search expand

Nancy Scheper-Hughes: Public anthropology through collaboration with journalists

(Links updated 29.5.2020) How can we make anthropology public? How survive as politically engaged anthropologist in conservative institutions? Nancy Scheper-Hughes answers these questions in the guest editorial in the new issue of Anthropology Today.

Public anthropology implies usually ‘writing’ for the public – making our work more accessible and also more accountable. A less conventional way of public anthropology is collaboration with journalists and the media, Nancy Scheper-Hughes writes. She did fieldwork on the global traffic in organs alongside journalists from USA, Canada, Brazil, Moldova, Albania, Turkey and the Philippines:

Most anthropologists fear ‘contamination’ by journalism: few scholars are comfortable with articles that may read more like ‘investigative journalism’ than ethnography. But that’s a risk I’ve been willing to take.

I continue to write in various registers with various publics in mind. The anthropological public is just one, though still – in terms of identity and affection – my primary audience. But thanks to collaborations with journalists I now know how to call on ‘fixers’ when I need them and I know how to conduct myself in radio and TV interviews, which does not come easily to academics.
(…)
To make anthropology public is to invite criticism as well as to face ‘erasures’ of ownership of research findings once we share these with journalists, for whom anthropologists are simply a ‘source’, sometimes named but never fully ‘acknowledged’. Even so, it is satisfying to see one’s work appear on the front pages of the New York Times or the Sunday Times Magazine, and thereby surreptitiously enter into a more public discourse than if we guard our research findings as ‘private property’.

Anthropologists have much to learn from journalists:

In teaching graduate seminars on genocide, the writings of anthropologists often pale beside the work of political journalists like Philip Gourevitch (1998), Mark Daner (1994) and Alma Guillermoprieto (1994). A little professional humility would go a long way to foster the potential for collaboration drawing on the strengths and skills of each.

Of course, collaboration with investigative reporters is not always easy:

However, the more I collaborate with skilled national and international reporters and documentary filmmakers, the more I am impressed with their thoughtfulness, thoroughness, dedication to accuracy and their own very different ethical and political sensibilities.

Nancy Scheper-Hughes stresses that the goal of public anthropology is to make public issues, not simply to respond to them:

This is what I have tried to do for the past decade with the Organs Watch project: to make the global traffic in humans for their organs into a pressing social issue requiring a global, multilateral response. At the beginning of the project (1998) I was ridiculed and drummed out of transplant meetings. (…) Bearing out Virginia Woolf’s contention that ‘ridicule, obscurity and social cen sure are preferable to fame and praise’, my interventions eventually bore fruit at the 2008 Istanbul summit of international transplant professionals, where we jointly and unanimously passed the Istanbul Declaration on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism.

But as we know, it is risky to be a public intellectual:

Scholars who want to reach diverse publics – through popular writing, speaking, or participating in social activism – are not only under rewarded by their universities, they are often penalized for ‘dumbing down’ anthropological thinking, cutting social theory into bite sized ‘sound bites’, ‘vulgarizing’ anthropology, sacrificing academic standards or (in the US) for playing to the anti intellectual, illiberal American popular (working) classes. Public service here tends to mean service to the academy – our discipline or uni versity – rather than service to global publics.

Is it possible to both study and participate in social change? Nancy Scheper-Hughes tells us about her first mentor, Hortense Powdermaker. Originally, she saw the roles as activist and researcher incompatible. However, moved by the student campus rebellions of 1968 and ’69, towards the end of her life Hortense began to reconsider her views.

She held her last public speech at the student Kroeber Anthropology Association Meetings in May 1970, just a month before she died:

She concluded her cautionary tale by directly addressing the angry, radicalized Berkeley students: ‘So you want to do your own thing? Then just do it! I’ve always done my own thing and I’ve gotten away with it too! […] I was a rebel in the 1920s […] avant­garde before it was the fashionable thing to do! In [Goucher] college I was a rebel of one. So, if you want to be a rebel or a revolutionary, if you want to join the struggle of the workers or of racially oppressed minorities, my hat is off to you! Do it! But for heaven’s sake don’t expect to get college credit for it!’

