While studies of responsibility have been concerned with the ways responsibility is traced to accountable human persons or institutions, the deflection of responsibility to nonhumans that are not accountable has been neglected. Such deflections may follow at least two different procedures. The Rmeet in Laos sometimes opt to deflect responsibility for wrongdoing to spirits who temporarily obfuscate a person’s intentionality. People in modern contexts, in contrast, occasionally delegate responsibility to impersonal sets of rules and laws—the “system,” the “market,” “nature.” In both cases, concepts of personhood condition the shape of the nonhumans emerging from the distribution of agency. Persons appear as forms that differentiate between actions that can be integrated into them and those that cannot. The deflection of responsibility protects personal integrity from actions incoherent with a person’s form. In particular, deflection to nonhumans removes accountability from the sphere of human influence.
{"title":"Deflecting responsibility","authors":"Guido Sprenger","doi":"10.1086/721850","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721850","url":null,"abstract":"While studies of responsibility have been concerned with the ways responsibility is traced to accountable human persons or institutions, the deflection of responsibility to nonhumans that are not accountable has been neglected. Such deflections may follow at least two different procedures. The Rmeet in Laos sometimes opt to deflect responsibility for wrongdoing to spirits who temporarily obfuscate a person’s intentionality. People in modern contexts, in contrast, occasionally delegate responsibility to impersonal sets of rules and laws—the “system,” the “market,” “nature.” In both cases, concepts of personhood condition the shape of the nonhumans emerging from the distribution of agency. Persons appear as forms that differentiate between actions that can be integrated into them and those that cannot. The deflection of responsibility protects personal integrity from actions incoherent with a person’s form. In particular, deflection to nonhumans removes accountability from the sphere of human influence.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"12 1","pages":"805 - 818"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75167117","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}
This article takes up the loaded topic of “Russia in the world of Ukraine.” Now an object of official Russia’s aggressive attention, contemporary Ukraine presents a pressing case for reconsidering colonialism which, I propose, requires reconceptualizing sovereignty. I compare descriptions of sovereignty resting on two different genealogies, “limited sovereignty” as described by Russian expert Igor Gretskiy and “creative sovereignty” from Ukrainian scholar Oleksandr Merezhko, and bring them into conversation with Ukrainian Semyon Gluzman’s argument that thinking about colonialism in Ukraine implicates temporality, reflexivity, and subjectivity. Beyond “center” and “periphery,” beyond mapping control, suffering, production, and exploitation onto topographies of sovereign power and rural subjectivity, can we imagine sovereignty beyond territoriality? Can we decolonize the present from the past? The essay concludes with a suggestion to expand consideration of colonialism from a spatial to a temporal frame, the lexicon of colonialism beyond spatial deictics, and the project of decolonization to ourselves.
{"title":"From “limited sovereignty” to decolonization in Ukraine","authors":"M. Eppinger","doi":"10.1086/724016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/724016","url":null,"abstract":"This article takes up the loaded topic of “Russia in the world of Ukraine.” Now an object of official Russia’s aggressive attention, contemporary Ukraine presents a pressing case for reconsidering colonialism which, I propose, requires reconceptualizing sovereignty. I compare descriptions of sovereignty resting on two different genealogies, “limited sovereignty” as described by Russian expert Igor Gretskiy and “creative sovereignty” from Ukrainian scholar Oleksandr Merezhko, and bring them into conversation with Ukrainian Semyon Gluzman’s argument that thinking about colonialism in Ukraine implicates temporality, reflexivity, and subjectivity. Beyond “center” and “periphery,” beyond mapping control, suffering, production, and exploitation onto topographies of sovereign power and rural subjectivity, can we imagine sovereignty beyond territoriality? Can we decolonize the present from the past? The essay concludes with a suggestion to expand consideration of colonialism from a spatial to a temporal frame, the lexicon of colonialism beyond spatial deictics, and the project of decolonization to ourselves.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"11 1","pages":"659 - 667"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85294369","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":"Catharsis after the hangover","authors":"R. Kaur","doi":"10.1086/723870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723870","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"34 1","pages":"958 - 960"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72976111","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}
Unwritten Letters is a beautiful and complex film that can be approached from a number of different angles. In this commentary I focus specifically on a set of scenes which appear to hold a subtle but fascinating narrative revolving around a haircut which may or may not have happened and which may or may not be significant to the protagonists. The possible occurrence of a haircut stands out as a clue that potentially speaks to the power of film as a medium not only of documenting and representing modalities of healing but also of bringing forth a form of healing in itself. As a whole, Unwritten Letters tells the story of how the two directors, Max Bloching and Abd Alrahman Dukmak, met in Beirut and later in Italy and together decided to make a film about Dukmak’s situation of being a Syrian refugee trying to find a place for himself after fleeing his home country. In the film we move between scenes that show excerpts of conversations between the two directors about the construction of the film; scenes in which Dukmak reflects on his situation; scenes that feature different aspects of his life in Italy; and scenes with letters about possible futures that Dukmak could have sent to his friend Zean with whom he participated in the early days of the Syrian revolution but who later died.
