has a singular importance in the life of a person and a family: it is WHERE their history occurs.

>> visit The Story Of My Home

TV-shows about people from remote places (the producers use the term "tribes") seem to have become quite popular. In a German TV-show, German families are sent into the African bush to live with "African tribes". Now, in Britain a new TV-show called "Reverse Anthropology" is in the making according to the BBC:

Reverse Anthropology aims to turn the traditional formula - where a UK film-maker experiences life with distant tribes - on its head. Members of a tribe of pygmies will take part in a British hunting expedition and report back on their experiences. Channel 4 deputy head of documentaries Simon Dickson said: "It's about time we turned the mirror on ourselves."

"While we're often baffled and amused by the customs of communities on the other side of the globe, this series will show that some of our rituals - the gym, queuing, getting drunk on a Friday night, golf, showing a lack of respect to our elders - look pretty peculiar to outsiders too," he added.

C21 MediaNet even writes: "Channel 4 flips with anthropology".

We may wonder: What has this to do with anthropology? And does it remind us on something? But as commentators on the Livejournal Anthropologist Community write:

On the one hand, this seems like another terrible and exploitative stunt in a long line of such TV programs. However, on the other hand, it presents a very interesting exercise in viewing our world through the eyes of those whom we usually study. (...) And, considering how connected the world is today, will they really be that shocked by what they see?

(...)

I think it might be the best damn cure for ethnocentrism the unwashed masses may ever recieve. And a highly amusing foreign vacation for the islanders, which is not to be sneezed at.

(...)

I initially had a knee-jerk reaction that this was exploitive, but then I considered that if it is done tastefully, it might be alirght.

Maybe Channel 4 is more tasteful than the private German TV channel SAT1? Their show is called "Like the savages" (!) (Wie die Wilden) and on their website you can click on "the families" and "the tribes", and these texts are quite revealing. The message is: "These tribes do consist of real savages!" Each presentation has chapters on hygiene, rituals, men and women.

We learn these details about the Mentawai (Indonesia):

• armed with bow and arrow, they are representatives of a lost past
• they have sex in the hen-house
• you're not allowed to fart inside the house
• they eat what their dogs have peed on

We learn about the Himas (Namibia, former German colony):

• Women aren't allowed to wash themselves
• Their toothbrushes consist of a chewed off branchlet

We are not provided such details about hygiene and sexual life when you click on "the families".

At the German excellent blog Riemer-o-rama there is a link to an interesting related article called Talking about "Tribe". Moving from Stereotypes to Analysis:

For most people in Western countries, Africa immediately calls up the word "tribe." The idea of tribe is ingrained, powerful, and expected. Few readers question a news story describing an African individual as a tribesman or tribeswoman, or the depiction of an African's motives as tribal.

(...)

Yet today most scholars who study African states and societies--both African and non-African--agree that the idea of tribe promotes misleading stereotypes. The term "tribe" has no consistent meaning. It carries misleading historical and cultural assumptions. It blocks accurate views of African realities. At best, any interpretation of African events that relies on the idea of tribe contributes no understanding of specific issues in specific countries. At worst, it perpetuates the idea that African identities and conflicts are in some way more "primitive" than those in other parts of the world. Such misunderstanding may lead to disastrously inappropriate policies.

In this paper we argue that anyone concerned with truth and accuracy should avoid the term "tribe" in characterizing African ethnic groups or cultures.

In this paper, they argue that:

• Tribe has no coherent meaning.
• Tribe promotes a myth of primitive African timelessness, obscuring history and change.
• In the modern West, tribe often implies primitive savagery.
• Images of timelessness and savagery hide the modern character of African ethnicity, including ethnic conflict.
• Tribe reflects once widespread but outdated 19th century social theory
• Tribe became a cornerstone idea for European colonial rule in Africa.

In the US, the TV show Survivors plans to divide teams based on "race". James Pritchett, professor of anthropology said: "This program is drumming up every old stereotype, and I don’t think it is going to be useful at all. What next, a show pitting Jews and Muslims and Christians against each other?"

SEE ALSO:

Anthropological Days at the Olympic Games: An homage to imperialism, the exhibit of conquered peoples was designed to show how America would bring progress to savage peoples

In Detroit and London: More African Villages in the Zoo

Our obsession with the notion of the primitive society

Ancient People: We are All Modern Now

Primitive Racism: Reuters about "the world's most primitive tribes"

Last year we had debates about racism and neo-colonialism when the Zoo at Augsburg exhibited an "African village". The same is happening right now in Kolmårdens djurpark - the largest zoo in Scandinavia: They have engaged Massai people who "dance, sing and jump" in the zoo (more in Norwegian).

