|
E500 PROSEMINAR IN SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
ANTHROPOLOGY |
|
|
|
Dr. Richard Wilk |
|
|
|
Professor's Office: 242
Student Building, phone 855-3901, email: WILKR |
|
Office Hours: Tuesday
2:30-5:00 PM, or by appointment |
|
|
|
Course Description |
|
|
|
The course catalog
defines this course with a laundry-list of topics: "economics, ecology,
kinship, life cycle, education, social stratification, political organization,
religion, values, culture change, evolution, methodology, etc..." By the
end of the semester, you should be able to figure out when that catalog copy
was written, and make a good guess about who wrote it. |
|
|
|
This is a required course
for all incoming graduate students in sociocultural anthropology, and it is
not at all harmful for bioanthropologists, archaeologists, and linguists who
want familiarity with current concepts and issues in the study of culture. It
serves as an introduction to the field for graduate students in other social
sciences, who are thinking about including anthropological method and/or
theory in their own work. Many of the students in this course have taken
H500, the history of anthropological theory, but I will not expect much prior
knowledge about sociocultural anthropology from anyone. |
|
|
|
The course will cover the
major writers and theories in sociocultural anthropology starting in 1970 and
working up to the present. Our goal is the classically impossible one of a
survey course; to cover all the intellectual currents of a discipline. This
means major frustration at every turn, since you could spend all your time
reading theoretical works in anthropology, and you would still find yourself
falling further and further behind! Anthropologists are compulsive
theoreticians, and most academics want to make their marks by adding to (or
deleting…or slandering, besmirching, paying obeisance to, worshipping…)
anthropological theory at some time in their careers. Why do we write so much
theory? Well, the profound questions about human nature and the meaning of
culture are still open and unsettled, and we are still waiting for the kind
of grand synthesis which will really explain some fundamental issues. And
then there is the need to get tenure and promotion. For some reason, theory
always has a high status within the discipline. “Big” anthropologists did not
acquire their status by careful fieldwork or finely detailed ethnography. |
|
|
|
I don’t mean to denigrate
theory or be too cynical about it. I actually love anthropological theory,
and have tried my own hand at it. But I am also very impatient with many
aspects of theory - its timeless repetitive nature, the self-important
puffed-up language, the intellectual macho one-upmanship, the hermetic lack
of interest in important work being done in other social sciences…you get the
picture. |
|
|
|
Because theory is always
expanding in many directions, and because it is so hard to see which current
works are going to stand the test of time, we will focus on the 80s and 90s.
We will also take as many short cuts as possible – for example reading about
someone’s work instead of reading all the work in the original. I see my role
as trying to show you how the arguments link up to each other, how they are
genealogically connected, and the ‘back story’ of the sociology of the
discipline which helps make sense out of passionate arguments and
personalities. |
|
|
|
This class has a history.
Since the first time I taught it in 1996 the students have been adding their
cumulative work to a web publication called “Theory in Anthropology” which
portrays the three dimensions of sociocultural anthropology in recent times.
If you have not already seen it, the website on theory in anthropology is at
http://www.indiana.edu/~wanthro/theory.htm. It gets several thousand hits a
month, sometimes more than ten thousand, and has been linked on many
anthropological websites and has won several awards. It is usually close to the top when you
google “anthropology theory.” Some past students tell me that their
contribution to the site is cited more widely than anything else they have
published! This is an opportunity to have your work read widely! |
|
|
|
Course Structure |
|
|
|
How are we supposed to
gain a comprehensive understanding of 35 years of developments in a rich and
complex social science during 16 weeks?
