Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
To cite this article: Polier Nicole & Roseberry William (1989) Tristees tropes: post-modern anthropologists encounter the
other and discover themselves, Economy and Society, 18:2, 245-264, DOI: 10.1080/03085148900000012
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be
liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of
the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Tristes tropes: post- -
modern anthropologists
encounter the other and
discover themselves
Nicole Polier and William Roseberry
Abstract
by the authors to describe any ethnography that 'seeks to represent the reality
of a whole world or form of life' (1982: 29). Extending the literary analogy a
step further, realism is reduced to an 'effect' achieved through the careful, at
times artful, choice of ethnographic detail. In this way the reader of social
sciences -whom Marcus and Cushman regard as a benighted soul - is lulled
by a flood of facts and the monograph is 'respectfully marginalized as a
medium for providing trivial information.' (1982: 52)
In this view, representation, empiricism and descriptive realism all fall
within the dominant paradigm of positivism. We are not told what positivist
practice actually is, except by tautology: unselfconscious representation, thick
description, positivism, and an empiricist faith are all tarred with the same
brush. Positivism 'becomes a swear-word, by which nobody is swearing'
(Williams, 1976: 201). Although the post-modernists have located in empiri-
cism a genuine (and well known) problem, two aspects of their approach
preclude a careful consideration of it. One is their dismissive attitude toward
science; another is their largely uncritical appropriation of literary theory.
Stephen Tyler begins his contribution to Writing Clrltlrrewith an autopsy of
science and the modern world that produced it. 'Science's' problem, we are
told, was rooted in a 'disjunction of language and the world' (Tyler,
1986: 123), a contradiction between a language adequate to represent the
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
chooses. While rhetorical analysis may share common features with cultural
analysis, however, some rather obvious differences outweigh the similarities.
In the end, using literature as more of an homologue than a limited analogue
mystifies more than it illuminates the practice and process of social research.
The most remarkable statement of this view is made by Tyler. In response
to apparent questions from other participants in Writing Culture, Tyler
contends that 'no object of any kind precedes and constrains the ethnography.
It creates its own objects in its unfolding and the reader suppliers the rest'
(Tyler, 1986: 138)." This presents us with an untenable choice between a
naive and mechanical evocation of 'the real world' and a nihilistic denial of
experience. The opposition is a false one, based upon a choice between an
unreflective empiricist view of the material world as 'out there', an object for
passive reception and assimilation, and a subjective view of the object world as
sin~pbthe creation of the perceiving subject. Here textualism's promise - as a
multi-stranded reflection upon the historical and cultural construction of
knowledge - is betrayed. In this view, there is neither history nor culture until
and unless the ethnographer finds words to express them. Without the
ethnographer, there is 'only a disconnected array of chance happenings'
(Tyler, 1986: 138).
In our view, Gramsci presented a more useful resolution of this problem,
one that rejects the simplistic dualism proposed by some post-modernists, in
his critique of Bukharin. In a section on 'The So-Called "Reality of the
External World," ' he suggests that simple reference to objective facts
250 Nicole Polier and William Rosebeny
Obviously East and West are arbitrary and conventional, that is historical,
constructions, since outside of real history every point on the earth is East
and West at the same time. This can be seen more clearly from the fact
that these terms have crystallized not from the point of view of a
hypothetical melancholic man in general but from the point of view of the
European cultured classes who, as a result of their world-wide hegemony,
have caused them to be accepted everywhere. . . . So because of the
historical content that has become attached to the geographical terms, the
expressions East and West have finished up indicating specific relations
between different cultural complexes. . . . And yet these references are
real; they correspond to real facts, they allow one to travel by land and by
sea, to arrive when one had decided to arrive, to 'foresee' the future, to
objectivise reality, to understand the objectivity of the external world.
(Gramsci 1971: 447-8)
Two aspects of Gramsci's argument are important here. First is the location
of objectivity, of facts, in processes of historical construction; second is the
location of that construction in fields of power, in the 'specific relations
between cultural complexes', a problem to which we return in a subsequent
section. But, it might be argued, this does not address the ethnographer's
dilemma. If 'the real' is the 'historically and culturally real', we still must
confront the problem of knowledge across cultural complexes, even in a world
in which East and West have been defined in a particular field of power. The
problem is formidable, but it cannot be resolved with an a priori denial of
'facts' and 'experience'. As ethnographers conduct their fieldwork, they deal
Tristes tropes 25 1
with certain 'facts' by virtue of their prolonged experience with living human
beings. They see things happen - a market transaction, a ceremony, a fight.
