Against Ethnography

Author(s): Nicholas Thomas
Source: Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Aug., 1991), pp. 306-322
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association
Stable URL:
Accessed: 11-04-2016 19:33 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact

Wiley, American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Cultural Anthropology

This content downloaded from on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC
All use subject to

or is there a sense in which the discipline's underlying concepts need to be mutilated or distorted. for 306 This content downloaded from 177. syncretism. a part of north India which. that I could hardly persuade myself that the whole was not a masquerade. The room was very well lighted up. This essay is concerned with anthropology's enduring exoticism. The problem of interpretation arises not from an ethnocentric expectation that other peoples are the same. The visitor encounters not a stable array of "Asiatic manners" but what appears to be an unintelligible inauthenticity. and how processes such as borrowing. had not yet been liberated by the East India Company from Muslim oppression. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. one conclusion of most efforts seems to be an affirmation of what has always been central. creolization. and innumerable other articles of European manufacture.8. [although] the forbidden liquor was served in abundance on the table.jstor.. the Mussulmauns drank none. before we can deal satisfactorily with these areas that were once excluded? The current wave of collective autocritique within anthropology' has a paradoxical character in the sense that while reference is made to crisis.. as it may have been extended to cover history and .101. and even radical transformation in the discipline. . with plenty of wine .142 on Mon. from a failure to predict the local singularity of their manners and customs. Clifford. At Lucknow he was surprised to find in the Nawab's palace an extensive collection of curiosities. including "several thousand English prints framed and glazed . and they had two glasses of different sizes standing before them. but from an assumption that others must be different. as he observed. nationalism. and a band of music (which the Nawaub had purchased from Colonel Morris) played English tunes during the whole time. Can anthropology simply extend itself to talk about transposition. that their behavior will be recognizable on the basis of what is known about another culture. and oppositional fabrications of custom. and the reifications of local culture through colonial contact are to be reckoned with." The dinner was French. [Valentia 1809 1:143-144] This aristocratic colonial traveler's confusion could be taken to be emblem- atic of one of the predicaments of late 20th-century anthropology. and so contrary to all my ideas of Asiatic manners. experimen- tation. The scene was so singular.Against Ethnography Nicholas Thomas Australian National University In March 1803 Lord Valentia was traveling through Awadh.

Spencer 1989). and while methods admittedly constrain and influence forms of presentation. and equally to use sim- ilar research procedures toward divergent theoretical genres. one stable term in a highly eclectic and contested discipline. may be mainly associated with positivistic enumeration and claims about correlations. if the claims of cultural historians (e.. if not the specific arguments. I take the overall perspective. the relationships between practical research technologies and forms of writing should be evoked in a notion of mutual entanglement. The second feature of current debate relevant here is that while "writing" and "writing-up" have been increasingly problematized (in a manner which is essentially necessary and constructive).142 on Mon. for instance. distinctions are constantly effaced between . Dening 1988) to write "ethnographic history" are recognized. and assume presentation in the standard form of the monograph (cf. while leaving open the potential for another kind of writing energized by the experience of the field. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about..101. and the writing of ethnography.8. a recent guide to method in economic anthropology claims that the "great future" of the subject arises from its "direct observation method of ethnographic analysis" (Gregory and Altman 1989:ix). Of course. ethnographic analysis. of course. This article. While most comments on what has been variously called reflexive or postmodernist anthropology have been reactive and negative (e.g.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 307 instance.jstor. My argument is thus that while ways of observing and ways of representing are often tangled up. affirms that "ethnographic fieldwork remains an unusually sensitive method" for cross-cultural representation (1988:23-24) and Borofsky's relativizing exploration of anthropological constructions of knowledge concludes with rather bland reflections on the importance of ethnography (1987:152-156). and that at present it helps to situate the enduring problems of anthropological vision in the constitution of the ethnographic genre.3 Gregory and Altman like many conflate methods of observation and analysis. There seems therefore to be one point about which we are all convinced. discursive practices. fieldwork and ethnography are separable. of works such as Writ- This content downloaded from 177. but Bourdieu's Distinction (1984) absorbs those styles to a limited extent in a work of "social critique" that seems closer generically to an 18th- century philosophical and empirical dissertation than it is to either the theory books or case studies of postwar sociology. it might need to be acknowledged that ethnography can be written in the absence of fieldwork (setting aside the metaphorical extension of that term to encompass the archives). Marcus and Fisher 1986:18-19). to permit naive empiricist separations between observation and representation. sustains a hard distinction between practices of research and the particular kinds of writing that we recognize as "ethnographic.2 In a very different genre. in contrast. and the kinds of questions asked of it. Darnton 1984. since both research and writing are clearly political. The survey."4 The purpose of such an assertion is not.g. rather than some kind of determinism: it is obviously possible to generate similar analytic discourses from very different research procedures. While methods and research techniques such as inquiry through conversation and sociological questionnaires may strongly influence the form in which information is presented.