{"title":"Reflections on the healing power of collaborative filmmaking","authors":"Christian Suhr","doi":"10.1086/723765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723765","url":null,"abstract":"Unwritten Letters is a beautiful and complex film that can be approached from a number of different angles. In this commentary I focus specifically on a set of scenes which appear to hold a subtle but fascinating narrative revolving around a haircut which may or may not have happened and which may or may not be significant to the protagonists. The possible occurrence of a haircut stands out as a clue that potentially speaks to the power of film as a medium not only of documenting and representing modalities of healing but also of bringing forth a form of healing in itself. As a whole, Unwritten Letters tells the story of how the two directors, Max Bloching and Abd Alrahman Dukmak, met in Beirut and later in Italy and together decided to make a film about Dukmak’s situation of being a Syrian refugee trying to find a place for himself after fleeing his home country. In the film we move between scenes that show excerpts of conversations between the two directors about the construction of the film; scenes in which Dukmak reflects on his situation; scenes that feature different aspects of his life in Italy; and scenes with letters about possible futures that Dukmak could have sent to his friend Zean with whom he participated in the early days of the Syrian revolution but who later died.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"485 1","pages":"968 - 971"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76697899","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}
The contested evidentiary status and supposed ambiguity of a survivor’s video points to a central challenge in the making of our film, Big Mouth, which addresses a broader context of risks to journalists reporting on sexual violence. We believe and support the survivor. How then, as filmmakers, can we use sounds and images in our own process of making claims, without either dismissing or overdetermining the evidentiary notion assumed by the courts? In this article, I consider how the survivor’s efforts offer a critical lens on the notion of “ambiguous” or “false” or “defamatory” claims, and argue that by moving away from a focus on evidence as object and toward a notion of evidentiary expression, we might exceed the bounded political and temporal space of the courts in order to explore the very conditions of evidentiary claims-making and investigation—with implications for ethnographers, advocates, journalists, and filmmakers alike.
