Pub Date : 2015-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1113729
R. Darnell
The Northwest Coast has long held a seminal role in the ethnographic and theoretical development of anthropology in North America. Both that role and the saliency of Native American Indigenous peoples have seemingly waned over time. Almost invisibly, however, a critical mass of new ethnographic perspectives and a new aspiration toward synthesis have emerged across the sub-disciplines and subject areas of Americanist anthropology in the United States and particularly in Canada. The Northwest Coast as the quintessential culture area has become a more fluid continuum of contact zones intersecting across Northeastern North America, as reflected in the works discussed here.
{"title":"Recent Trends in Northwestern America","authors":"R. Darnell","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1113729","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1113729","url":null,"abstract":"The Northwest Coast has long held a seminal role in the ethnographic and theoretical development of anthropology in North America. Both that role and the saliency of Native American Indigenous peoples have seemingly waned over time. Almost invisibly, however, a critical mass of new ethnographic perspectives and a new aspiration toward synthesis have emerged across the sub-disciplines and subject areas of Americanist anthropology in the United States and particularly in Canada. The Northwest Coast as the quintessential culture area has become a more fluid continuum of contact zones intersecting across Northeastern North America, as reflected in the works discussed here.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"237 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1113729","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1088337
S. Harkness
Attachment theory currently plays an important role in both research and practice concerned with children's healthy development, yet there is mounting criticism of its core assumptions and methods of investigation. Three recent books bring together a number of these criticisms, based on cross-cultural studies of children in diverse environments as well as an historical analysis of how attachment theory was created and sustained over time. The two cross-cultural books (Attachment Reconsidered, edited by Naomi Quinn and Jeannette Mageo, and Different Faces of Attachment, edited by Hiltrud Otto and Heidi Keller) include ethnographic observations of how infants and young children are cared for in many non-Western societies, as well as research on children's behavior in attachment-related situations. Common themes include multiple caregiving, maternal responsiveness, and autonomy versus relatedness, viewed from evolutionary, cross-cultural, and developmental perspectives. Marga Vicedo's historical study (The Nature and Nurture of Love) offers a scholarly account of the creators of attachment theory and the social-historical context of its development. Based on detailed documentation of the intellectual careers of these people, those who influenced them and those who criticized them, Vicedo builds an argument that attachment theory is not as scientifically solid as has been claimed, and that its core ideas are ultimately damaging to mothers. Taken as a whole, these books suggest seven observations on the current “strange situation” of attachment theory, which are summarized at the conclusion of the review.
{"title":"The Strange Situation of Attachment Research: A Review of Three Books","authors":"S. Harkness","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1088337","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1088337","url":null,"abstract":"Attachment theory currently plays an important role in both research and practice concerned with children's healthy development, yet there is mounting criticism of its core assumptions and methods of investigation. Three recent books bring together a number of these criticisms, based on cross-cultural studies of children in diverse environments as well as an historical analysis of how attachment theory was created and sustained over time. The two cross-cultural books (Attachment Reconsidered, edited by Naomi Quinn and Jeannette Mageo, and Different Faces of Attachment, edited by Hiltrud Otto and Heidi Keller) include ethnographic observations of how infants and young children are cared for in many non-Western societies, as well as research on children's behavior in attachment-related situations. Common themes include multiple caregiving, maternal responsiveness, and autonomy versus relatedness, viewed from evolutionary, cross-cultural, and developmental perspectives. Marga Vicedo's historical study (The Nature and Nurture of Love) offers a scholarly account of the creators of attachment theory and the social-historical context of its development. Based on detailed documentation of the intellectual careers of these people, those who influenced them and those who criticized them, Vicedo builds an argument that attachment theory is not as scientifically solid as has been claimed, and that its core ideas are ultimately damaging to mothers. Taken as a whole, these books suggest seven observations on the current “strange situation” of attachment theory, which are summarized at the conclusion of the review.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"178 - 197"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1088337","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1083359