Paraphrasing Hortense Powdermaker: you want to be a public anthropologist – then do it! I always did. But don’t expect to be rewarded for it. Instead, consider it a precious right and a privilege. Be grateful that, despite the tendency of bureaucratic intuitions toward social con servatism, we can still ‘do what we want and get away with it too!’

So, how does one survive in the academy as a politically engaged anthropologist? Ironically, by keeping one’s public engagements fairly private, she writes:

And very much like the first generation of working mothers, you do double time, keeping up with expected home front duties, with the expected rate of scholarly productions of books, arti cles and graduate students, participating in academic meetings, etc. while simultaneously doing human rights work, serving on international panels, giving keynote speeches in places and at events that don’t matter a hoot to one’s peers.

And something important: Express your views, don’t wait unitil you’re tenured:

Finally, don’t be overly cautious in expressing heterodox views or taking heretical positions. Don’t wait until you are safely tenured to jump into the public fray. If you do, you may find you have lost what I call ‘the habit of courage’. But protect yourself by keeping up with the expectations of the academic home front.

And, she adds, don’t complain about overwork and under pay:

Just be glad they don’t pull you off the stage and haul you off to jail for speaking your mind, and for being what academic administrators sometimes call a ‘loose cannon’.

That is the privilege of academic freedom in a flawed but still viable democratic society, the privilege to be engaged in national and global struggles against injustice, exploita tion, racism, homophobia, unjust wars and for the rights of immigrants, minorities and political prisoners. If anthropology cannot be put to service as a tool for human liberation why are we bothering with it at all? A public anthropology can play its part in all these devel opments: it has an opportunity to become an arbiter of emancipatory change not just within the discipline, but for humanity itself.

The whole article “Making Anthropology Public” is not available to the general public (!), only to subscribers.

Nancy Scheper-Hughes has been much in the American media recently. The American Anthropological Association has collected some links, see their entry Anthropologist Investigates Organ Trafficking Ring.

UPDATE Times Higher Education writes about Scheper-Hughes’ article: Institutions slap down those who speak up, argues campaigning scholar

SEE ALSO:

Why anthropologists should become journalists

Marianne Gullestad and How to be a public intellectual

“Anthropology needs to engage in an activist way”

“Discuss politics!” – How anthropologists in Indonesia engage with the public

More and more anthropologists, but they’re absent from public debates – “Engaging Anthropology” (1)

Blogging and Public Anthropology: When free speech costs a career

(Links updated 29.5.2020) How can we make anthropology public? How survive as politically engaged anthropologist in conservative institutions? Nancy Scheper-Hughes answers these questions in the guest editorial in the new issue of Anthropology Today.

Public anthropology implies usually ‘writing’ …

Read more

How anthropology in Eastern Europe is changing

Studia ethnologica Croatica is one of those Open Access journals I’ve found recently. Their latest issue gives an overview over recent delevopments in anthropology in Eastern Europe. The texts are based on presentations made at the conference ‘New Curricula in Ethnology and Cultural Anthropology – Marking the 80th Anniversary of Croatian Ethnology’ in Zagreb.

Janusz Baranski is one of several authors who describe how anthropology in Eastern European countries has changed recently. In his paper New Polish Anthropology, he writes:

(T)he Polish tradition of anthropology differs from Western traditions in at least one aspect. Whereas the main subject of the latter were the so-called primitive cultures of the New World, colonized by Western powers; the main subject of Polish and other East European ethnologies were the so-called folk cultures.

Scholars who wanted to deal with non-European cultures did their research in Western academic centers; Bronislaw Malinowski is perhaps the best-known example. The opposition “our – foreign” or “us” and “them” was, in the East European context, identified with the opposition of “upper classes – the people” or “upper culture – lower culture”. For East European anthropologist, a peasant filled the role that the Trobriander filled for Malinowski.