{"title":"Witnessing, refusal, and the conditions of investigation","authors":"Bremen Donovan","doi":"10.1086/723677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723677","url":null,"abstract":"The contested evidentiary status and supposed ambiguity of a survivor’s video points to a central challenge in the making of our film, Big Mouth, which addresses a broader context of risks to journalists reporting on sexual violence. We believe and support the survivor. How then, as filmmakers, can we use sounds and images in our own process of making claims, without either dismissing or overdetermining the evidentiary notion assumed by the courts? In this article, I consider how the survivor’s efforts offer a critical lens on the notion of “ambiguous” or “false” or “defamatory” claims, and argue that by moving away from a focus on evidence as object and toward a notion of evidentiary expression, we might exceed the bounded political and temporal space of the courts in order to explore the very conditions of evidentiary claims-making and investigation—with implications for ethnographers, advocates, journalists, and filmmakers alike.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"33 1","pages":"900 - 907"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76749260","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}
I was initiated into anthropological theory as a first-year graduate student in 1973 by Marshall Sahlins as we simultaneously arrived at the University of Chicago. He taught the required theory course while in the midst of writing his influential book Culture and practical reason (Sahlins 1976), which formed the basis of the course. I was profoundly shaped by his conceptual map of the world of anthropologists, as well as his understanding of culture, semiotics, and French structuralism, but I also vividly recall his instruction to us first-year grad students: “stand on my shoulders and shit on my head.” While I would not presume to do either, I find that his posthumous book, The new science of the enchanted universe: An anthropology of most of humanity, serves as a poignant bookend for my relationship to his thought, as I return to his work after pursuing a very different approach to the anthropology of Islam over the course of my career. I find myself finally carrying out his instruction to think critically about his work as I ponder a book that moves explicitly into my area of expertise: the problem of religion and ontology. According to Sahlins, most of the world lives in cultures based on the premises of immanentism. By this he means that people inhabit worlds where a distinction between spiritual andmaterial is not made and “all sorts of so-called ‘things’—often everything there is—[are] animated by in-dwelling spirit-persons” (p. 3). This book aims to explain why most societies, except those
{"title":"A perspective on science, ontology, and reflexivity","authors":"K. Ewing","doi":"10.1086/722035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722035","url":null,"abstract":"I was initiated into anthropological theory as a first-year graduate student in 1973 by Marshall Sahlins as we simultaneously arrived at the University of Chicago. He taught the required theory course while in the midst of writing his influential book Culture and practical reason (Sahlins 1976), which formed the basis of the course. I was profoundly shaped by his conceptual map of the world of anthropologists, as well as his understanding of culture, semiotics, and French structuralism, but I also vividly recall his instruction to us first-year grad students: “stand on my shoulders and shit on my head.” While I would not presume to do either, I find that his posthumous book, The new science of the enchanted universe: An anthropology of most of humanity, serves as a poignant bookend for my relationship to his thought, as I return to his work after pursuing a very different approach to the anthropology of Islam over the course of my career. I find myself finally carrying out his instruction to think critically about his work as I ponder a book that moves explicitly into my area of expertise: the problem of religion and ontology. According to Sahlins, most of the world lives in cultures based on the premises of immanentism. By this he means that people inhabit worlds where a distinction between spiritual andmaterial is not made and “all sorts of so-called ‘things’—often everything there is—[are] animated by in-dwelling spirit-persons” (p. 3). This book aims to explain why most societies, except those","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"1 1","pages":"934 - 938"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73333843","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}
1. He has amply discoursed on life-bestowing powers in other contexts: for example, in the precursor to his Hocart Lecture (Sahlins 2013). We just have to conjoin that with death-dealing It already seems some time ago that Elizabeth Povinelli (2016) bracketed together life and death in order to contrast the duo (“life”) with nonlife. TheAnthropocene and climate change are, she suggests, as much political and conceptual disturbances as meteorological or geological. They tamper with time in the sense that Carol Greenhouse (2019) conveys of the politics of populism, where the only possible question becomes what (kind of) time is shared by coevals who are present to one another. It is certain entrenched perceptions of time that Marshall Sahlins proposed upending by hailing in his Hocart Lecture (2017) a new Copernican revolution. Rather than celebrate human society as the (originating) center of the universe, anthropologists pursuing ethnographic realities should evacuate it in favor of the cosmic authorities who were for so many and so long people’s primordial rulers. Reversing customary priorities of infrastructure and superstructure, he was also challenging conventional temporal orderings in anthropological thinking about hierarchical and egalitarian polities. I am glad there was an opportunity to respond to Sahlins’s lecture while he was still with us (Strathern 2017). This is both because it feels too soon to be responding to his last volume and because I have already made evident my considerable appreciation of his demonstration, including the way in which he drew on the work of the early missionary anthropologists of Mount Hagen, especially Hermann Strauss. On this occasion I leave that appreciation as read. In Sahlins’s magisterial delineation, the immanentist condition is to be apprehended through people’s utter
