search expand

What’s the point of anthropology conferences?

panel

I’m back from the conference Anthropology and Cosmopolitanism at Keele University (1h from Manchester, UK). As I’ve learned from entries on Savage Minds, job hunting and networking are a main point of anthropology conferences arranged by the AAA (American Anthropological Association). Luckily, this wasn’t the case with the conference I’ve attended last week: The main purpose seemed to be socialising – without ulterior motives: The participants were very friendly and open people. It seemed to be that I’ve talked at least to the half of all participants.

The topic – cosmopolitanism – seemed to have attracted a certain kind of people. “There are nearly no Americans here”, one delegate wondered. Usually, lots of Americans attended conferences arranged by the Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth. What I found most striking: The largest part of all delegates were migrants!

Nearly none of them is working at a University in the country they were born. I met an anthropologist from Sri Lanka who’s working in the USA, another anthropologist working in Canada, originally from Turkey but – as she said – “a product from Norway”. There were quite a lot of German anthropology migrants living in the UK, and from Switzerland and Italy. A woman wore a badge with “Aberdeen University” on it. Of course, she told me that she’s from Malta!

colson

Many participants appreciated the social events. In contrast to other conferences, nobody left the venue after the day’s final lecture. There was nowhere to go as the University of Keele is a kind of academic ghetto, located far away from the nearest village. And the lectures actually lasted until 11 o’clock at night! I especially enjoyed these less formal after-dinner lectures – held by Elizabeth Colson (see picture to the right), by Andre Beteille and a debate on Robert Hayden’s ‘Shared Shrines, Syncretism and Tolerance’ in the old library (see image below), published in Current Anthropology.

old library

But concerning the topic of the conference, I wonder if I might have learned more if I had stayed at home and read the papers on my own. There were many very weak presentations: Most paper-givers read their papers monotonously and went over time. There was never enough time for discussion. Furthermore, generally three or four papers were read one after another without any breaks in between! It reminded me of the worst seminars during my first year at university.

Several participants left these panels before they ended. After a short walk in the sun, I met a young PhD-student. He was as frustrated as me: “It’s my first and probably my last conference”, he told me.

I wondered: Is the main purpose of a conference to deliver a paper in order to get it listed on one’s CV as John McCreery supposes while we discussed the topic How To Present A Paper?

“If you want to be considered a serious academic you have to read your paper. That’s standard and just the way it is”, one of the elder anthropologists informed me.

Some papers haven’t even had much to do with the topic of the conference (a few paper-givers admitted it openly!).

On the last day of the conference, Keith Hart said (maybe too harshly?): “Anthropologists don’t care for cosmopolitanism. It’s just an excuse to come together. We’re not engaging in the world. We don’t talk about Iraq and Iran. Our detached discourse lacks wider relevance.”

As I’ve found out afterwards, Keith Hart had said something that many delegates agreed with. The organisers had asked great questions about cosmopolitanism, but we haven’t heard many concrete answers. I missed debates about moral and ethical issues: Recently, several magazines and newspapers have discussed cosmopolitanism as an answer to the growing polarisation between socalled Western values and the socalled Islamic world. After the controversy around the Mohammed-cartoons, mainstream-media loved talking about culture and religion wars and Huntingtons clash of civilisation. But maybe we should have talked more about cosmopolitanism? Is this correct? Is cosmopolitanism a better alternative than multiculturalism? If yes, how could anthropologists contribute to a more peaceful, just, cosmopolitan world?

Nobody addressed these questions. Rather, extreme relativism prevailed. French anthropologist Benoît de L’Estoile for example, argued, we shouldn’t define the term cosmopolitanism by its moral qualities (openness to the world, empathy etc). graeber It is in his view problematic to define some people as good (cosmopolitans) or bad (non-cosmopolitans).

Nevertheless, there were many interesting papers (among others by David Graeber, see image to the left). I’ll have a look at them during the following days and weeks, (I hope) and will try to summarize some of the discussions.

See also my earlier post For an Anthropology of Cosmopolitanism.