M. Harkin
It is certainly true that anthropology is, more than any other field of inquiry, a science of the emergent. As Andrew A. White suggests, we can stack the sciences up with physics, the most fundamental, at the bottom, then chemistry, biology, and so forth until we reach anthropology. Just as chemistry relies on and encompasses physics, so, by the time we get to anthropology, it encompasses all scientific knowledge, as it is all, in some fashion, relevant to human culture. An archaeologist cannot study a pyramid, for example, without taking into account physics, geology, economics, and so forth. Anthropologists deal not only with emergent phenomena, but with emergent systems such as economics, kinship, information flow, or cultural ecology. These are remarkably complex systems that often defy traditional ethnographic description. In many such cases, White argues, complexity and chaos theory may provide ways of understanding and modeling these systems. At one point he mentions schools of fish. This brought to my mind a memory from a visit to Hanoi a few years ago. Traffic on the boulevards was constant, consisting entirely of motorbikes. Few crosswalks or signals existed. I had no idea how to cross the street until a young man came up to me and demonstrated that as long as I walked predictably, the bikes would part to make room, much like a school of fish avoiding a moving obstacle. White’s complaint with this sort of example, which seems valid, is that up to this point anthropologists have only flirted with these theories, using them as a metaphor for the social processes in which they are interested. I confess myself to having been such a flirter, attempting to understand Kwakwakawakw and Heiltsuk ecological relation to salmon as expressed in myth, using concepts from complexity theory (Harkin 2007). I agree that moving forward the use of formal modeling of these complex or chaotic systems offers great promise; and one side benefit is the ability to revitalize the four-field approach. I have some differences with the author on this approach, as I believe that the configuration of our field is historically contingent and that no one, including Franz Boas, was truly a four-field practitioner. Nonetheless, I think there are many opportunities for valuable exchange at the margins of the subfields, both with other subfields of anthropology, and other fields of science.
毫无疑问，人类学比其他任何研究领域都更像是一门新兴的科学。正如安德鲁·a·怀特(Andrew A. White)所建议的那样，我们可以把所有的科学摞起来，最基础的是物理学，排在最后，然后是化学、生物学，等等，直到人类学。就像化学依赖并包含了物理学一样，当我们进入人类学时，它包含了所有的科学知识，因为它在某种程度上都与人类文化有关。例如，考古学家研究金字塔，就不能不考虑物理学、地质学、经济学等等。人类学家不仅研究新兴现象，而且研究新兴系统，如经济学、亲属关系、信息流或文化生态学。这些都是非常复杂的系统，常常与传统的民族志描述相悖。怀特认为，在许多这样的情况下，复杂性和混沌理论可能提供理解和建模这些系统的方法。他一度提到鱼群。这使我想起几年前访问河内的情景。林荫大道上车水马龙，全是摩托车。几乎没有人行横道或信号灯。我不知道该怎么过马路，直到一个年轻人向我走来，向我演示，只要我按期行走，自行车就会分开让出空间，就像一群鱼避开移动的障碍物一样。怀特对这类例子的抱怨(似乎是有道理的)是，到目前为止，人类学家只是在玩弄这些理论，把它们作为他们感兴趣的社会过程的隐喻。我承认自己曾经是这样一个调情者，试图理解Kwakwakawakw和Heiltsuk生态与鲑鱼的关系，就像神话中表达的那样，使用复杂性理论的概念(Harkin 2007)。我同意向前推进这些复杂或混沌系统的形式化建模提供了巨大的希望;一个附带的好处是能够使四领域方法重新焕发活力。在这个方法上，我与作者有一些不同，因为我相信我们领域的结构在历史上是偶然的，没有人，包括弗朗茨·博阿斯，是真正的四个领域的实践者。尽管如此，我认为在子领域的边缘有很多有价值的交流机会，无论是与人类学的其他子领域，还是与其他科学领域。
{"title":"Editor's Introduction","authors":"M. Harkin","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1083359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1083359","url":null,"abstract":"It is certainly true that anthropology is, more than any other field of inquiry, a science of the emergent. As Andrew A. White suggests, we can stack the sciences up with physics, the most fundamental, at the bottom, then chemistry, biology, and so forth until we reach anthropology. Just as chemistry relies on and encompasses physics, so, by the time we get to anthropology, it encompasses all scientific knowledge, as it is all, in some fashion, relevant to human culture. An archaeologist cannot study a pyramid, for example, without taking into account physics, geology, economics, and so forth. Anthropologists deal not only with emergent phenomena, but with emergent systems such as economics, kinship, information flow, or cultural ecology. These are remarkably complex systems that often defy traditional ethnographic description. In many such cases, White argues, complexity and chaos theory may provide ways of understanding and modeling these systems. At one point he mentions schools of fish. This brought to my mind a memory from a visit to Hanoi a few years ago. Traffic on the boulevards was constant, consisting entirely of motorbikes. Few crosswalks or signals existed. I had no idea how to cross the street until a young man came up to me and demonstrated that as long as I walked predictably, the bikes would part to make room, much like a school of fish avoiding a moving obstacle. White’s