search expand

Plan for the next three sessions

*) 22nd of February at 10:15: Methods
Alex Stewart: The ethnographer’s method
-85 dry but inspiring pages on how to tell if a particular ethnography is good, scientific work or not…

Cicilie F. will present the book briefly and everybody is encouraged to make a short presentation discussing to what extent Stewart’s criteria of scientificness are useful in their own material. (I’m thinking about posting my presentation either here or on my own blog…).

AK also suggested that we read Paul Stoller’s The taste of ethnographic things, as it is highly relevant in a methods discussion (It’s also interesting for us that Tim Ingold criticized exactly Stoller’s phenomenology for not being able to provide explanations, and explanations in anthropology was also one of the points that came up in today’s discussion). We haven’t decided yet whether we’ve got time read it or not… What do the rest of you think?

*) 14th of March: a monograph on power by Paul Farmer… which one?

*) 4th of April: something by Daniel Miller
as he will have a seminar with us (the phd-candidates the 10th of April). Hopefully he will provide us with a reading list in time for the seminar, or some of us – Christian for instance – can suggest a text of general theoretical and/or methodological interest.

We haven’t yet decided for the rest of the semester, but it’s probably about time we have some presentations of our own work…

Hope to see you all in three weeks!

*) 22nd of February at 10:15: Methods
Alex Stewart: The ethnographer’s method
-85 dry but inspiring pages on how to tell if a particular ethnography is good, scientific work or not…

Cicilie F. will present the book briefly and…

Read more

2. februar: Lukes og Wolf om makt

Vi som var tilstede sist fredag bestemte oss for å følge opp Foucault med to andre tekster som diskuterer makt: Steven Lukes lille, men innflytelsesrike essay, Power: A radical view og Eric Wolfs korte og kompakte “Facing Power: Old Insights, New Questions”. Kenneth tok på seg å gi en kort presentasjon av Lukes.

(Lenke til Facing Power… i American Anthropologist 1992. Den fins også i R. Borofsky (ed.): Assessing Cultural Anthropology, 1994).

Dette blir 1. februar (ble vi enige om klokkeslett?). Gangen etter, 29.februar, står åpen.

Vi som var tilstede sist fredag bestemte oss for å følge opp Foucault med to andre tekster som diskuterer makt: Steven Lukes lille, men innflytelsesrike essay, Power: A radical view og Eric Wolfs korte og kompakte "Facing Power: Old Insights,…

Read more

Neste seminar er fredag 23. november kl 10:15

(- altså ikke den 16. november)



Eksempler på linjer i bylandskap :-)

Tema blir som kjent Lines: A brief history av Tim Ingold. Christian og Cicilie holder en omtrent 15 minutter lang innledning til diskusjon, med vekt på hvordan de tenker seg å bruke disse perspektivene i sin egen forskning (eller hva, Christian?)

Cicilie

(- altså ikke den 16. november)

Eksempler på linjer i bylandskap :-)

Tema blir som kjent Lines: A brief history av Tim Ingold. Christian og Cicilie holder en omtrent 15 minutter lang innledning til diskusjon, med vekt på hvordan de tenker…

Read more

Eerie post-fieldwork experiences: Norwegian Anthropologists’ Facebook association

Facebook hit Norway like a meteorite while I was in Paris (where, by the way, Myspace was the big thing). With 404 508 members, this tiny country with only 4,5 million inhabitants constitute one of the larges regional networks on Facebook (Norway). I still haven’t really discovered what’s so great about Facebook yet (by contrast I got hooked on Flickr immediately and can still spend so many hours immobile in front of the photo sharing utility that my eyes get sore from forgetting to blink and my shoulders stiffen.) Anyway, in my slow and trying attempts to catch up on what everybody here were doing in the spring – while I was watching other people tending other sheep in other valleys (e.g. surfing on Myspace) – I stumbled upon the Norwegian anthropologists’ Facebook association (Norske antropologers fjesbokforening). And what do I find, after a short presentation of the association and a handful of links to informative sites (where of course the incredible antropologi.info by Lorenz is on top)? Yes, a link proclaiming in capital letters: PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION ON YOUTUBE. It’s me, with a poem by the Norwegian author Jens Bjørneboe, first in French translation, then a little more comfortably in the original Norwegian version. My mate Lorent who sat next to me, suggested taking over the camcorder when the maître de cérémonie Dgiz introduced me (to my surprise), so he filmed the whole séance.

