Culture/Power/Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology
Culture/Power/Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology
复制标题
文化/权力/场所：批判人类学的探索
DOI：
10.2307/3318089
复制
发表时间：
1998
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
James Ferguson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Hodgson;Akhil Gupta;James Ferguson
文化/权力/场所：批判人类学的探索。编辑：Akhil Gupta和James Ferguson。北卡罗来纳州达勒姆：杜克大学出版社，1997年；361页。在我们不懈地寻找理解“文化”的理论指导的过程中，文化人类学家长期以来一直在寻找其他分析领域和学科的洞察力。通过将“文化”与生态、个性、历史或现在的“权力”和“场所”相抗衡，我们不仅试图通过探索什么不是文化来界定什么是文化的模糊轮廓，更重要的是试图理解文化是如何产生、复制和转化的。作为这一探索的一部分，当代人类学家首先求助于历史(例如，想想尼古拉斯·德克斯、雪莉·奥特纳和杰夫·埃利编辑的重要著作《文化/权力/历史》)，最近又转向地理学寻求帮助。地理学的概念机器的广泛吸引力体现在人类学最近的标题中过多的空间隐喻中--风景、空间、地点、地图、位移、全球、局部，仅举几例。文化/权力/地点是对当前文化人类学理论轨迹的一个里程碑式的贡献。这本选集在修订版中转载了开创性的理论论文(丽莎·马尔基、约翰·伯恩曼、詹姆斯·弗格森、丽莎·罗菲尔、阿克希尔·古普塔、阿克希尔·古普塔和詹姆斯·弗格森)，这些文章首次出现在1992年的一期《文化人类学》杂志上，专门讨论人类学中的空间和地点主题。这些论文，特别是马尔基、古普塔、古普塔和弗格森的论文，自首次发表以来，已成为当前重新思考文化与国家、领土、身份、差异、跨国进程和权力之间关系的关键。这本书中另外的七篇论文(其中一些，比如克里斯汀·科普蒂奇的文章，也是已发表文章的重印版本)补充、强化和复杂化了这些早期文章中提出的主题(所有这些文章最初都是在美国人类学协会年会的三个小组会议上提出的)。因此，这本书具有编辑选集中罕见的理论连贯性和深度，编辑Akhil Gupta和James Ferguson应该受到赞扬。两个主题组织了这本书的形式和贡献：文化和空间的问题，以及文化和权力的关系。正如古普塔和弗格森在他们的导言和文章中所说的那样，地点的概念一直隐含在文化理论中。这些术语可以是早期人类学中有地域限制、有象征意义的“文化”和“文化区域”的概念(以及假定的空间、地点和文化的同构)，也可以是当前对“全球”和“局部”感兴趣的概念。明确这些假设使人类学家能够超越文化，以分析文化和地方之间的关系，特别是在同一性和差异性的空间化生产中。换句话说，正如约翰·达勒姆·彼得斯在他关于事实和虚构的挑衅性之旅中所建议的那样，人类学家必须学会“双焦点观察”，即在我们的人种学研究中同时阅读当地和全球的情况。第一节中其余文章的作者使用详细的人种学研究来探索和扩展这一论点的各个方面。有几篇论文对文化理论中的民族和民族主义概念提出了质疑。Lisa Malkki通过对坦桑尼亚两个胡图族难民定居点的比较研究，探索了关于国家和民族主义的观念如何影响人类学研究以及文化和身份认同的理论。在对马尔基分析的一个令人回味的补充中，约翰·博尼曼研究了Heimat(家，家园)与二战后德国国家、民族和领土的结构和重组有关的不断变化的、矛盾的含义。…
Culture/Power/Place: Explorations in Critical Anthropology. AKHIL GUPTA and JAMES FERGUSON, eds. Durham NC: Duke University Press, 1997; 361 pp. In our relentless search for theoretical guidance in understanding "culture," the central conceptual cornerstone of our discipline, cultural anthropologists have long looked to other analytic realms and disciplines for insight. By counterpoising "culture" to ecology, personality, history, or now, "power" and "place," we have tried to not only define the nebulous contours of what culture is by exploring what it is not, but sought, more importantly, to understand how culture is produced, reproduced, and transformed. As part of this pursuit, contemporary anthropologists have turned first to history (think, for example, of the important volume Culture/power/ history edited by Nicholas Dirks, Sherry Ortner, and Geoff Eley), and more recently to geography for assistance. The widespread appeal of geography's conceptual apparatus is revealed in the plethora of spatial metaphors -- landscapes, spaces, places, maps, displacement, global, local, to name just a few - in recent titles in anthropology. Culture/power/place is a landmark contribution to this current theoretical trajectory in cultural anthropology. The anthology reprints, in revised versions, the ground-breaking theoretical essays (by Lisa Malkki, John Borneman, James Ferguson, Lisa Rofel, Akhil Gupta, and Akhil Gupta and James Ferguson) which first appeared in a 1992 special issue of the journal Cultural Anthropology dedicated to the theme of space and place in anthropology. Since their initial publication these essays, especially those by Malkki, Gupta, and Gupta and Ferguson, have become pivotal to current rethinkings of the relationship between culture and nation, territoriality, identity, difference, transnational processes, and power. The additional seven essays in the volume (some of which, like Kristin Koptiuch's, are also reprinted versions of published articles) complement, enhance, and complicate the themes raised in these earlier essays (all of the pieces were originally presented at three panels for the American Anthropological Association annual meetings). The volume therefore has a theoretical coherence and depth rarely found in edited collections, for which the editors, Akhil Gupta and James Ferguson, should be commended. Two themes organize the format and contributions of the volume: issues of culture and space, and the relationship of culture and power. As Gupta and Ferguson argue in their introduction and in their article, ideas of place have always been implicit in cultural theory. The terms may be the territorially circumscribed, symbolically bounded notions of "cultures" and "culture areas" in earlier anthropology (and the assumed isomorphism of space, place, and culture) or those of current interests in the "global" and "local." Making these assumptions explicit enables anthropologists to go "beyond culture" in order to analyze the relationship between culture and place, particularly in the spatialized production of identity and difference. In other words, as John Durham Peters suggests in his provocative tour through fact and fiction, anthropologists must learn to "see bifocally," that is to read the local and global simultaneously in our ethnographic studies. Authors of the remaining essays in the first section use detailed ethnographic studies to explore and expand aspects of this argument. Several papers problematize the concept of nation and nationalism in cultural theory. Lisa Malkki explores how ideas about nations and nationalism inform anthropological studies and theories of culture and identity, in part through her comparative study of two settlements of Hutu refugees in Tanzania. In an evocative complement to Malkki's analysis, John Borneman investigates the shifting, ambivalent meanings of Heimat (home, homeland) in relation to the structuring and restructuring of state, nation, and territory in post World War II Germany. …