People tell them things - about their neighbors, about the merchants with
whom they deal, about their husbands or children, about their own
childhoods. These 'facts' do not speak for themselves. Much of the
ethnographer's efforts will be devoted to making sense of them - placing them
in the context of other 'facts' (other market transactions or ceremonies, other
fights, other stories) as well as the larger context of the community and region
in ~ h i c hthese events took place and these stories were told. The ethnogra-
pher poses questions to the facts, some of which have to do with their
relationship to other facts and some of which have to do with the
ethnographer's own intellectual, political and personal preoccupations. The
result, as Geertz and others have pointed out, is necessarily a series of
constructions upon constructions. Our facts are made, but they are not made
up.' T h e events we see and the stories we are told constrain us; they impose
upon us a certain discipline (cf. Thompson 1978: 37-50).
social life all 'genres, texts and voices' are no! created equal. T h e point is plain
but apposite: in the production of ethnographic texts, the ethnographers
privilege is precisely a discourse on the discourse.
T h e metaphor of transference has been invoked for the dialogic encounter
between 'participants' in the ethnographic situation. In an essay on ethnicity,
Fischer (1986) extends the metaphor in a discussion of the psychic odyssey of
the individual in the construction of ethnicity - couched in the language of
self-determination. But the metaphor betrays the illusion of social equality
between the fieldworker and her or his putative partner. Transference comes
from the discourse of psychology and psychiatric practice. T h e process takes
place in a clinical context in which the 'curer' - in this case an ethnographer -
has a claim on knowledge of and knowledge over the analysand. In exchange,
the professional may or may not confer the accolade of mental health on the
subject - defined and verified in terms of the dominant discourse of
psychiatry. The context of transference is one of unequal power and
knowledge, and as a process can only be fully understood as a social relation.
Transference as a social relation of unequal power may be entirely mystified,
but it is no less real.
In practice the discursive space which the fieldworker occupies is not one of'
shared circumstance in which all others are created equal with equal freedom
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
can be reduced to one of styles of writing and reading in which the context of
power is elided. Concentration on the problem of cultural translation leaves
less space for a retreat into literary theory and suggests that, '[Plerhaps there is
a greater stiffness in ethnographic linguistic conventions, a greater intrinsic
resistance than can be overcome by individual experiments in modes of
ethnographic representation' (Asad, 1986: 158).
T o understand such stiffness and resistance, we need to consider carefully
a variety of larger contexts - the economic and political processes at work in
our own societies and in the societies we study, processes that place us and
them in certain kinds of relationship; the intellectual and political processes at
work within our discipline and within the academy, processes that encourage
certain forms of investigation, of expression, and of debate. Unfortunately,
post-modern ethnographers are hesitant to examine such larger contexts. It is
toward that hesitance that we now turn.
discourses are constituted - drop from view. Social processes are reduced to
disembodied signs, accessible only to the abstract logic of the semiotician.
By collapsing the message into the medium - the semiotic collage with all of
its sutures showing - Clifford commits two conceptual blunders. First, he
confuses a metaphor for a social fact. T h e process of pastiche and the process
of writing fiction share certain features with the production of ethnographic
texts, but, as we argued above, it is the difference that makes the difference:
our facts are not made up.
T h e second blunder follows from the first. T h e fragment is treated as real
rather than metaphorical and made to stand in place of a social whole. In this
argument efforts to reconstitute social wholes are resoundingly rejected as a
fool's errand: neither a social whole nor the connections between fragments
exist. Marx, by contrast, saw the commodity under advanced capitalism as the
kernel of social life and the 'concentration of many determinations'' -
fragmentary in appearance only, but not in fact. T h e commodity, like the
postmodern fragment, would seem to have a life of its own, detached from
history and social process. It was the seeming autonomy and sentience of the
commodity that Marx had in mind when he wrote of the fetishism of
commodities and their secret; this autonomy, he said, was illusory.