despite a plethora of topics and approaches. My preferred metaphor would situate the causes of an array of moments of blindness and insight in the constitution of a discipline's analytic technology: particular kinds of overlooking arise from research methods. even thought it is partly a misunderstanding prevalent outside the discipline.6 and this reified idea of a diverse discipline can only be unfair and unrepresentative of a variety of innovative approaches. such as the tendency to exoticism. the response has often been qualified or critical (e. But if what is said here applies only in a partial way to work remote from canonical types. and more can be known about a particular topic by adding other ways of perceiving it. The arguments here deploy this stereotypic construct.101. The object of my critique is thus an "analytical fiction" in Marilyn Strathern's sense (1988:10). in the constitution of ethnographic discourse. there are still strong prescriptions that certain anthropological projects (such as those dealing with tribal religions) are more anthropological than others. Exoticism Although Edward Said's work has aroused considerable interest in anthro- pology. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. This is essentially a model borrowed from feminist anthropology: as those critiques developed. Defects are absences that can be rectified through the addition of further information. the fabrication of alterity is not so much a blight or distortion to be excised or exorcised. or that a mis- leading stereotype of the discipline has wide currency. the charge of exoticism is only partly justified.308 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY ing Culture (Clifford and Marcus 1986) and The Predicament of Culture (Clifford 1988) for granted.5 It is sometimes asserted that because anthropologists have engaged in many studies of European or American societies. that the problems I discuss are analogous to illnesses. and the critique is valid insofar as anthropological texts actually do take the form of ethnographic depictions of other cultures.g. Marcus and Fisher 1986:1-2.8. It is not clear.jstor. Clifford 1988:255-276). This article however attempts to move beyond the current debate by situating problematic features of anthropology. That is. it became apparent that the essentially imbalanced character of anthropological accounts of society could not be corrected without complex scrutiny of methods and analysis. One obstacle here is the commonsense epistemology of the discipline-which no doubt accords with a broader cultural model-that understands knowledge primarily in quantitative terms. that "academic fields could not be cured by sexism simply by accretion" (C. Without disputing either that work carried out under the name of anthropology has been extraordinarily diverse. Boxer quoted in Moore 1987:2-3). but a project central to ethnography's rendering of the proper study of . ways of understanding concepts. and are concerned with universal humanity as well as cultural difference. "Bias" is thus associated with a lack and can be rectified or balanced out by the addition of further perspectives. however. it must be said that this overlooks the fact that the presentation of other cultures retains canonical status within the discipline.. This content downloaded from 177. and genres of representation. and partly something that practitioners continue to impose upon themselves and most particularly their graduate students.142 on Mon. the converse also applies.

the Balinese dif- ferent concepts of time. the central theme of Borofsky's Making History was "how Pukapukans and anthropologists come to possess different 'ways of knowing' " (1987:xvii). This operation clearly gives the discipline enormous scope and potential. often are different. criteria of publishability. no culture" (Strathern 1980). More recently. the discipline is a discourse of alterity that magnifies the distance between "others" and "ourselves" while suppressing mutual entanglement and the perspectival and political fracturing of the cultures of both observers and observed.101. because it can proceed from topic to topic exposing previously unrecognized cultural differences: the Samoans have a different concept of the person. it must be recognized that there is great scope for slippage from the appropriate recognition of difference.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 309 Anthropology's most enduring rhetorical form uses a rich presentation of one stable and distant culture to relativize cherished and unexamined notions imputed to culture at home. for instance in cognition and language. obviously. the Tahitians different ideas of growth and age. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. to an idea that other people must be different. Accurate ethnographic representation of stable and unitary cultures thus conveys the radical difference of other peoples' original practices and beliefs. and the reasonable reaction against the imposition of European categories upon practices and ideas which. And no doubt they do. cf.7 A strand in feminist anthropology establishes that cultural oppositions elsewhere set up as universals are peculiar to the West. It does not depict a succession of meanings and transpositions that make cultures partly derivative and mutually entangled.8. while caste in modem India has clearly been profoundly influ- enced by British codification and the transformation of warrior kings into bearers of hollow crowns (Dirks 1987) the most famous anthropological account (Dumont 1980) is concerned above all with the opposition between Indian hierarchy and This content downloaded from 177.142 on Mon. while the Balinese polities of Geertz's Negara (1980) confound and deny the central tenets of Western political thought. Gewertz (1984. As Keesing has recently observed. 469). Errington and Gewertz 1987) has taken Mead to task for her own unreflective deployment of Western constructions of the individual. Insofar as this is stip- ulated by this form of anthropological rhetoric. are generally very marginal to a discipline dominated by the sensitivity of the local case study). papers that might show how un-exotic and un-alien other people's worlds are never getting written or read" (1989:460. in contrast Hagen people have "no nature. And the machine of relativist displacement can work very effectively upon its own products: while Mead exposed the cultural specificity of certain American personality types. the Australian Aborigines different constructions of space and geography. For instance. Margaret Mead's Samoa destabilized certain ideas about sex roles. the postulate operates at such an abstract level that it does not override the radical difference imputed to such people as the Balinese (and those works that actually are concerned with universals. and theoretical principles of our discipline. Although gestures are made toward the idea of common humanity and sometimes to cultural universals.jstor. "be- cause of the reward . while the Japanese presumably have a different conceptual model of a restaurant menu. Without wishing to deprive the discipline of a thousand dissertation topics.