It’s incredible strange to watch this video now, in my own living room, so removed from Bellevillian fieldwork as I can be. I’ve just come back from the Cinemateket (Scarface, 1933 – the remake, with Al Pacino, is said to be a cult movie for the kids in the deprived Parisian suburbs). It’s a quiet Friday evening. Outside, it’s almost frosty, but the streets were full of people on their way to a party or a “vorspiel” when I cycled through town, like always in the weekends. So, in the middle of this, my typical Oslo life, I get reminded of my own participation in a poetry slam in haut Belleville five-six months ago. It’s funny to see my nervousness, hear the applause, see how I first forget to get the ticket (for a free drink) like so many slammers often do, then how Dgiz smiles after he has given it to me, then, finally, my big smile of relief towards Lorent after sitting down again. It’s funny to be back at L’Atelier du Plateau and this soirée, and it’s incredibly funny – yes, eerie – to have found the link on that Facebook site, inscribed in the heart of this internet community of young Norwegian anthropologists, as an example of participant observation.

Facebook hit Norway like a meteorite while I was in Paris (where, by the way, Myspace was the big thing). With 404 508 members, this tiny country with only 4,5 million inhabitants constitute one of the larges regional networks on…

Read more

Ethnography under colonialism: what did Evans-Pritchard think of it all?

“When the Government of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan asked me to make a study of the Nuer I accepted after hesitation and with misgivings” (Evans-Pritchard 1940: 7).

“A Government force surrounded our camp one morning at sunrise, searched for two prophets who had been leaders in a recent revolt, took hostages, and threatened to take many more if the prophets were not handed over. … It would at any time have been difficult to do research among the Nuer, and at the period of my visit they were unusually hostile, for their recent defeat by Government forces and the measures taken to ensure their final submission had occasioned deep resentment. Nuer had often remarked to me, ‘You raid us, yet you say we cannot raid the Dinka’; ‘you overcame us with firearms and we had only spears. If we had had firearms we could have routed you’; and so forth. When I entered a cattle camp it was not only as a stranger but as an enemy, and they seldom tried to conceal their disgust at my presence, refusing to answer my greetings and even turning away when I addressed them” (ibid. p. 11).

There is no other anthropologist I’ve read so extensively and thoroughly as Evans-Pritchard. I love how he makes reference to his arguments over witchcraft with members of the Azande community. His ethnographic descriptions of situations and even individuals in Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic among the Azande are so “thick”, that you are allowed judge by yourself whether you agree with his theoretical analysis or not. When I reread The Nuer a couple of weeks ago, my hero disappointed me.

The book is nothing but generalisations – there isn’t one event, one situation, one individual mentioned after the short introductory chapter. Not even his one “constant companion in Nuerland” Nhial (p.10), who must have been indispensable in acquiring knowledge of the fierce and hostile Nuers appears in the text proper. He leaves us with an image of Nuer society as a seamless, timeless whole* devoid of real human beings. But as we know from his own introduction, Nuerland is in full anti-colonial revolt at the moment of writing. And in Evans-Pritchard’s own tent, young and proud Nuer men “endlessly visit”, talking about nothing but cattle and girls (which “led inevitably to that of cattle” :D ) and asking for tobacco without bothering to answer his questions.

Like anyone who’s been through a graduate course in social anthropology, I was of course familiar with the critique. However, my recent interest in colonial encounters gives an extra edge to reading 70 years old ethnographic descriptions by a white Brit in East Africa (Bourdieu among the Kabyle has certainly moved up on my reading list).

“I … never succeeded in training informants capable of dictating texts and giving detailed descriptions and commentaries. This failure was compensated for by the intimacy I was compelled to establish with the Nuer. As I could not use the easier and shorter method of working through regular informants I had to fall back on direct observation of, and participation in, the everyday life of the people. … Information was thus gathered in particles, each Nuer I met being used as a source of knowledge, and not, as it where, in chunks supplied by selected and trained informants. … Azande would not allow me to live as one of themselves ; Nuer would not allow me to live otherwise. … Azande treated me as a superior ; Nuer as an equal” (Ibid. p. 15).

Between the lines of this cold and “objective” ethnography, I read a lot of respect for the Nuers. But how on earth could this brilliantly alert and bright anthropologist not reflect on his own position as employed by the colonial – and so obviously repressive and violent – government. And equally puzzling: how can he treat the fact that he moves around with black servants (not Nuers, of course!) as such a matter of course? From the previous quote it even sounds like he usually treated his informants as servants… (This classical photo from Monica’s blog apparently gives a good indication of his relationship with the Azande).

A student alerted me to the fact that Evans-Pritchard lead African troops against the Italians in Eastern Africa during the WWII (Wikipedia). After seeing the French film Indigènes (see earlier blog post) on how the French colonial troops were treated during the war, I cannot but wonder how my predecessor treated his own soldiers.

*) This seamless whole is in fact what he wanted, as he writes that he wanted to write a new kind of monograph where the development of theory isn’t drowned in ethnographic detail.

“When the Government of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan asked me to make a study of the Nuer I accepted after hesitation and with misgivings” (Evans-Pritchard 1940: 7).

“A Government force surrounded our camp one morning at sunrise, searched for two prophets who…

Read more