Last Thursday, anthropologist Dustin Wax has reminded us in a paper of the long history of displaying indigenous people in the museums and zoos - living people, not dead people. Even famous anthropologists as Franz Boas and Alfred Kroeber have been involved in organizing "ethnographic zoos".

How are indigenous people represented? As it was the case in the zoo in Augsburg and Kolmården, the exhibitions in museums focused on the (timeless) past. Not much seems to have changed:

The focus on the enactment of the past, coupled with the insistence that Indian culture was only “authentic” insofar as it was free from the “taint” of Western civilization, had the effect of presenting Indian culture as something static, unchanging, and doomed to disappear. There was no room in either the dominant evolutionary paradigm of the day or the germinal cultural relativism just beginning to take shape for Indian cultures that continued to exist and to adapt to the changing world around them.

Most organizers of these ethnographic shows had an evolutionary view of the world - in the sense that indigenous people are "less advanced" than "us". They are "stone age people" and can be used to "illustrate the advancement of evolution of man":

In the United States (...), the Indian became a symbol of the American land brought to heel by the expansion and dominance of the “civilized” Anglo-Americans—a symbolism brought to life and enacted for a self-congratulatory American public in virtually all of the world fairs and expositions hosted by American cities.

But these "Stone age tribes" are in reality no less modern than middle class Americans. So, anthropologists were horrified when they realised that people from Samoan cut their hair and adopt American garb during their lengthy cross-Pacific journey on their way to the zoo:

They were greeted with horror by the manager in charge of their exhibit at the Exposition, who quickly “put a halt to the ‘civilizing process’” (Rydell 1984: 67) and within a short while it was reported that “the Samoans [were] making a heroic and laudable effort to resume their natural state of barbarism” (Daily Inter Ocean, 14 June 1893, in Rydell 1984: 67).

Likewise, Boas’ Kwakiutl were performing rituals that at home were no longer practiced, and which had never been intended for the kind of display expected at the Exposition. Curtis Hinsley writes that “They were aiding Boas in his effort to recapture a presumed pristine, pre-Columbian condition” (350), a state of affairs that sat well both with Boas’ scientific predilection—later realized in his advocacy of “salvage ethnography”

>> read the whole paper: Representations of Indians in American Natural History Museums by Dustin Wax

Just a few days earlier, Kevin Friedman wrote about Ota Benga - a Kongolese was put on display in the monkey house at New York’s Bronx Zoo. He quotes from an New York Times article:

Visitors to the Monkey House that second day got an even better show. Ota Benga and an orangutan frolicked together, hugging and wrestling and playing tricks on each other. The crowd loved it. To enhance the jungle effect, a parrot was put in the cage and bones had been strewn around it.

>> read the whole post

SEE ALSO:

The Construction of Indigenous Culture by Anthropologists

Anthropological Days at the Olympic Games: An homage to imperialism, the exhibit of conquered peoples was designed to show how America would bring progress to savage peoples

In Detroit and London: More African Villages in the Zoo

Our obsession with the notion of the primitive society

Geldof's Live8 and Western myths about Africa

Kurt Jonassohn, On A Neglected Aspect Of Western Racism: From the beginning of the 1870s to the end of the 1930s - the exposition of so-called exotic peoples in zoological gardens attracted a huge public

Along the northern border between Botswana and Namibia, in a region of Africa that is raging with AIDS, a small society of some 3,000 souls, the Ju/'hoansi (or !Kung) is living virtually free of HIV infection. According to research by anthropologist Richard Lee, the reason is gender equality, the Toronto Star reports.

Lee is going to present his findings tomorrow, Monday, at the International AIDS Conference AIDS 2006 in Toronto. He says the high status of women in the Ju/'hoansi society gives them significant autonomy in choosing their sexual and marriage partners:

In the other societies around the region, the young men will say, `Oh no, a girl has to obey me if I want to have sex with her, and if I don't want to use a condom, that's it,'. With the Ju/'hoansi, their high status in the community gives women plenty of leverage in sexual negotiations.

Before the age of AIDS the Ju/'hoansi were famous in anthropology for being among the last hunting and gathering people in the world. Hunter-gatherers typically granted women significant respect and status, he says.

>> read the whole story in the Toronto Star
(link updated with copy)

SEE ALSO:

The emerging research field of medical ethnomusicology: How music fights AIDS

Cultural values and the spreading of AIDS in Africa