Here, however, Clifford turns material life on its head. Social life is
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
have before us models to avoid, from those authors who stress unity to such an
extent that they make the modern world homogeneous (as in extreme versions
of world-systems theory) to those who stress diversity to such an extent that
they create sharp and antihistorical disjunctions between the capitalist West
(the ship) and the noncapitalist, non-Western Other (the shore), privileged
preserve of anthropological practice (Ortner, 1984), extreme views which may
share more assumptions than their adherents care to admit. Among the
post-modernists we are considering in this essay, Marcus (1986) has made the
most serious effort to address these problems. Unfortunately, this effort is
marred (a) by its acceptance of a version of world-systems theory (cf. Marcus,
1981) and (b) by its attempt to 'background' capitalism while writing more
fine-grained ethnographies." This is at once too much and too little. It is too
much in that its understanding of capitalism is much too systemic and
seamless. It is too little in that it makes 'the system' static. Taken together,
these two problems have the effect of reaffirming the autonomy of the
fragment, the apparent source of dynamism, counterpoised to the static
capitalist whole, the ready-made system, 'rhere, so to speak, to be invoked'
(Marcus, 1986: 173). Paradoxically, this is where world-systems theory and
post-modernism come together conceptually: they share a totalizing view of the
capitalist system. For the world-systems theorists, the system becomes
determinant; for the post-modernists, given the evident inadequacy of such a
view, reference to systemic relationships disappears altogether. For both,
determination is conceived of as total: if there is no total determination, then
there must be no determination at all.
The problem remains one of understanding the constitution of anthropo-
258 Nicole Polier and Willian~Roseberry
struggle shift to distant corners ofthe world, and so on. Although our object of
criticism in this essay is more limited than Jameson's in that we are looking at a
particular group of authors in anthropology, and although we are skeptical of
the epochal search for 'cultural logics' of early, middle and late capitalism, we
appreciate his attempt to understand particular intellectual movements in
terms ofpolitical, economic and social histories. In this light, we return to our
linkage of world-systems theory and post-modernism, not at the level of
shared assumptions but at the level of shared intellectual and cultural
experiences. We propose here that both world-systems theory and post-
modernism can be seen as intellectual frameworks characteristic of a
post-hegemonic imperial academy. That is, if we consider the U S (and the
authors we have been discussing teach in US universities and write primarily
for Northamerican audiences), the post-war decades (roughly 1945-70) were
characterized by the US'S apparently vigorous and unshakeable world
hegemony, for which modernization theory was its most confident expression.
T h e past fifteen years have been characterized by deepening, if not constant,
crisis and restructuring. World-systems theory and post-modern thought,
both of which arose out of the critiques of modernization theory, can be seen
as intellectual expressions of that crisis. Extreme versions of world-systems
theory, which absorbed the more mechanical strains of Latin American
dependency thought (see Cardoso, 1977), had the effect of denying the
possibility of movement in the system precisely at the moment when
movement became more possible. Extreme versions of post-modern thought
had the efect of denying a world of politics and economics as both became more
threatening.
260 Nicole Polier and Williatn Roseberry
Departmen t ofAnthropo1og)l
The Graduate Faarltjl
Nem School for Social Research
Nem York
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
Acknowledgements
Among the many people who have scolded or complimented us for this essay,
we especially want to thank Jay O'Brien, Sid Mintz, Jane Schneider, Gerry
Sider and the reviewers for Econom)~and Socie~jfor their specific suggestions.