UPDATE 2: A heavily edited version of this text was published in Anthropology Today august 2006. You can read the text here on my personal homepage

UPDATES

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

Owen Sichone: Poor African migrants no less cosmopolitan than anthropologists

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

panel

I'm back from the conference Anthropology and Cosmopolitanism at Keele University (1h from Manchester, UK). As I've learned from entries on Savage Minds, job hunting and networking are a main point of anthropology conferences arranged by the AAA (American Anthropological…

Read more

For an Anthropology of Cosmopolitanism

Some days ago I registered for the conference Cosmopolitanism and Anthropology at Keele University (UK). As a preparation, here some notes on anthropology and cosmopolitanism.

After the controversis around the Mohammed-cartoons, media loved talking about culture and religion wars and Huntingtons clash of civilisation. But maybe we should have talked more about cosmopolitanism than culture war. Isn’t cosmopolitanism more common than fundamentalism? In his article Anthropology as cosmopolitan practice? (subscription required) published in Anthropological Theory in 2003 (3):403–415, Joel Kahn writes:

I would suggest that a certain cosmopolitanism governs the practices of localized individuals and institutions, everyday interactions between individuals and groups, popular cultural activities, forms of economic relations, and institutions of village government.
(…)
Could one go further to argue that in instances where a breakdown of such cosmopolitan coalitions has taken place – in Aceh, West Papua, Kalimantan, the Moluccas more often than not this has been precisely a result of the imposition from above (by the Indonesian state, outside powers and institutions) of disembedded, supposedly universal, culturally neutral forms of power, jurisprudence and so on (that is, of liberal versions of the cosmopolitan ideal)?

In his paper he wants to recover “cosmopolitanism in recent social and political theory, a project to which according to him “surprisingly few anthropologists have so far contributed”:

The world which anthropologists seek to study is a world not of discrete and isolatable other cultures and societies, but a world of ‘intercultural’ or ‘intercommunal’ relationships.

A quick internet-search revealed that many anthropologists and social scientists make similar points as Kahn.

In the book Cosmopolitanism, Identity and Authenticity in the Middle East, Roel Meijer writes, that the Middle East was, in the past, “an open undefined territory in which groups of different religious and ethnic backgrounds intermingled and exchanged ideas and lifestyles”. In his review (source url-lost), Fred Halliday from London School of Economics concludes:

The main message of this collection of studies is that in the past the Middle East did embody certain forms of cosmopolitanism, but that modern forces – the modern state, anti-imperialism, the mass politics of secular and religious forces alike – have overwhelmed these forms. Globalisation now substitutes a different kind of superficial and consumerist, universalism.

The researchers stress that cosmopolitanism is no elite-phenomenon – it’s everyday practice. Per Wirten points to studies on the Bosnian war by peace – and conflict researcher Mary Kaldor:

As it turned out, those who defended cosmopolitan ideas often lived in small towns and villages where they hid refugees, saving them from ethnic cleansing and paving the way for continued co-existence. Many of them had never gone to university or even once left the place where they were born. In contrast, many of the most militant Croatian and Serbian nationalists had in many ways lead what we tend to think of as a cosmopolitan life: educated at foreign universities they felt at home in all of the major airports around the world and could converse in a relaxed manner with the global political and financial elite.

And in the anthology Cosmopolitics. Thinking and Feeling Beyond the Nation (red: Pheng Cheah and Bruce Robbins), Wirten writes, a number of philosophers, anthropologists and cultural sociologists are inspired by the Dominican migrant, the Kurdish refugee, the stateless Palestinian, the indigenous propertyless of Chiapas.

The conference organizers introduce the concept of cosmopolitanism this way:

One tendency has been to think of cosmopolitanism as transgressing the parochialism or ethnicism of the nation-state. In this view, cosmopolitans are travellers who move beyond national boundaries, and hence a cosmopolitan social science must study these flows and movements, or reflect on issues of global justice, human rights and governmentality.