complaint with this sort of example, which seems valid, is that up to this point anthropologists have only flirted with these theories, using them as a metaphor for the social processes in which they are interested. I confess myself to having been such a flirter, attempting to understand Kwakwakawakw and Heiltsuk ecological relation to salmon as expressed in myth, using concepts from complexity theory (Harkin 2007). I agree that moving forward the use of formal modeling of these complex or chaotic systems offers great promise; and one side benefit is the ability to revitalize the four-field approach. I have some differences with the author on this approach, as I believe that the configuration of our field is historically contingent and that no one, including Franz Boas, was truly a four-field practitioner. Nonetheless, I think there are many opportunities for valuable exchange at the margins of the subfields, both with other subfields of anthropology, and other fields of science.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"139 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1083359","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027817","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1078702
Andrew A. White
Four-field anthropology has always struggled with the problem of how to holistically study human cultural systems that are the products of environment, process, and history. Complexity science offers a set of tools calibrated to the analysis of complex systems like those of human societies, and has the potential to allow us to scientifically understand how history and process affect the physical, cultural, and linguistic components that are entangled in the whole of human societies. Application of complexity science to anthropological problems thus far has favored engagement on a conceptual level rather than one that harnesses the full power of the approach.
{"title":"Chaos, Complexity, and a Revitalization of Four-Field Anthropology?","authors":"Andrew A. White","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1078702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1078702","url":null,"abstract":"Four-field anthropology has always struggled with the problem of how to holistically study human cultural systems that are the products of environment, process, and history. Complexity science offers a set of tools calibrated to the analysis of complex systems like those of human societies, and has the potential to allow us to scientifically understand how history and process affect the physical, cultural, and linguistic components that are entangled in the whole of human societies. Application of complexity science to anthropological problems thus far has favored engagement on a conceptual level rather than one that harnesses the full power of the approach.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"142 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1078702","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1078704
Adam Harr
Within the anthropology of Christianity, much attention has been paid to the convergence of Christianity with modern understandings of language. In this essay, I review scholarship that traces the historical connections between modern and Christian views of language, particularly in British colonial attacks on Hindu language practices, and I examine two recent ethnographies that offer different vantage points on the variety of ways in which contemporary Christians use language in a self-consciously modern way.
{"title":"Moving Words: Christian Language and the Modern World","authors":"Adam Harr","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1078704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1078704","url":null,"abstract":"Within the anthropology of Christianity, much attention has been paid to the convergence of Christianity with modern understandings of language. In this essay, I review scholarship that traces the historical connections between modern and Christian views of language, particularly in British colonial attacks on Hindu language practices, and I examine two recent ethnographies that offer different vantage points on the variety of ways in which contemporary Christians use language in a self-consciously modern way.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"161 - 177"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1078704","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1029834
Casey High
In this article I review several recent books to consider how anthropologists have approached questions of cosmology, history, and social transformation in Amazonia. Several of these engage a now well-established tradition in presenting indigenous ontologies as radical alternatives to Western concepts of agency and history. In contrast to the discontinuities described in the “New History” of Amazonia, anthropologists tend to approach social transformation as the extension of an enduring symbolic economy of alterity. I argue that the “New Amazonian Ethnography” would benefit from an openness to understanding radical social change beyond questions of continuity.
