Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/ An ARC blog Sun, 22 Jan 2012 06:46:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44308 Stephen Collier Thu, 05 Apr 2007 01:59:50 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44308 I think Povanelli should not worry too much about this. It has been years since I read any anthropological work -- at least in the elite part of cultural anthropology -- that provided "evidence" or "knowledge" about anything. Mostly it produces theory, witnessing, and some occasional name calling that passes as "politics" or "ethics." And, of course, the main "product" of anthropology is hand-wringing about anthropology. What are the ethics of *that*?? I think Povanelli should not worry too much about this. It has been years since I read any anthropological work — at least in the elite part of cultural anthropology — that provided “evidence” or “knowledge” about anything. Mostly it produces theory, witnessing, and some occasional name calling that passes as “politics” or “ethics.” And, of course, the main “product” of anthropology is hand-wringing about anthropology. What are the ethics of *that*??

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44307 marymurrell Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:16:38 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44307 She explictly said, in reference to the Writing Culture critique, that hers is not a critique of ethnography but a critical of the ethical practice of anthropology (her focus being evidence making and its circulation). Thus, it's wider focus than ethnography (that's me extending her). About your other, earlier question, I don't understand how describing her argument as Euro-American is a critique of it. She explictly said, in reference to the Writing Culture critique, that hers is not a critique of ethnography but a critical of the ethical practice of anthropology (her focus being evidence making and its circulation). Thus, it’s wider focus than ethnography (that’s me extending her). About your other, earlier question, I don’t understand how describing her argument as Euro-American is a critique of it.

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44311 Carlo Caduff Wed, 04 Apr 2007 22:56:50 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44311 Mary: My other question was: How is Povinelli's problem different from the issue raised by Writing Culture? I mean, haven't we been there before? And hasn't part of the answer been to share ethnographic authority? Finally, isn't there a lesson in Foucault's brilliant piece on What is an author? I guess I would still maintain that I think she frames her problem in a very particular (Euro-American) way. But granted that I couldn't come to the talk this might well be totally mistaken. Mary: My other question was: How is Povinelli’s problem different from the issue raised by Writing Culture? I mean, haven’t we been there before? And hasn’t part of the answer been to share ethnographic authority? Finally, isn’t there a lesson in Foucault’s brilliant piece on What is an author?

I guess I would still maintain that I think she frames her problem in a very particular (Euro-American) way. But granted that I couldn’t come to the talk this might well be totally mistaken.

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44310 daromir Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:21:17 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44310 I didn't hear the lecture, but based on Mary's summary, it sounds extremely interesting. Particularly the observation that in anthropology "both sides produce but the one side circulates and the other is subject to that circulation." The reason that I find this interesting is because a lot of contemporary anthropology has focused on the convergence of subject and object. That is to say, anthropologists have made the argument that the subject's problem is the analyst's problem (I am thinking of work by Maurer, Marcus, Miyazaki, and Strathern, among others). I have always been slightly uncomfortable with this argument/observation. First, because it doesn’t seem particularly earthshaking and secondly because it makes wonder what the significance of anthropology is? That is to say, why not just read what Islamic accountants are saying on their blogs and chatrooms about Islamic financial systems, rather than read about what anthropologists have to say about what Islamic accountants are saying about Islamic financial systems? Povinelli (and again I am relying on Mary's summary here, since I wasn't able to attend the lecture in person) suggests that the equivalence between anthropologists and non-anthropologists is problematic. In fact, while there may be some convergence of perspective, the anthropologist and the non-anthropologist both stand in very different places with regard the politics of the circulation of what then becomes anthropological knowledge. This strikes me as an important and interesting critique, but I am unsatisfied with the conclusion that this ethical conflict is simply "the anthropologist’s way of life," as if it is something that we merely need to learn to live with. I find myself unsatisfied with either 1) the first position in which the anthropologist’s problem is the same as the non-anthropologists problem or 2) the notion that anthropology as a vocation means learning to live with the paradox that our forms and methods are ultimately irreconcilable. There seems to be a bigger question here that is going unaddressed. Namely, what is the significance of anthropology? I didn’t hear the lecture, but based on Mary’s summary, it sounds extremely interesting. Particularly the observation that in anthropology “both sides produce but the one side circulates and the other is subject to that circulation.” The reason that I find this interesting is because a lot of contemporary anthropology has focused on the convergence of subject and object. That is to say, anthropologists have made the argument that the subject’s problem is the analyst’s problem (I am thinking of work by Maurer, Marcus, Miyazaki, and Strathern, among others). I have always been slightly uncomfortable with this argument/observation. First, because it doesn’t seem particularly earthshaking and secondly because it makes wonder what the significance of anthropology is? That is to say, why not just read what Islamic accountants are saying on their blogs and chatrooms about Islamic financial systems, rather than read about what anthropologists have to say about what Islamic accountants are saying about Islamic financial systems?