Notes
one of its ideal forms, would result in a polyphonic text, none ofwhose
participants would have the final word in the form of a framing story or
encompassing synthesis - a discourse on the discourse. It might be just the
dialogue itself, or possibly a series of juxtaposed paratactic tellings of a shared
circumstance, as in the Synoptic Gospels, or perhaps only a sequence of separate
tellings in search of a common theme. (Tyler, 1986: 126)
7 Calling this form of essay 'modernist', Marcus writes:
The modernist form of the essay. . . absolves the writer from having to develop
the broader implications of his thought (while nonetheless indicating that there
are such implications) or of having to tie loose ends together. T h e essayist can
mystify the world, leave his subjects' actions open-ended as to their global
implications, from a rhetorical posture of profound half-understanding, half-
bewilderment. . . . This is thus a form well suited to a time such as the present,
when paradigms are in disarray, problems intractable, and phenomena only partly
understood. It is finally a hedge on the holistic commitments of anthropological
ethnography. (Marcus 1986: 191)
Further:
The ethnography as modern essay profoundly disrupts the commitment to holism
that is at the heart of most realist ethnography and that is increasingly
problematic. . . . It does not promise that its subjects are part of a larger order.
Instead, by the open-endedness of the form, it evokes a broader world of
uncertain order - this is the pose the modernist essay cultivates supremely.
(ibid.: 192)
8 As far as it goes, it is true that the Paris circle of surrealists identified their artificial
arrangements as a burlesque ofbourgeois society. But it is also true that surrealism was
deliberately inaccessible to rational thought processes. The real was considered a
pathway to the surreal, a private realm to which the individual retreated to unleash
262 Nicole Polier and William Roseberg1
10 In doing so, they practise a form of cultural relativism which they call 'cultural
critique' (Marcus and Fischer, 1986; Fischer, 1986; Crapanzano, 1987). Fischer
expresses his relativistic critique as 'bifocality':
The juxtaposing of exotic customs to familiar ones, or the relativizing of
taken-for-granted assumptions, has always been the kind of cultural criticism
promised by anthropology. This bifocality, or reciprocity of perspectives, has
become increasingly important in a world of growing interdependence between
societies. . . . 'Bifocality' moreover must increasingly be a shorthand for 'two or
more' cultures in juxtaposition and comparison. Successful cross-cultural
comparison requires at least a third case to avoid simplistic better-worse
judgments, to foster multiple axes of comparison, and to evoke a sense of the
larger universes in which cultures are situated (see also Marcus in this volume).
(Fischer, 1986: 199)
We get hints of a larger world, and are told to read Marcus to learn all about it, but the
cultures are still seen as separate. They are jrixtaposed, as in a collage, rather than
connected, as in history.
11 As he expresses it:
[Elthnographers who write explicitly within the [sic] Marxist theoretical tradition
have the powerful advantage of placing the larger order in the background while
focusingintensely upon a close& observed locale as ethnographic sibject.
Because familiarity. or at least acauaintance. with the Marxist framework can be
assumed on the part of the reader; much of the work of inventing a representation
of the larger order is accomplished merely by orienting or referring the situated
ethnography to issues of Marxist theory. T h e Marxist system is there, so to speak,
to be invoked. (Marcus, 1986: 173)
References
Strrdies in Sociep and History 23(4): 539- Geoffrey Nowell Smith, New York,
64. International Publishers, p. 419-72.
-(1983) 'On Ethnographic Jameson, Frederick (1984)
Authority', Representations l(2): 118-46 'Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic
-(1986) 'Introduction', in James of Late Capitalism', Arpm LeJi Reriem
Clifford and George Marcus (eds), 146: 53-92.
Writing Ctlltirre. Berkeley, University of Jay, Martin (1984) Mamisrn atid Totalit)!,
California Press, p. 1-26. Berkeley, University of California Press.
Clifford,James and Marcus, George Keesing, Roger (1982) Kmaio Religion,
(eds) (1986) Writing Crrltirre, Berkeley, New York, Columbia University Press.
University of California Press. -(1985) 'Kwaio Women Speak: The
Crapanzano, Vincent (1977) 'The Micropolitics of Autobiography in a
Writing of Ethnography', Dialectical Solomon Island Society', Anierican
Anthropology 2: 69-73. Anthropologist 87(1): 27-39.
-(1986) 'Hermes' Dilemma: The -(1987) 'Anthropology as
Masking of Subversion in Ethnographic Interpretive Quest', Ciirrent Anthropology
Description', in James Clifford and 28(2): 161-76.
George Marcus (eds), Writing Grltlrre, Lyotard,Jean-Francois (1984) The
Berkeley, University of California Press, Pos~niodernConditiort, Minneapolis,
p. 51-76. University of Minnesota Press.