Especially when those years are a turbulent period when the discipline
has changed almost out of recognition, to the point where some people think
it has exploded into fragments? Obviously we have to be selective, and divide
up the work so we can cover as large a territory as possible in a short space
of time. |
|
|
|
In the past I have asked
students to divide the semester up into three sections organized around the
following three themes: |
|
|
|
Space. All disciplines,
like any social groups, organize themselves spatially into social and
intellectual groups. Mapping the discipline means identifying the relevant
groups. These include departments, traditions, and sub-disciplines. There are
many formal social groups among anthropologists, including professional
associations, journal editorial boards, University departments, and
foundation grant review panels. There are also informal groups of many kinds,
including the students trained in a particular department, those defined by
kinship connections (yes, anthropologists do marry one another and raise
little anthropologists!), and those affiliated by common theoretical or
political position. For the purposes of the course I will pre-define a number
of these formal and informal groups, using standard taxonomic categories like
"ecological anthropology," but we will also be investigating other
kinds of spatial order through our own research. |
|
|
|
Time. Once we have a
basic map of the relevant groups, we can think about when they started, when
they flourished, and when they began to shrink or disappear. This will help
us to figure out the directions in which the discipline is moving, and
identify the crucial times of transition. I will focus attention on some of
the largest shifts - the emergence of applied anthropology, the rise and
decline of ecological anthropology and evolutionism in the 1970s, the rise of
reflexivity and postmodernism in the 80s, and the questioning of history and
representation in the 90s. We can also try a more microscopic year-by-year
history of the discipline, based on close reading of journal articles and
annual review summaries. |
|
|
|
Processes of Change. I
don't think we understand very much about how disciplines change direction,
and what causes intellectual currents to run in particular directions. The
spatial and temporal perspectives are largely descriptive, but may provide
some clues. The conventions of intellectual history, however, point towards
the pivotal role of crucial individuals in moving a discipline. Many
anthropologists also believe that the field is moved along by the
intellectual efforts of particularly important thinkers (I have my doubts
about this thesis, which I will discuss in class). So throughout the class we
will read the works of anthropologists who are widely perceived as movers and
shakers. |
|
|
|
But this semester I want
to try doing something different. |
|
|
|
Yes, each of you will
have an opportunity to contribute to the Theory in anthropology website. In
particular I would like each of you to choose a particular theorist and write
an intellectual biography for your first assignment, though if you want to
contribute to a different section of the site, I am open to discussion. |
|
|
|
For your second
assignment, though, we are going to tackle larger questions, in response to
the major challenge offered by the recent book “Unwrapping the Sacred Bundle:
Reflections on the Disciplining of Anthropology” edited by Dan Segal and
Sylvia Yanagisako. The biggest issues in the future of anthropology, I think,
are whether or not we will survive as a discipline, a social group, or as a
bunch of individuals who just happen to reside in the same building. We are
not competing well with other social sciences, and many anthropologists no
longer seem to know what we are supposed to be doing
in the world, and what makes us different besides a peculiar intellectual
history. |
|
|
|
So for your main
contributions to the theory website this semester I would like essays which
seek to answer one or more of the following questions: |
|
|
|
1. What, if anything,
makes anthropology a special way to understand what is going on in the
world? |
|
|
|
2. Do anthropologists
share a point of view which justifies our speaking as a discipline, a group
rather than as individuals? |
|
|
|
3. What obligations does
the discipline have to the public which finances our research and teaching? |
|
|
|
4. How can anthropology
gain more authority to speak about important issues, and find a public voice? |
|
|
|
These essays will be
posted to a ‘controversial issues’ section of the theory website, as part of
an effort to open the site up to wider debate and discussion. |
|
|
|
Your third assignment is
going to be more fun. Building on the essays presented in “Off the Edge,” you
will be writing an essay exploring a particular metaphor for understanding
cultural processes. |
|
Class Requirements |
|
|
|
One thing you can expect
from this course is a |
|
|
|
Each week we will have a
lecture or focused presentation followed by a discussion. Sometimes I will
give you specific discussion topics in advance - other times we will have an
open discussion. You are always welcome to make suggestions about topics or
issues for the discussion period. You can call me, talk to me after class, or
send me email. You must expect to participate regularly in these discussions,
and demonstrate that you are keeping up with the reading. Don't be
intimidated by other students! Other people will always seem to understand
the material better than you, but believe me, it is rarely true. |
|
|
|
You should expect to join
a reading group to meet informally out of class time each week. I strongly
discourage forming groups on the basis of your experience or academic
background - you will get more from a diverse group. |
|
|
|
Grades |
|
|
|
Your grade in the course
is based on four grades each of which counts for one fourth of the total.