He thinks he is a good example of recent shifts of interests within Polish anthropology:

I am a graduate of ethnography – this was the formal nomenclature of the discipline in the communist period (with a thesis on Slavic mythology; so, one would say, a “traditional one”); next I completed a postgraduate degree in ethnology – this is the nomenclature of the discipline in the post communist period (the thesis was on the language of political propaganda; say – a “modern one”); finally, I identify, above all, with cultural studies: my post-doctoral dissertation was on material culture and social symbolism of the material world – commodity aesthetics, fashion, lifestyle, consumer culture.

In this respect, I am a typical example of the tendency among anthropologists, mentioned by George Marcus, to shift from the first project, which is framed by the traditional field of anthropology, into the second – experimental and new for the discipline, which, he claims, is a growing tendency in American anthropology. Not only in American, as we see.

>> read the whole paper

Spiritual culture and folk medicine have become popular research topics, as Antoaneta Olteanu writes in her paper “Teaching Anthropology in Romania”:

We should not forget that, under the communist regime, we were forbidden to talk (and write) about the spiritual culture, folk mentality and folk religion (folk Christianity, demonology and such), in order to prevent their interference with the healthy vision of the communist ideology.

This was one of the reasons why, after 1989, Romanians started to publish research of both the ethnological and the anthropological approaches on peasant healing (both text and rituals, but also general representations of illness, demons, personality of the healer, ritual plants, objects and others topics (…).

>> read the whole paper

>> overview over all articles in this issue

SEE ALSO:

Interview: “Anthropology Is Badly Needed In Eastern Europe”

Doing fieldwork in Eastern Europe – New issue of Anthropology Matters

“Take care of the different national traditions of anthropology”

How can we create a more plural anthropological community?

Studia ethnologica Croatica is one of those Open Access journals I've found recently. Their latest issue gives an overview over recent delevopments in anthropology in Eastern Europe. The texts are based on presentations made at the conference ‘New Curricula in…

Read more

Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford Goes Open Access

“I am pleased to announce that JASO (Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford” has been relaunched as a free online journal, editor David Zeitlyn (University of Kent) writes in an email to the Anthropology Matters mailing list:

The intention is for the new version to exploit the flexibilities of web publication while maintaining a continuity with the precedent set by JASO. A retrospective conversion of the back issues is planned in due course.

On the journal’s website, though, they “reserve the right to levy a charge at any time in the future”.

JASO-Online is no refereed journal. Nevertheless, “a strict quality threshold will apply”.

The journal was originally launched in 1970 as a hard copy journal; it ceased publication in that form in 2005. It has now been re-launched to coincide with the Centenary of the Oxford Anthropological Society in 2009.

There is only one issue online. The most contributors to this issue are graduate students of the Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology at the University of Oxford.

The current issue consists of nine book reviews and these four articles:

Arielle Rittersmith: Contextualising Chinese medicine in Singapore: microcosm and macrocosm

Marisa Wilson: Food as a good versus food as a commodity: contradictions between state and market in Tuta, Cuba

Harry Walker: Transformations of Urarina kinship

Ieva Raubisko: Proper ‘traditional’ versus dangerous ‘new’: religious ideology and idiosyncratic Islamic practices in post-Soviet Chechnya

"I am pleased to announce that JASO (Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford" has been relaunched as a free online journal, editor David Zeitlyn (University of Kent) writes in an email to the Anthropology Matters mailing list:

The intention…

Read more

Is the anthropologist a spy? New Anthropology Matters is out

When anthropologist Michael Madison Walker did research in rural Mozambique, he – as a white man – was variously assumed to be a priest, a development worker, a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer, and even a spy. Fieldwork identities is the topic of the new issue of Anthropology Matters.

11 authors reflect on perceived inequalities, differences or power relations, e.g. related to race or wealth, gender or age. As Ingie Hovland writes in her introduction, “the identities that are attributed to us and the roles we are placed in during fieldwork matter – to the people we study, to us, and to the research process.”