Povinelli (and again I am relying on Mary’s summary here, since I wasn’t able to attend the lecture in person) suggests that the equivalence between anthropologists and non-anthropologists is problematic. In fact, while there may be some convergence of perspective, the anthropologist and the non-anthropologist both stand in very different places with regard the politics of the circulation of what then becomes anthropological knowledge. This strikes me as an important and interesting critique, but I am unsatisfied with the conclusion that this ethical conflict is simply “the anthropologist’s way of life,” as if it is something that we merely need to learn to live with. I find myself unsatisfied with either 1) the first position in which the anthropologist’s problem is the same as the non-anthropologists problem or 2) the notion that anthropology as a vocation means learning to live with the paradox that our forms and methods are ultimately irreconcilable. There seems to be a bigger question here that is going unaddressed. Namely, what is the significance of anthropology?

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44309 daromir Wed, 04 Apr 2007 19:13:41 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44309 Thanks Mary for this synopsis. It sounds like an excellent lecture. Is there anyway that lectures of this nature could be transformed into webcasts? Thanks Mary for this synopsis. It sounds like an excellent lecture. Is there anyway that lectures of this nature could be transformed into webcasts?

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44312 marymurrell Wed, 04 Apr 2007 18:57:06 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44312 Carlo, She would readily admit that it is being made out of "liberal logics." She's not trying to translate an aboriginal lifeworld. In fact, the title of the talk was "forgetting where you are," which refers to the moment when one is only "coping" and no longer "disturbed" (these soft Heideggerian concepts she was using), the moment when one one "stops being an anthropologist." She is an anthropologist and affirms anthropology ('liberal' or no), but she thinks there is an ethical paradox in being so. My question was rather this ethical paradox could possibly pertain to every situation of anthropological questioning. Carlo, She would readily admit that it is being made out of “liberal logics.” She’s not trying to translate an aboriginal lifeworld. In fact, the title of the talk was “forgetting where you are,” which refers to the moment when one is only “coping” and no longer “disturbed” (these soft Heideggerian concepts she was using), the moment when one one “stops being an anthropologist.” She is an anthropologist and affirms anthropology (‘liberal’ or no), but she thinks there is an ethical paradox in being so. My question was rather this ethical paradox could possibly pertain to every situation of anthropological questioning.

]]> Buy Clomid No Prescription - Online DrugStore http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/comment-page-1/#comment-44313 Carlo Caduff Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:27:24 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/04/povinelli-290-lecture/#comment-44313 I wonder where Povinelli's own argument comes from. It seems to me that her argument is not exactly coming from the social relations that she is referring too so emphatically. Euro-Americans, by contrast, are quite used to construe social relations and knowledge as two ontologically different domains. Povinelli's concern might in the end turn out to be less anthropological and more home made than one might think at first glance. I wonder where Povinelli’s own argument comes from. It seems to me that her argument is not exactly coming from the social relations that she is referring too so emphatically. Euro-Americans, by contrast, are quite used to construe social relations and knowledge as two ontologically different domains. Povinelli’s concern might in the end turn out to be less anthropological and more home made than one might think at first glance.

]]>