{"title":"Keep on Changing: Recent Trends in Amazonian Anthropology","authors":"Casey High","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1029834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029834","url":null,"abstract":"In this article I review several recent books to consider how anthropologists have approached questions of cosmology, history, and social transformation in Amazonia. Several of these engage a now well-established tradition in presenting indigenous ontologies as radical alternatives to Western concepts of agency and history. In contrast to the discontinuities described in the “New History” of Amazonia, anthropologists tend to approach social transformation as the extension of an enduring symbolic economy of alterity. I argue that the “New Amazonian Ethnography” would benefit from an openness to understanding radical social change beyond questions of continuity.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"117 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029834","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1029837
M. Harkin
Bruce Kaufman has provided a novel and thought-provoking analysis of the evolution of the field of industrial relations. In addition to analyzing the development of the academic field of industrial relations during the twentieth century in the United States, he assesses the state of the major professional association of the field, the Industrial Relations Research Association, and offers prescriptions for the revival of each. The three reviewers whose comments follow all take issue with some of Kaufman's arguments, but all praise him for presenting a well-written, carefully reasoned thesis. I share their high opinion of the book's quality. The special attention we give the book in this review symposium, however, might not be warranted if it were not also the case that the subject Kaufman explores is of unquestionable interest and practical importance to industrial relations scholars and practitioners. Few would deny that the field of industrial relations and the practice of collective bargaining in the United States are in crisis-or, at least, at a crossroads. At the simplest level, the shrinking number of
{"title":"Editor's Introduction","authors":"M. Harkin","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1029837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029837","url":null,"abstract":"Bruce Kaufman has provided a novel and thought-provoking analysis of the evolution of the field of industrial relations. In addition to analyzing the development of the academic field of industrial relations during the twentieth century in the United States, he assesses the state of the major professional association of the field, the Industrial Relations Research Association, and offers prescriptions for the revival of each. The three reviewers whose comments follow all take issue with some of Kaufman's arguments, but all praise him for presenting a well-written, carefully reasoned thesis. I share their high opinion of the book's quality. The special attention we give the book in this review symposium, however, might not be warranted if it were not also the case that the subject Kaufman explores is of unquestionable interest and practical importance to industrial relations scholars and practitioners. Few would deny that the field of industrial relations and the practice of collective bargaining in the United States are in crisis-or, at least, at a crossroads. At the simplest level, the shrinking number of","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"69 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029837","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027754","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1029832
Vilma Santiago-Irizarry
Performance and performativity occupy a significant place in anthropological analytics. In this review, I examine recent publications that address, document, and analyze how different performance genres and practices, enacted across a variety of socio-cultural domains, can be productively mined to establish how pervasively they contribute to our understanding of human behavior. These publications, moreover, range across anthropological fields as well as multiple societies and historical periods, further underscoring that performance has been crucial for human cultures and in our own discipline.
{"title":"The Ubiquity of Performance: Theory and Practice in Expressive Genres","authors":"Vilma Santiago-Irizarry","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1029832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029832","url":null,"abstract":"Performance and performativity occupy a significant place in anthropological analytics. In this review, I examine recent publications that address, document, and analyze how different performance genres and practices, enacted across a variety of socio-cultural domains, can be productively mined to establish how pervasively they contribute to our understanding of human behavior. These publications, moreover, range across anthropological fields as well as multiple societies and historical periods, further underscoring that performance has been crucial for human cultures and in our own discipline.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"72 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029832","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00938157.2015.1029833
LouAnn Wurst
In this paper, I begin with ideas of difference and try to weave together aspects of our disciplinary structure, contemporary theoretical critique, and research agendas to show how our emphasis on difference, multiplicity, and individual identity makes it difficult to comprehend all that we share and constrains our political action to only local concerns. Instead, the kind of archaeological research that I envision focuses on commonalities through questions of labor, class and capitalism geared toward developing an understanding of all that we as people share.
{"title":"Toward a Collective Historical Archaeology","authors":"LouAnn Wurst","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2015.1029833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029833","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I begin with ideas of difference and try to weave together aspects of our disciplinary structure, contemporary theoretical critique, and research agendas to show how our emphasis on difference, multiplicity, and individual identity makes it difficult to comprehend all that we share and constrains our political action to only local concerns. Instead, the kind of archaeological research that I envision focuses on commonalities through questions of labor, class and capitalism geared toward developing an understanding of all that we as people share.","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"44 1","pages":"118 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00938157.2015.1029833","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59027705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：