But as Nigerian anthropologist and blogger Olumide Abimbola shows, “being similar” is not necessarily less challenging. On his fieldwork among mostly Nigerian traders in Benin, some thought his questions, his glasses and backpack made him a suspicious character or a spy. As he is based at an academic institution in Germany, others thought he must be a German citizen (who could aid others in acquiring German visas). It was precisely the shared similarities (Nigerian background) between himself and the traders, that brought out the differences between them all the more sharply, Olumide Abimbola argues.

>> visit Anthropology Matters 1/2009

SEE ALSO:

Panic, joy and tears during fieldwork: Anthropology Matters 1/2007 about emotions

When anthropologist Michael Madison Walker did research in rural Mozambique, he - as a white man - was variously assumed to be a priest, a development worker, a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer, and even a spy. Fieldwork identities is the…

Read more

Interview with Benedict Anderson: Being a cosmopolitan without needing to travel

During my research for the new overview over open access anthropology journals, I made many great discoveries. I’ll try to present some of them.

One of the discoveries was Invisible Culture. An electronic journal for visual culture. The most recent issue includes an interview with famous Benedict Anderson about colonial cosmopolitism or cosmopolitism from below.

Cosmopolitism does not mean that you have to spend more time in airports than in your own bed. You don’t need to travel at all, Anderson, the author of “Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism” says.

In this interview he takes a different take on this term than in 2005 when I interviewed him. “I haven’t met many cosmopolitans in my life, perhaps no more than five”, he said.

In the interview in Invisible Culture, he tells us the story of Kwee Thiam Tjing, a poor Chinese-Indonesian journalist, in order to explore the role of cosmopolitanism in the life of the “colonial subject”. Kwee lived in Indonesia.

Anderson says:

In terms of colonial cosmopolitanism, I thought it was interesting because this guy was absolutely a cosmopolitan, but he almost never went anywhere—not even to China, as many of his Chinese acquaintances did. So I had to think about cosmopolitanism to talk about Kwee.

Interviewer Cynthia Foo asks Anderson how he would describe Keew as a cosmopolitan.

Anderson answers:

His family had been in Indonesia for 300 years, but Dutch colonial policy had been always, as much as possible, to segregate the Chinese and not let them assimilate with the natives (a policy which was of course quietly resisted). So Kwee was very aware of the fact that he wasn’t a native of the country, although he was extremely patriotic about the country.

He spoke Hokkien, which nobody except the Chinese spoke, as well as Indonesian and Javanese. He started out, really, with 4 languages: he had a home or “in-the-house” language of Hokkien; he spoke Javanese, which is a street language; Dutch he got in school; and Indonesian he learned in his teens, I think, maybe early 20s, because that was the popular medium for writing in newspapers and magazines.

 So you start off with a guy who at 20 is a master of 4 languages, and you’ve got something right there.

The second thing to add was that this was a very rich colony, yet little Holland didn’t have the power to say “only for us,” so all kinds of people came to seek their fortunes: Indians came, Yemenese came, Europeans of different kinds—Germans, Austrians, English, Americans—and so forth. This is why the population was very mixed; there was also a huge migration of natives, mainly Javanese, from the interior where people were looking for better ways to live. The Chinese ghetto system broke down in the 1910s, so, wherever you went, you were running into all kinds of people.





>> read the whole interview

SEE ALSO:

Owen Sichone: Poor African migrants no less cosmopolitan than anthropologists

David Graeber: There never was a West! Democracy as Interstitial Cosmopolitanism

Thomas Hylland Eriksen: Cosmopolitanism is like respecting the ban on smoking in the public

For an Anthropology of Cosmopolitanism

During my research for the new overview over open access anthropology journals, I made many great discoveries. I'll try to present some of them.

One of the discoveries was Invisible Culture. An electronic journal for visual culture. The most recent issue…

Read more