This apparently commonsensical view has been challenged, however, in a deservedly much cited article by Kwame Anthony Appiah, ‘Cosmopolitan Patriots’. (…) Appiah speaks of a ‘rooted’ cosmopolitanism, and proposes that cosmopolitans begin from membership in morally and emotionally significant communities (families, ethnic groups) while espousing notions of toleration and openness to the world, the transcendance of ethnic difference and the moral incorporation of the other. His vision opens up scope for a cosmopolitan anthropology which builds on anthropological strengths of fieldwork in particular locales.

In her thesis on British Asian cosmopolitains, anthropologist Cicilie Fagerlid explains the difference between multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism:

While the prototype multicultural society is made up of enclosed cultural units with different but equal rights, the cultural flows do not stay within bounded groups, in a cosmopolitan society. Instead they intersect and mix in various ways in various individuals.

Doing cosmopolitan anthropology means questioning assumptions on “us” and “them”, she writes:

It has been important for me to show that the world is interconnected; I did not only share subcultural preferences with my informants, but we reflected on identity formation in similar ways as well. (…) My aim has been to make use of these parallels between lived urban life and life as an urban researcher.
(…)
We all need to acknowledge that there is no such thing as ‘us’ and ‘them’.

UPDATE: POSTS ABOUT THE CONFERENCE

What’s the point of anthropology conferences? (general summary)

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

Owen Sichone: Poor African migrants no less cosmopolitan than anthropologists

MORE TEXTS:

Per Wirtén: Free the nation – cosmopolitanism now!”

Book review: Cosmopolitanism. Carol A. Breckenridge, Sheldon Pollock, Homi K. Bhabha, and Dipesh Chakrabarty, eds (updated link)

Kwame Anthony Appiah on Cosmopolitanism: The Case For Contamination

Q&A with Kwame Anthony Appiah: Deepening the conversation about identity

Cicilie Fagerlid: “Beyond Ethnic Boundaries? British Asian Cosmopolitans” (459kb, pdf)

Steven Vertovec: Trends and Impacts of Migrant Transnationalism (updated link)

Steven Vertovec: Fostering Cosmopolitanisms: A Conceptual Survey and A Media Experiment in Berlin (pdf)

Rebecca Graversen: Imagining Other Places. Cosmopolitanism and exotic fantasies in multicultural cities

Mary Kaldor: Cosmopolitanism and organised violence

Per Mouritsen: Can Patriots Be World-Citizens? (pdf)

Edward Spence: Cosmopolitanism and the Internet

How can we create a more plural anthropological community?

Transnational Communities Programme – lots of working papers

Cosmopolitanism – from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Some days ago I registered for the conference Cosmopolitanism and Anthropology at Keele University (UK). As a preparation, here some notes on anthropology and cosmopolitanism.

After the controversis around the Mohammed-cartoons, media loved talking about culture and religion wars and Huntingtons…

Read more

New anthropology blog: Fieldwork on cosmopolitism and migrants in Paris

Cicilie Fagerlid, anthropologist at the University on Oslo, has started blogging from her fieldwork in Paris. After the youth protests, she writes, her research question is “more justified than ever”: What influences senses of belonging and community making in a cosmopolitan city like Paris?

She comments on the recent protests in the suburbs of Paris, shares her impressions from demonstrations against French immigration policy and her observations among “banlieue bloggers” and internet forums.

She’s just moved to Paris and therefore still wondering how to carry out her fieldwork:

So far, I’ve considered, and rejected, three possible approaches: 1) Hanging around in a (multi ethnic) music or artist collective, preferably with political objectives. 2) A neighbourhood study in the cosmopolitan area Belleville. 3) Participating in two (multi ethnic) political groups working towards recognition of the colonial era in France. Yesterday, when I asked to local (Maghrebi) baker if he would help me with my research, I messed it up a bit and confused my three approaches. It was easier when I just asked the greengrocer what he thought about the present situation… Anyway, now it seems to me that I just have to live with the information overload some more time, to see what will happen.

>> visit Cicilie Fagerlids blog “Cicilie among the Parisians”

SEE ALSO:

Beyond Ethnic Boundaries? Cicilie Fagerlid’s study on British Asian Cosmopolitans in London

PS (23.1.06): Due to spam attacks, comments are closed for this post.

