Ryan Schram
ANTH 2700: Key debates in anthropology
ryan.schram@sydney.edu.au
Social Sciences Building 410 (A02)
Week of March 10, 2025 (Week 3)
Slides available at https://anthro.rschram.org/2700/2025/3
Main reading: J. L. Comaroff and Comaroff (2009); Gilberthorpe (2007)
Other reading: J. Comaroff and Comaroff (1989); J. L. Comaroff and Comaroff (1990); J. L. Comaroff (1987); Wolf (1984); Trouillot ([2003a] 2016); Trouillot ([2003b] 2016)
In different ways, Durkheim and Saussure both employ the homo duplex model of the subject (aka a “split subject”).
It leads them to a set of corollaries about social systems:
The river
where you set
your foot just now
is gone—
those waters
giving way to this,
now this. (Heraclitus 2001, 27)
“Class” (a regular meeting of students and a teacher, a “unit of study” or a “course”) is a social institution. Can you go to the same class twice?
What about these other examples? What changes and what stays the same?
Please go to Mentimeter: https://www.menti.com/alz8weo3ccn6 (or https://menti.com and use code 5331 1924
).
Ethnographic writing is usually present-tense. History touches everything, but anthropologists usually write as if their fieldwork happened now, not in the past.
Johannes Fabian notes that this means that readers have to assume that they live in a different time than the people about whom they read. Classical anthropology is based on “allochronism” and “denial of co-temporaneity” (Fabian [1985] 1992, 201).
There are two different yet interconnected critiques of allochronism in anthropology:
Eric Wolf (1982) also notes that anthropology’s separation from sociology is influenced by the same ideology (see also Wallerstein 2003).
When Europeans came to North America, they encountered people who were already pretty self-sufficient and, indeed, very healthy and wealthy.
Some of the effects of the fur trade noted by Wolf are:
The idea of the dialectic is very old, and versions of it exist in many intellectual traditions. Heraclitus, Hegel, and Marx all have their own interpretations of it.
You may have heard about dialectic change as a three-step process. This is a simplification that can be a little misleading since it emphasizes distinct stages over flux itself (Mueller 1958).
Let’s see how this goes. Feedback is welcome. :)
Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. (Marx [1852] 1972, 595)
The law of the dialectic is known even to people who know how to cook soup, or so says Marxist thinker Leon Trotsky (see Thatcher 1991, 134).
The soup is the flux of salt and water. It is a union of drinkable and undrinkable water.
Soup is always on the verge of becoming something else.
Can we also say this about societies and cultures?
Hegel describes individual self-consciousness as an outcome of the encounter between two people, a lord and servant.
Comaroff, Jean, and John L. Comaroff. 1989. “The Colonization of Consciousness in South Africa.” Economy and Society 18 (3): 267–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085148900000013.
Comaroff, John L. 1987. “Of Totemism and Ethnicity: Consciousness, Practice and the Signs of Inequality.” Ethnos 52 (3-4): 301–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.1987.9981348.
Comaroff, John L., and Jean Comaroff. 1990. “Goodly Beasts, Beastly Goods: Cattle and Commodities in a South African Context.” American Ethnologist 17 (2): 195–216. https://www.jstor.org/stable/645076.
———. 2009. “A Tale of Two Ethnicities.” In Ethnicity, Inc., 86–116. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Evans-Pritchard, E. E. 1940a. “The Nuer of Southern Sudan.” In African Political Systems, 272–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 1940b. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fabian, Johannes. (1985) 1992. “Culture, Time, and the Object of Anthropology.” In Time and the Work of Anthropology, 191–206. London: Routledge.
Feir, Donn L, Rob Gillezeau, and Maggie E C Jones. 2022. “The Slaughter of the Bison and Reversal of Fortunes on the Great Plains.” Working paper. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass. No. 30368. NBER Working Papers. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30368/w30368.pdf.
Gilberthorpe, Emma. 2007. “Fasu Solidarity: A Case Study of Kin Networks, Land Tenure, and Oil Extraction in Kutubu, Papua New Guinea.” American Anthropologist 109 (1): 101–12. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2007.109.1.101.
Heraclitus. 2001. Fragments: the collected wisdom of Heraclitus. Translated by Brooks Haxton. New York: Viking. http://archive.org/details/fragmentscollect00hera.
Marx, Karl. (1852) 1972. “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.” In The Marx-Engels Reader, edited by Robert C. Tucker, 594–617. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Montesquieu, Baron de. (1748) 1777. Complete Works, Vol. 1 (The Spirit of Laws). London: T. Evans & W. Davis. https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/montesquieu-complete-works-vol-1-the-spirit-of-laws#lf0171-01_label_1040.
Mueller, Gustav E. 1958. “The Hegel Legend of ‘Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis’.” Journal of the History of Ideas 19 (3): 411–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/2708045.
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1935) 1952. “On the Concept of Function in Social Science.” In Structure and Function in Primitive Society, 178–87. New York: The Free Press. https://archive.org/details/structurefunctio00radc.
———. (1924) 1952. “The Mother’s Brother in South Africa.” In Structure and Function in Primitive Society, 15–31. New York: The Free Press. https://archive.org/details/structurefunctio00radc.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. (1755) 1964. “Discourse on the origin and foundations of inequality among men [The second discourse].” In The first and second discourses, edited by Roger D. Masters, translated by Roger D. Masters and Judith R. Masters, 77–228. New York: St. Martin’s Press. http://archive.org/details/firstseconddisco00rousrich.
Said, Edward W. (1978) 2014. Orientalism. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
Thatcher, Ian D. 1991. “Trotsky’s Dialectic.” Studies in Soviet Thought 41 (2): 127–44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20100579.
Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. (2003a) 2016. “Adieu, Culture: A New Duty Arises.” In Global Transformations: Anthropology and the Modern World, 97–116. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-137-04144-9.
———. (2003b) 2016. “Anthropology and the Savage Slot: The Poetics and Politics of Otherness.” In Global Transformations: Anthropology and the Modern World, 7–28. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-137-04144-9.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1974. The Modern World-System, Vol. I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.
———. 2003. “Anthropology, Sociology, and Other Dubious Disciplines.” Current Anthropology 44 (4): 453–65. https://doi.org/10.1086/375868.
Wolf, Eric R. 1982. Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: University of California Press.
———. 1984. “Culture: Panacea or Problem?” American Antiquity 49 (2): 393–400. http://www.jstor.org/stable/280026.
ANTH 2700: Key debates in anthropology—A guide to the unit
Lecture outlines and guides: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, B, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.
Assignments: Weekly writing assignments, What I learned about the future of anthropology: An interactive presentation, Second essay: Who represents the future of anthropology and why?, Possible sources for the second essay, First essay: Improving AI reference material, Concept quiz.