-(1987) 'Editorial', Crrltural Marcus, George (1980) 'Rhetoric and
Anthropology 2(2): 179-89. the Ethnographic Genre in
Donner, Florinda (1982) Shabono, Anthropological Research', CIIrrre~t
New York, Laurel Books. Anthropology 21: 507-10.
Dwyer, Kevin (1977) 'The Dialogic of -(1981) 'Power on the Extreme
Anthropology', DialecticalAnthropology Periphery: The Perspective of Tongan
2: 143-51. Elites in the Modern World System',
-(1982)Moroccan Dialogzres, Pacific Viewpoint 22(1): 48-64.
264 Nicole Polier and William Rosebc
Mike Gane, born 1943. Educated at University of Leicester and LSE where
he completed a PhD on the sociology of music. Currently lecturer in the
Department of Social Sciences at Loughborough University, and has
recently published On D~rkheinz'sRules ofSociologicalMerhod. Currently
working on a book on Baudrillard.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
Peter Goodrich born 1954, wrote his PhD at Edinburgh University oil
Linguistics and Law. Subsequently, he has worked on the history and
hermeneutics of English law. He is currently in the Faculty of Law at the
University of Newcastle. He is author of Reading the Law (Blackwell, 1986),
Legal Discourse (Macmillan 1987), and is now working on problems of
grammatology and the common law tradition; his book Languages ofLaw
(Weidenfeld and Nicolson) is to appear in 1989.
Jolzit Shotter has worked in the past in developmental and social psychology.
His long-term concern has been with the development of autonomous
personhood, social identities, and responsible action. Currently, he is one of
a group of professors of general social science developing an experimental,
interdisciplinary study programme at the Rijksuniversiteit of Utrecht, with
citizenship as its central research theme.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
REVIEW
FERNAND BRAUDEL CENTER
A Journal of the
Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of
Economies, Historical Systems, and Civilizations
and
I11 a special issue (XII, 3 , Summer 1989) on Tbe Frencb Revolution and
tbe World-System, including articles by Maurice Agulhon, Josep Fontana,
Patrice Higonnet, and Patrick K. O'Brien.
A brochure containing the Tables of Contents of past issues is avadable
on request.
I
Vol. X, No. 1, our Anniversary Issue: The Work of the Fernand
Braudel Center, is still available.
Managing Editor, h i n v
Fernand Braudel Center
Non-U.S. addmses,
Binghamton, NY 13901
Public
Budgeting
& Finance
Jesse Burkhead (Syracuse University)
Publl~ and Naomi Caiden (California State
University, San Bernardino), edltors
=wwnq
& Finance The fundamental journal of theory and
-
* * M
*
l. I
practice in financial management and
budgeting, at all levels of American
government.
S*.YUI"-X.ll*~-.ME*l
c.w"."!*r
m*.n.oir *u,.lao.m T..E.aol"".
Recent artlcles Include:
.
Du.cow,aavrna --"oar
"RIM mu,--.IJ,L...
am", r w r Ed iaoawnln I..-
dI.-~nwE-l
u n r lDl,l*C4"..*
-L
*.
M -
..
George M. Palumbo reviews the report on
'U*
federal-state-local fi8cal relations.
--
N Y l r m P * I I r n " -I"-,
-nn.alaL"p.a
Glrard M l l l r presents a research agenda on the
investment of public funds.
C. Bradley Doos, Jr. discusses the use of capital
budgeting procedures in U.S. aties.
Downloaded by [University of Glasgow] at 02:44 23 December 2014
PuMIshed Quarterly
The officl.1 journal of the Amdamn
Aswclatlon for Budg.1 and Prognm Analysls
and the Section on BudgeUng and Fi~ncl.1
M8n.gem.nt of the Amorken Society for
Publk Admlnlstratlon.
Subacrlptbn n u s :
Indivlduds: $20&r; w a r s ; $ 5 5 ' 3 ~ ~ .
Institutions: $30/yr; $ 5 8 1 2 ~$8!j/3yrs.
~;
Domestic first-class mall add $121yr.
Foreign surface mall add $12/yr.
Fordgn alrmall add $2!Yyr.