Cicilie Fagerlid, anthropologist at the University on Oslo, has started blogging from her fieldwork in Paris. After the youth protests, she writes, her research question is "more justified than ever": What influences senses of belonging and community making in a…

Read more

How can we create a more plural anthropological community?

Interesting article in Anthropology News October by Brasilian antropologist Gustavo Lins Ribeiro on the lacking globalisation of anthropology:

Globalisation in anthropology has mirrored unequal relations existing within larger structural processes. Theory, for instance, has flown from metropolitan centers to non-metropolitan centers while the flow of “raw data” makes the opposite movement.

The consequence is that a large part of anthropological knowledge remains unnoticed:

English has become the global language to the detriment of a more diversified linguistic and stylistic scenario. Think, for instance, of the size of anthropology in Japan or Brazil. But few read Japanese or Portuguese outside of their original language communities. Furthermore, only a small internationalized elite interacts on a global level. Nation-states remain the primary place where the reproduction of the profession is defined in particular ways.

So what can be done? How can foster the visibility of non-metropolitan works of quality and enhance our modes of exchanging information? How can we create and consolidate a more plural anthropological community?

He suggests among others:

Translation of different anthropological materials into English. But to to avoid linguistic monotony, German anthropologists should be translated into Japanese, Mexicans into German, Australians into Portuguese, Brazilians into Russian, and so on.

Online communication: An electronic collection of classics from different countries and a global anthropology e-journal are real possibilities.

– Increased presence of international participants at national anthropology congresses and creating connections and fostering exchange is to capitalize on already existing national and international anthropological associations. The creation in 2004 of the World Council of Anthropological Associations was an important step in this direction.

>> read the whole article

UPDATE (10.2.07)

World Anthropologies – Book and papers online: Working towards a global community of anthropologists

SEE ALSO

On Ribeiros new book “World Anthropologies. Disciplinary Transformations within Systems of Power

Gustavo Lins Ribeiro: Global Navigations

Gustavo Lins Ribeiro: The Condition of Transnationality. Exploring Implications for Culture, Power and Language

Open Source Anthropology : Are anthropologists serious about sharing knowledge?

Interesting article in Anthropology News October by Brasilian antropologist Gustavo Lins Ribeiro on the lacking globalisation of anthropology:

Globalisation in anthropology has mirrored unequal relations existing within larger structural processes. Theory, for instance, has flown from metropolitan centers to…

Read more

“No Pizza without Migrants”: Between the Politics of Identity and Transnationalism

Why are there such different patterns of identity and community formation among second-generation migrants? A transnational perspective with focus on the migrants’ relationship to their (or their parents’) homeland is neccessary, argues anthropologist Susanne Wessendorf in her paper “No Pizza without Migrants: Between the Politics of Identity and Transnationalism: Second-Generation Italians in Switzerland”:

“Politics of identity, transnationalism and integration should not be regarded as mutually exclusive, but as complementary strategies or reactions of migrants to the challenges of and tensions between mobility and settlement”

Wessendorf has among others studied Italian migrants in Switzerland and their political Secondo movement that fights against the negative image ascribed to them (They designed and sold T-Shirts as a way to communicate their pride in being members of the second generation, and to show that even if you do not look like a foreigner, you might well be of immigrant origin).

Wessendorf critizes concepts which describe fragmented second-generation integration as simply ‘bicultural’, moving ‘between two cultures’:

“But these new spaces can neither simply be called ‘transnational social spaces’, she writes: They are clearly embedded in the political, economic and socio-cultural realities of the nation-state in which they emerge. Rather, they are counter-hegemonic attempts to deal with both a national legal system and, sometimes, the nostalgia for the homeland.”

>> read the whole paper

PS: This one of the Working Papers of the Center of Migration, Policy and Society at the University of Oxford

Why are there such different patterns of identity and community formation among second-generation migrants? A transnational perspective with focus on the migrants' relationship to their (or their parents') homeland is neccessary, argues anthropologist Susanne Wessendorf in her paper "No…

Read more