{"title":"Life-giving and death-dealing powers","authors":"M. Strathern","doi":"10.1086/723227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723227","url":null,"abstract":"1. He has amply discoursed on life-bestowing powers in other contexts: for example, in the precursor to his Hocart Lecture (Sahlins 2013). We just have to conjoin that with death-dealing It already seems some time ago that Elizabeth Povinelli (2016) bracketed together life and death in order to contrast the duo (“life”) with nonlife. TheAnthropocene and climate change are, she suggests, as much political and conceptual disturbances as meteorological or geological. They tamper with time in the sense that Carol Greenhouse (2019) conveys of the politics of populism, where the only possible question becomes what (kind of) time is shared by coevals who are present to one another. It is certain entrenched perceptions of time that Marshall Sahlins proposed upending by hailing in his Hocart Lecture (2017) a new Copernican revolution. Rather than celebrate human society as the (originating) center of the universe, anthropologists pursuing ethnographic realities should evacuate it in favor of the cosmic authorities who were for so many and so long people’s primordial rulers. Reversing customary priorities of infrastructure and superstructure, he was also challenging conventional temporal orderings in anthropological thinking about hierarchical and egalitarian polities. I am glad there was an opportunity to respond to Sahlins’s lecture while he was still with us (Strathern 2017). This is both because it feels too soon to be responding to his last volume and because I have already made evident my considerable appreciation of his demonstration, including the way in which he drew on the work of the early missionary anthropologists of Mount Hagen, especially Hermann Strauss. On this occasion I leave that appreciation as read. In Sahlins’s magisterial delineation, the immanentist condition is to be apprehended through people’s utter","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"37 1","pages":"943 - 946"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81934763","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}
Social and legal disputes around sexual violence commonly involve a pattern in which those alleged to have committed violence instead portray themselves as victims, often successfully so. As part of the Forum on evidence and ambiguity in the Big Mouth film project, this article explores the process of legal and everyday persuasion involved in reinforcing this narrative of victimhood. In the events in Big Mouth, the survivor and her advocates film, broadcast, argue, and plead to convince others of the harm done to her, while the perpetrator repeatedly claims his own injury, including through a retaliatory lawsuit against the journalist Moussa Yéro Bah. Focusing on the perpetrator’s assertion of his own victimhood, I consider how such claims are voiced and how they interact with existing ways of listening, to perpetrators and to survivors. I draw attention to sound and listening to examine the performance of claims and the strategies by which parties in a dispute are rendered varyingly audible or inaudible to the law and the public at large.
{"title":"The tone of justice","authors":"Nomi Dave","doi":"10.1086/723679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723679","url":null,"abstract":"Social and legal disputes around sexual violence commonly involve a pattern in which those alleged to have committed violence instead portray themselves as victims, often successfully so. As part of the Forum on evidence and ambiguity in the Big Mouth film project, this article explores the process of legal and everyday persuasion involved in reinforcing this narrative of victimhood. In the events in Big Mouth, the survivor and her advocates film, broadcast, argue, and plead to convince others of the harm done to her, while the perpetrator repeatedly claims his own injury, including through a retaliatory lawsuit against the journalist Moussa Yéro Bah. Focusing on the perpetrator’s assertion of his own victimhood, I consider how such claims are voiced and how they interact with existing ways of listening, to perpetrators and to survivors. I draw attention to sound and listening to examine the performance of claims and the strategies by which parties in a dispute are rendered varyingly audible or inaudible to the law and the public at large.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"39 1","pages":"908 - 915"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77819846","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}
The state of most current political anthropology tends to be the modern nation-state, and relatively few works address questions posed by other state formations. Focusing on the Moroccan makhzan and the non-state institutional environment in which it operated, this paper argues for a more sustained engagement with alternative traditions of political thought and practice. It does this by drawing on historical ethnography from Morocco and southwestern Algeria, and through a sustained reciprocal comparison with parts of the classic European literature on the concept of the state.
