Claiming and knowing the real: authenticity today
Claiming and knowing the real: authenticity today
复制标题
声称并了解真实:今天的真实性
DOI:
10.1111/1467-9655.12215
复制
发表时间:
2015
影响因子:
1.2
通讯作者:
Douglas-Jones R
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Douglas-Jones R
While writing this book review, I was asked to give an overview of my first year of teaching at a Danish University to a workshop for incoming international staff. A meeting with the workshop co-ordinators furnished me with PowerPoint slides from previous speakers, although they assured me it didn't matter what I focused on. What I should deliver, they felt, was an'authentic account'. Euro-American anthropology has an uneasy relationship with the concept of authenticity, whether in its connotations of inner, personal genuineness requested of me as a speaker, its still recent association of'essential meanings' and'authentic culture'(Asad 1979; Strathern 1995: 3), or its current ubiquitous use in heritage and tourism. In its more implicit days, the authentic was sought unquestioningly:'[T] he anthropological concern was with" real" tradition', writes Macdonald in the introduction to Memorylands; twentieth-century careers and ambitions built on'gathering up information about ways of life deemed to be on the brink of disappearing'(Memorylands [ML]: 29). In its current, more explicit era, the constructions, practices, processes, negotiations, truth claims, and effects of authenticity are anthropologically analysed. But its transition from desired to critiqued practice has been far from smooth, and the disentanglement of its connotations of the genuine, the essential, the true, and the real from analytical language can perhaps never be complete. How, then, is it to be written about today, what modes of reasoning might it encompass (Debating authenticity [DA]: 144)? As the editors of Debating authenticity suggest, the'dichotomy between academic use of the term and the one deployed in public spaces and political projects'{DA: blurb) is a juncture at which it is worth pausing, and in the review below, I do so for each of these three recent publications. Fillitz and Saris handle the complex conceptual past of authenticity most elegantly, their introduction to Debating authenticity's twelve chapters providing students and scholars with a critical handle on the disciplinary history, periodicity, and philosophical inheritances of the concept. The'spectre of authenticity', they write,'can still be found at the anthropological banquet'{DA: 8), pointing to anthropologists professionally implicated in legitimation, authorizing, and adjudicating claims of the authentic (eg Clifford 1988).'Debating'is an appropriate title verb, since the assembled chapters take radically distinct approaches to both the study and use of the term. Fillitz and Saris are'struck by the ubiquity of the notion of authenticity'(DA: 1); they are also
登录
查看更多内容
DOI:
--
发表时间:
2011
期刊:
HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory
影响因子:
--
作者:
D. M. Schneider
通讯作者:
D. M. Schneider
影响因子:
0.4
作者:
P. Nora
通讯作者:
P. Nora
DOI:
--
发表时间:
2012
期刊:
HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory
影响因子:
--
作者:
Casper Bruun Jensen;A. Morita
通讯作者:
A. Morita
DOI:
--
发表时间:
1979
期刊:
影响因子:
--
作者:
T. Asad
通讯作者:
T. Asad
DOI:
--
发表时间:
1994
期刊:
影响因子:
--
作者:
R. Koshar
通讯作者:
R. Koshar