With a focus on the activities of Native Americans and anthropologists involved in the Indian New Deal between the 1930s and the 1950s, I show that Native Americans have long attended to and contributed to a global conversation about decolonization and that North American anthropologists have long worked to decolonize Native American peoples. The Indian New Deal engaged the language of decolonization and instituted policy reforms in service of self-determination for Native Americans. But the Indian New Deal exhibited the characteristic ambivalences of the global decolonization movement, representing an impulse toward self-determination, on the one hand, and neocolonialism, on the other. Anthropologists’ involvement in decolonization is thus complex, liberatory at times, paternalistic at others. To explore such important issues realistically, the history of anthropology needs to develop historiography to better situate practices of North American anthropologists within global history, including notably the global history of decolonization.
{"title":"Decolonization and the History of Anthropology: The Implications of New Deal Anthropology from the 1930s to the 1950s","authors":"David W. Dinwoodie","doi":"10.1086/727076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727076","url":null,"abstract":"With a focus on the activities of Native Americans and anthropologists involved in the Indian New Deal between the 1930s and the 1950s, I show that Native Americans have long attended to and contributed to a global conversation about decolonization and that North American anthropologists have long worked to decolonize Native American peoples. The Indian New Deal engaged the language of decolonization and instituted policy reforms in service of self-determination for Native Americans. But the Indian New Deal exhibited the characteristic ambivalences of the global decolonization movement, representing an impulse toward self-determination, on the one hand, and neocolonialism, on the other. Anthropologists’ involvement in decolonization is thus complex, liberatory at times, paternalistic at others. To explore such important issues realistically, the history of anthropology needs to develop historiography to better situate practices of North American anthropologists within global history, including notably the global history of decolonization.","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135888235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vine Deloria’s account of anthropology in Custer Died for Your Sins (Macmillan, 1969) has become a touchstone of disciplinary self-critiques, used to dismiss past anthropologists and their vision of the discipline. Yet contemporary critical histories of anthropological practice in Native North America often ignore the specificities of Deloria’s complaints and erase his engagement with contemporary activist anthropologists. My article focuses on one of Deloria’s most important anthropological interlocutors, Nancy Oestreich Lurie. Building on her experience as an action anthropologist, Lurie championed Deloria’s call for a mode of anthropology responsive to Indigenous struggles in a series of publications beginning in 1969 and extending through subsequent decades. Drawing on archival sources, I trace the development of Lurie’s engagement with Deloria in writings calling anthropologists to join the ongoing struggle of Indigenous peoples and in her work with activists from the Menominee Nation in their efforts to protect their land and reclaim their sovereignty.
{"title":"Joining the Ongoing Struggle: Vine Deloria, Nancy Lurie, and the Quest for a Decolonial Anthropology","authors":"Grant Arndt","doi":"10.1086/727072","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727072","url":null,"abstract":"Vine Deloria’s account of anthropology in Custer Died for Your Sins (Macmillan, 1969) has become a touchstone of disciplinary self-critiques, used to dismiss past anthropologists and their vision of the discipline. Yet contemporary critical histories of anthropological practice in Native North America often ignore the specificities of Deloria’s complaints and erase his engagement with contemporary activist anthropologists. My article focuses on one of Deloria’s most important anthropological interlocutors, Nancy Oestreich Lurie. Building on her experience as an action anthropologist, Lurie championed Deloria’s call for a mode of anthropology responsive to Indigenous struggles in a series of publications beginning in 1969 and extending through subsequent decades. Drawing on archival sources, I trace the development of Lurie’s engagement with Deloria in writings calling anthropologists to join the ongoing struggle of Indigenous peoples and in her work with activists from the Menominee Nation in their efforts to protect their land and reclaim their sovereignty.","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":"125 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135888214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In recent years, anthropologists ’ sense of the history of their discipline has oscillated be-tween extremes of paralyzing villainization and defensive hero worship. Conferences and publications have seen various constituencies struggle over the legacies both of individuals and of the traditions of conceptualization and practice they helped to create. In such a context, Akhil Gupta ’ s recent presidential address “ Decolonizing US Anthro-pology, ” given at the annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association in 2021, represents a welcome effort toward a more complex assessment and an opportunity to think through how we narrate the history of anthropology in relation to the various concerns now understood as decolonization. In the version published — after much discussion — as an article in the American Anthropologist , Gupta and coauthor Jesse Stoolman present an ambitious survey of a range of issues ranging from genocide and slavery to borders and nationalism, all chosen for their relevance to transforming anthropology into a “ decolonizing project ” (2023:779). Although they cite abundant work showing what anthropologists have done on such issues, their citations, most dating back only to 2000, suggest such concerns have arisen only in the discipline ’ s most recent generation. For Gupta and Stoolman, the endeavors of the generations of anthropologists before our own provide the materials only for at most a “ counterfactual ” history of decolonization — conjectures about what might have been possible, had those earlier generations only tried. Such an approach, however, erases the important work that was done in the past; we need turn to a conjectural “ counterfactual history ” only when factual history is impossible. The articles in this issue of the Journal of Anthropological Research all seek the histories waiting to be discovered in the decades where Gupta and Stoolman see only absence — histories offering insights into anthropological com-plicities and contentions relevant not only to our sense of the past, but to our present