Three grades cover the quality of the written assignments, and the fourth the
quality of your participation in class discussion, group decision-making, and
preparation and processing of information for inclusion in the website. |
|
|
|
TEXTS - all are required
and available in the IU bookstore |
|
|
|
The first is our general
text for the semester: |
|
|
|
Barnard, A. 2000
History and Theory in Anthropology. |
|
|
|
The others: |
|
|
|
Lofgren, O. and Wilk, R.
eds. 2006 Off the Edge: Experiments in Cultural Analysis. Museum Tusculanum. |
|
Latour, Bruno. We have
never been modern. |
|
Jenkins, R. 1992 |
|
Fabian, J. 1983 Time and
the Other. |
|
Wolf, E. 1984 |
|
Obeyesekere, G. 1994 The Apotheosis of Captain Cook. |
|
Marcus, G. 1999
Anthropology as Cultural Critique. |
|
|
|
I also thought very hard
about adding this book to the group, since it takes up a major new
theoretical issue, but I decided the topic really requires a course on its
own. |
|
|
|
Brown, Michael 2003 Who
Owns Native Culture? Harvard UP. |
|
|
|
In addition we have a
pile of articles to read. I will make these available to you through the
E-reserves in the Geography library downstairs in the |
|
|
|
The password is “brain” |
|
|
|
Disclaimers, stylistic
guidelines, legal advisories, etc: |
|
|
|
You are responsible for
keeping up with the readings and for attending class regularly. Late
assignments will be accepted, but grades will be reduced. Incompletes are
only given with good reason, and if I am notified two weeks before the final
exam date. |
|
|
|
You are not allowed to
copyright any of my class handouts or other materials, nor can you publish
them or use them in public presentations without my permission. |
|
|
|
You are encouraged to
discuss with classmates and colleagues, and to collaborate in studying,
reading, digesting, and synthesizing class materials. I encourage you to form
study groups and/or reading discussion circles. BUT, all written work
you turn in must be your own individual work, unless you make arrangements
with me in advance for a co-authorship. Co-authored work gets one grade which
is shared by all authors. |
|
|
|
Plagiarism is a serious
breach of academic ethics. Use full footnotes and references for all quoted
or attributed materials. Since we will be publishing class work on the web,
we need to pay careful attention to copyright restrictions on fair use. We
also need to use a uniform style for text and references: |
|
|
|
American Anthropologist
reference and bibliography style is required for all class materials. This
means in-line citations. The AA style guide is at
http://www.aaanet.org/pubs/style_guide.htm |
|
All printed materials
should be in Times New Roman font, 12 point type with 1-inch margins all
around. |
|
Any files submitted must
be in HTML. I will provide the basic
template for each assignment, and you will fill it in. Make sure you turn off all hyphenation.
Spell check everything. |
|
Graphics are always
encouraged. Pictures should be scanned and converted to GIF or JPG formats in
standard 72dpi for web publishing. I can show you how to do this. |
|
Send me files as MSWord
attachments via email, not through Oncourse unless I specifically tell you to
do so. |
|
|
|
I am always available for
consultation and discussion in my office. Please don't wait until the last
minute to discuss problems, readings, or issues with me! I am always very
busy, but I will always make time to talk about something important, except
during the last three weeks of the semester when I have very little time
available. |
|
|
|
Email is often the best
way to ask me brief questions, to check on assignments, or make short
comments. If you miss class, contact me by email to find out if you have been
assigned some discussion for the next week. |
|
|
|
We will use Oncourse (old
version) for most basic assignment information, and for sharing drafts of group
work. |