{"title":"Northwest African perspectives on the concept of the state","authors":"J. Scheele","doi":"10.1086/722386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722386","url":null,"abstract":"The state of most current political anthropology tends to be the modern nation-state, and relatively few works address questions posed by other state formations. Focusing on the Moroccan makhzan and the non-state institutional environment in which it operated, this paper argues for a more sustained engagement with alternative traditions of political thought and practice. It does this by drawing on historical ethnography from Morocco and southwestern Algeria, and through a sustained reciprocal comparison with parts of the classic European literature on the concept of the state.","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"22 1","pages":"732 - 746"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75448923","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}
2. Ballad for Syria, a musical ethnography made together with Maisa Alhafez, is a personal narrative of Maisa’s reflections on her own displacement. Our choice of concentrating on a single account was equally based onwanting to use the medium of cinema as a transformative tool. We had dialogues with Maisa throughout the film and these Unwritten Letters documents the story of a young Syrian man, Abd, arriving in Europe and making sense of who he is, through a collaborative autoethnography filmed by Abd Dukmak and Max Bloching. Abd is a twenty-four-year-old young man who took part in the early days of the 2011 revolution in Syria. Since his departure from Syria Abd has been longing for a day where he would stop traveling one-way routes, and gets the chance to hang his photographs on his own home’s walls. For the time being John Lennon and Kurt Cobain posters hang in his room and accompany Abd in his melancholy. The film begins with a night view in Lebanon, heavy in ambiance, the mood dark. Max, the co-director, introduces the film with his recognition of the pain of others (Sontag 2003), in his case a relatable other. He describes Abd to be someone of his own age who is similarly attracted to cinema.Max asks: “would there be a way to explore this moment of Abd’s transition together?” and the film takes us into a psychoanalytical journey, a conversation and dialogue taking place between two friends. Max further explains in his director’s statement:
2. 与Maisa Alhafez共同创作的音乐民族志《Ballad for Syria》，是Maisa对自己流离失所的反思的个人叙述。我们选择专注于单一账户同样是基于想要将电影媒介作为一种变革工具。我们在整部电影中都与Maisa进行了对话，《不成文的信》记录了一个名叫Abd的叙利亚年轻人的故事，他来到欧洲，并通过Abd Dukmak和Max Bloching拍摄的一部合作的民族志来理解他是谁。Abd是一名24岁的年轻人，他参加了2011年叙利亚革命的早期。离开叙利亚后，阿布德一直渴望有一天他不再走单行道，并有机会把他的照片挂在自己家的墙上。当时，约翰·列侬和库尔特·柯本的海报挂在他的房间里，陪伴着他的忧郁。影片以黎巴嫩的夜景开始，气氛沉重，气氛阴暗。联合导演Max以他对他人痛苦的认识(Sontag 2003)来介绍这部电影，在他的例子中，他是一个相关的他者。他说阿布德和他年龄相仿，同样被电影所吸引。麦克斯问:“有没有办法让我们一起探索阿布德转变的这一刻?”，影片将我们带入一场精神分析之旅，两个朋友之间的对话和对话。麦克斯在他的导演声明中进一步解释道:
{"title":"Brotherhood at times of war","authors":"E. Tibet","doi":"10.1086/723771","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723771","url":null,"abstract":"2. Ballad for Syria, a musical ethnography made together with Maisa Alhafez, is a personal narrative of Maisa’s reflections on her own displacement. Our choice of concentrating on a single account was equally based onwanting to use the medium of cinema as a transformative tool. We had dialogues with Maisa throughout the film and these Unwritten Letters documents the story of a young Syrian man, Abd, arriving in Europe and making sense of who he is, through a collaborative autoethnography filmed by Abd Dukmak and Max Bloching. Abd is a twenty-four-year-old young man who took part in the early days of the 2011 revolution in Syria. Since his departure from Syria Abd has been longing for a day where he would stop traveling one-way routes, and gets the chance to hang his photographs on his own home’s walls. For the time being John Lennon and Kurt Cobain posters hang in his room and accompany Abd in his melancholy. The film begins with a night view in Lebanon, heavy in ambiance, the mood dark. Max, the co-director, introduces the film with his recognition of the pain of others (Sontag 2003), in his case a relatable other. He describes Abd to be someone of his own age who is similarly attracted to cinema.Max asks: “would there be a way to explore this moment of Abd’s transition together?” and the film takes us into a psychoanalytical journey, a conversation and dialogue taking place between two friends. Max further explains in his director’s statement:","PeriodicalId":51608,"journal":{"name":"Hau-Journal of Ethnographic Theory","volume":"25 1","pages":"961 - 964"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83209263","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：