{"title":"Decolonization and the History of Americanist Anthropology: Introduction to the Special Issue","authors":"Grant Arndt","doi":"10.1086/727078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727078","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, anthropologists ’ sense of the history of their discipline has oscillated be-tween extremes of paralyzing villainization and defensive hero worship. Conferences and publications have seen various constituencies struggle over the legacies both of individuals and of the traditions of conceptualization and practice they helped to create. In such a context, Akhil Gupta ’ s recent presidential address “ Decolonizing US Anthro-pology, ” given at the annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association in 2021, represents a welcome effort toward a more complex assessment and an opportunity to think through how we narrate the history of anthropology in relation to the various concerns now understood as decolonization. In the version published — after much discussion — as an article in the American Anthropologist , Gupta and coauthor Jesse Stoolman present an ambitious survey of a range of issues ranging from genocide and slavery to borders and nationalism, all chosen for their relevance to transforming anthropology into a “ decolonizing project ” (2023:779). Although they cite abundant work showing what anthropologists have done on such issues, their citations, most dating back only to 2000, suggest such concerns have arisen only in the discipline ’ s most recent generation. For Gupta and Stoolman, the endeavors of the generations of anthropologists before our own provide the materials only for at most a “ counterfactual ” history of decolonization — conjectures about what might have been possible, had those earlier generations only tried. Such an approach, however, erases the important work that was done in the past; we need turn to a conjectural “ counterfactual history ” only when factual history is impossible. The articles in this issue of the Journal of Anthropological Research all seek the histories waiting to be discovered in the decades where Gupta and Stoolman see only absence — histories offering insights into anthropological com-plicities and contentions relevant not only to our sense of the past, but to our present","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135945101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Building upon recent efforts to assess the history of anthropology in light of renewed calls for disciplinary decolonization, this paper turns to the role of US anthropologists in the infamous policy known as Indian termination, or the withdrawal of all federal aid, services, and protection from tribal members, as well as the end of reservations. Contextualizing the activism of the applied anthropologist John H. Provinse against the backdrop of broader shifts in post-WWII US liberalism, I argue that Provinse’s support for termination in the late 1940s reflected an embattled social democratic and pluralistic conception of Indian–US relations. This perspective contrasted with and was ultimately overshadowed by the assimilatory sentiments that would become institutionalized in the termination policies of the 1950s. Thus, Provinse provides an analytical opening from which to explore the discipline’s relationship with termination as well as the affordances and limitations of liberal anthropological activism. Moreover, such a case offers a generous rejoinder to more speculative assessments of the discipline’s many pasts.
{"title":"Lessons in Safe Logic: Reassessing Anthropological and Liberal Imaginings of Termination","authors":"Nicholas Barron","doi":"10.1086/727074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727074","url":null,"abstract":"Building upon recent efforts to assess the history of anthropology in light of renewed calls for disciplinary decolonization, this paper turns to the role of US anthropologists in the infamous policy known as Indian termination, or the withdrawal of all federal aid, services, and protection from tribal members, as well as the end of reservations. Contextualizing the activism of the applied anthropologist John H. Provinse against the backdrop of broader shifts in post-WWII US liberalism, I argue that Provinse’s support for termination in the late 1940s reflected an embattled social democratic and pluralistic conception of Indian–US relations. This perspective contrasted with and was ultimately overshadowed by the assimilatory sentiments that would become institutionalized in the termination policies of the 1950s. Thus, Provinse provides an analytical opening from which to explore the discipline’s relationship with termination as well as the affordances and limitations of liberal anthropological activism. Moreover, such a case offers a generous rejoinder to more speculative assessments of the discipline’s many pasts.","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136032864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":":Obeah, Orisa, and Religious Identity in Trinidad, Volume I. Obeah: Africans in the White Colonial Imagination","authors":"M. Forde","doi":"10.1086/725742","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725742","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44954103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":":Music and Digital Media: A Planetary Anthropology","authors":"V. Erlmann","doi":"10.1086/725747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725747","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43117076","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":":The First Stones: Penywyrlod, Gwernvale and the Black Mountains Neolithic Long Cairns of South-east Wales","authors":"C. Scarre","doi":"10.1086/725746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725746","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41792887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":":Ancient DNA and the European Neolithic: Relations and Descent","authors":"O. Pearson","doi":"10.1086/725740","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725740","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47258,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anthropological Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44574271","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：