Paper Four: Rethinking "Society" and "Culture"

Due: Monday, December 12 by 5 pm at my office (312 Vollum). Late Paper Policy.

Length and Format: No more than 5-7 pages, double-spaced, 1 inch margins all around, 12 point fonts. Please spellcheck. They should be well-organized, with a clear argument supported by evidence from readings.

Citation: Note that you are expected to use anthropological citation for all papers in this class. See Citation Practices for Anthropology Papers.

Evaluation: I will evaluate and respond to papers based on (in order of priority):

1. Degree to which you respond to the assignment and incorporate ideas and issues from class materials in your discussion;
   
2. Extent to which you demonstrate clear understanding of basic terms presented in the course;
3. the creativity and originality of your ideas
4. The clarity of your organization and writing

Topic: This semester we've read anthropological theory and ethnography with an eye to placing its emergence and development in its historical and political economic contexts. We have seen how early theorists drew on impressions and assumptions about the "savage" or "primitive" other to construct theories of cultural or social collectivities. With this paper, we revisit contested notions of "society" and/or "culture" in order to consider how more recent anthropologists have "rethought" the assumed categories and practices of the discipline.

Since theory and practice are inseparable in anthropological analysis, this paper, like the last two, is an exercise to show that you can distill the most important notions, concepts, definitions and methodological recipes from complex texts and use them as tools for your own ethnographic analysis.

Your main task is then twofold:

1. Identify a sociocultural phenomenon (an event, a community, a practice, an institution, etc.) you are familiar with (including phenomena we have read about in this class); and
2. use it as a case study to illustrate the differences between two (or more) theorists' approaches to analyzing important sociocultural relationships and phenomena. At least one of the theorists must come from the 2nd half of the course.

Your consideration of these theoretical approaches can remain simply a compare and contrast exercise, or you may choose to build in your own critique, that is, for example, contrast an approach you find less useful/valid/satisfying with one you find to be better. Of course, then you would need to provide clear evidence why one approach is superior. Or construct a reasoned synthesis of 2 or more approaches.

Whatever tack you take though, you must, early in your paper, characterize the overall approach of your chosen theorists to the analysis of society and/or culture. That is, how do they explicitly or implicitly define "society" or "culture"? What are their main units of analysis? What do they thus assume about the nature of "individuals," "meaning," or human action? If you don't understand this, then you'll need to read very carefully, and/or consult with me or your peers.

Hints:

• This analysis would work best with a stark contrast, that is, between two very different or opposing definitions and approaches to "culture" and/or "society". Thus you might consider contrasting a theorist from the first half of the course ("Precedents") with one (or more) from the second half ("Rethinking Anthropology").
  
  
• Use your "theory map" note-taking to prepare for the paper by going back and considering what theorists meant by "culture" and/or "society", their main units of analysis.
  
  
• Get clear on the overall "gestalt" of your chosen theorists' arguments: how do their respective approaches to "society" and/or "culture" fit into their overall goals and broad assumptions (about humanity, nature, power, economy, kinship, etc.).
  
  
• Develop a thesis: an argument about how exactly these two approaches differ, and what might be the implications of those differences (methodological, epistemological, political, etc.).
  
  
• Apply them to an analysis Apply them to an analysis of important aspects of your chosen phenomenon: Show what is it that makes it a sociocultural phenomenon by explicitly referring to your theorists' definitions (notions, meanings) of "society"/"the social" and/or "culture". Note that their definitions might have remained implicit in the readings you read.
  

For instance: "... Geertz conceives of "culture" as XXX, characterized by blah, blah; he differentiates it from blah, blah, and emphasizes YYY. Rastafarians could thus be seen to constitute a culture in Geertz' sense."

• As a way to argue your thesis about the main differences and implications thereof between these approaches, Illustrate how an ethnographic account of your chosen phenomenon might differ if it were written by your chosen theorists.

  For instance: "... If Anna Tsing studied Rastafarians she would have explored X, paid special attention to Y, dismissed Z as irrelevant, misleading, etc. and shown how phenomenon Q and phenomenon P interact in the fashion R ...".
  
  By contrast: : " ... if Rastafarians were studied not by Anna Tsing but by Geertz, or Mary Douglas, or Eric Wolf, or Marshal Sahlins, or Radcliffe-Brown, etc., he/she would pay special attention to F rather than Y, dismiss K rather than Z as irrelevant, etc., etc.).

• In conclusion, briefly discuss how both the notion of culture and practice of ethnography changed in the last several decades and consider the implications of the differences you found in the theories you applied for an understanding of your chosen phenomenon.

Top