Identity, violence, and the uncomfortable necessity of categorization
Identity, violence, and the uncomfortable necessity of categorization
复制标题
身份、暴力以及令人不安的分类必要性
DOI：
10.1086/721343
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Kaur R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kaur R
在女权主义（见Visweswaran 1997）、写作文化（Clifford and Marcus 1986）和非殖民化批评（Harrison 1997, 2011; Kaur and Klinkert 2021）之后，人们对人类学的价值和目的一直存在争议，不满情绪激增。无论是作为方法、理论还是表征，民族志也受到了质疑——因为它将表征者和被表征者之间的权力动态物化、排除和重申（Bejarano et al. 2019）。这些都是棘手的问题，其参数不断被内部、外部和“内部外部”人类学家以不同的方式重新塑造和重新表述（Sharma 2022；也见Narayan 1993）。虽然它经历了几次低谷和转折，但民族志仍然是这门学科长寿的心脏，它在世界各地的无数地方进行了长期的基层研究。然而，民族志的价值毋庸置疑的一点是，当深入的田野调查将人们的历史和当代叙事和经历带到前沿时，这些人的自我表现途径是有限的，如果不是被国家模范和其他社会政治精英严重削弱的话。在这里，“外部”研究人员为被压迫群体发声不需要仅仅是口述（见Haanstad 2014），而是要真正对抗国家对他们的生活和观点的口述（见Yusupov，本期）。它不需要哲学上的反对，即“无声者”如何不能通过自由的人文主义框架得到公平的代表（O’hanlon 1988; Spivak 1988），但确实可能是这些团体渴望获得的。几个世纪以来，东西方、南北之间的地形是不稳定和模糊的，因为影响的浪潮相互交叉。尽管自由主义的人文主义或激进主义的表现方式各不相同、参差不齐、相互冲突，但它们现在无处不在。那些可能成功驾驭它们的人不一定是那些社会的土著，但他们可以从他们所限定的边界之外的人那里迁移，和/或与之合作。在这种情况下，“国际视野”成为摆脱令人窒息的地方或国家政权的重要门户。一个典型的例子是一个民族志，它突出了美拉尼西亚马莱塔的夸奥人的口述历史（Keesing 1992），这在法庭诉讼中发挥了重要作用，最终证明该岛不是澳大利亚政府试图声称的无主地。大量建设拘留中心和“寄宿学校”，以及国家支持的学校
The value and purpose of anthropology has long been debated, with discontent that saw a surge after feminist (see Visweswaran 1997), Writing culture (Clifford and Marcus 1986), and decolonizing critiques (Harrison 1997, 2011; Kaur and Klinkert 2021). Whether it be as method, theory, and/or representation, ethnography too has been put under question—for objectifying, excluding, and reiterating power dynamics between the representer and the represented (Bejarano et al. 2019). These are thorny questions whose parameters are constantly being reshaped and rearticulated by insider, outsider, and “insideroutsider” anthropologists in different ways (Sharma 2022; see also Narayan 1993). While it has taken several dips and turns, ethnography continues to be the beating heart of the discipline’s longevity, with its longue durée, grassroots research in countless localities across the world. One point where ethnography’s worth remains unquestionable, however, is when in-depth fieldwork brings to the fore historical and contemporary narratives and experiences of people whose avenues for self-representation are limited, if not severely curtailed by paragons of the state and other sociopolitical elites. Here, giving voice to oppressed groups by “outside” researchers need not be mere ventriloquism (see Haanstad 2014), but one that actually counters the state’s ventriloquizing of their lives and views (see Yusupov, this issue). It need not necessitate philosophical objections about how the “voiceless” cannot be fairly represented through a liberal humanist framework (O’Hanlon 1988; Spivak 1988), but indeed may be what those groups aspire to have access to. The terrain between East and West, North and South is unstable and blurred as waves of influences have crossed each other throughout the centuries. Even though manifesting themselves in very different, uneven, and conflicted ways, liberal humanist or activist avenues are now everywhere. Those who might successfully navigate them may not always be those who are indigenous to those societies but could move from, and/or collaborate with those from outside their circumscribed boundaries. In such cases, the “international eye” becomes an essential portal out of suffocating local or national regimes. A case in point is an ethnography that foregrounds oral histories among the Kwaio people in Malaita, Melanesia (Keesing 1992), which played an instrumental part in court proceedings, eventually proving that the island was not terra nullius as the Australian government tried to claim. Fieldwork in northeast Sri Lanka and afterwards with Tamil refugees is another case that played a palpable part in bringing to light human rights violations, with the circulation of articles, documentaries, graphic narratives, and international proceedings on the violence exacted by the state and insurgents against ordinary people in a civil war that brutally ended in 2009 (Dix and Kaur 2019). And more recently, ethnographies have played an integral part in illuminating the cases of oppression and atrocities against the Uyghur and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang, a borderland state in northwest China. While ethnic minorities in Xinjiang have undergone discrimination and state surveillance since the beginning of the communist reign and even earlier, Xi Jinping’s campaign against the “three evils” of terrorism, separatism, and extremism in the province in 2014, and his decision in 2015 to assign Party Secretary Chen Quanguo to rule the territory, have dramatically increased the level of state terror. An intensive spate of construction of detention centers and “boarding schools,” along with state-backed
绘画-写作文化：一部关于斯里兰卡内战和移民的民族图画小说的真实与虚构光谱
影响因子：
0.8
作者：
B. Dix;R. Kaur
通讯作者：
R. Kaur
本土主义的不安全感
DOI：
10.1086/719413
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory
影响因子：
--
作者：
Malvika Sharma
通讯作者：
Malvika Sharma
去殖民化的民族志
DOI：
10.1086/713966
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
Journal of Ethnographic Theory
影响因子：
--
作者：
Kaur R
通讯作者：
Kaur R