101. in a more faithful. This content downloaded from 177. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. practice. it is notable that matter to be translated must come from somewhere different. . works that deal with conflict. Hence Balinese theater and aesthetics stand against the me- chanical and narrowly political Western understanding of the state. less ethnocentric account of local belief. in a space that establishes the difference and contingency of our own practice (cf. or set of notions is the real object of interest. But the cultural critique depended upon the fabrication of alterity.8 that strand of local discourse is not conspicuous in the cultural ethnography of the Massim. in its homogenization of others and implicit denial of the significance of migrant cultures within the West. through a discourse of the translation of culture. The proposition that the gift is only intelligible as an inversion of the category of the commodity hardly requires extended discussion here (but cf. This is in fact more accurately described as contrast. while informants in the societies of the "kula ring" frequently make analogies between the famous shell valuables (that they sometimes call "Papuan money") and European cash. For instance. . it must similarly be acknowledged that Mead's theoretical orientation and literary flair led her to render Samoan freedom as the mirror of American constraint. the challenge is not to do away with cultural difference. at least in the minimal sense that they aimed to affirm the value of other cultures and express a certain scepticism about "Western" ideas that were taken to be natural and . and that cultural differences are inconsequential.9 upon a showcase approach to other cultures that is now politically unacceptable. since the most persuasive and theoretically consequential ethnographic rhetoric represents the other essentially as an inversion of whatever Western institution. The claim that anthropology is concerned with difference within as well as between cultures is excessively charitable. Fabian 1983). excessive Orientalist purism has done little except make India seem peculiar to the outside world" (1988:x). those in other disciplines appear to have had a more balanced view of the problems of translation and exoticism. There are. While the power-claims of cultural ethnography have been based on rigor in cultural translation.jstor.142 on Mon. and. of course. Parry 1986:466-467). and perspectival differences between men and women. disagreement about beliefs. but these themes could hardly be said to have the same centrality for the discipline as the operation of imputing difference between cultures. I am not saying that people are all the same. that facilitates a professional potlatch of sophisticated interpretations. Bayly recently suggested that although there are "dangers in glib comparison . Although there are sceptics within anthropology (Keesing 1989).310 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY the individualism of the West (and ironically also with the alleged superiority of purity over power). In justifying the use of English categories such as "class" and "capitalist" in the analysis of Indian history. it is ludicrous if anthropological commentary continues primarily to place such peoples in another domain. Beliefs and notions that are not different take on the appearance of difference through the process of apparent translation. Many works of the relativizing style were or are intended to be critical. without endorsing Freeman's style of critique or ethological non sequiturs. there is clearly a certain selectivity. After so many decades of "economic development" and conflict in tribal and third world societies.

and various other criteria. but the concept itself can no longer stand as the ruling concept of a modem anthropology. but to integrate this more effectively with historical perceptions and a sense of the unstable and politically contested character of culture. as Moore has noted. between those who stay in the countryside and those who have left. the separation between these terms energizes the interpretive project of ethnography.101.8. and it is obvious also that the crucial differences relate to age. the notion of what constitutes cultural difference seems to be restricted to distinction between an undefined "West" and another domain of experience and . "understanding cultural difference is essential. the notion that fieldwork entails partaking of alterity and thus requires an account of cultural difference is manifestly insufficient. There are numerous contexts in "Western" cultures in which alienation or foreignness facilitate cul- tural critique (a south London black woman in an Oxbridge college).jstor. given that one of the reasons for engaging in research is to gather material that serves a particular argument. and the voices of those without authority. The tendency to exoticize others could be regarded as a quirk of the individuals who become anthropologists. or an inevitable consequence of the encounter of fieldwork. then it is clear that there are many circumstances in which these conditions exist. sex. of course." Or. or purports to explicate. given the pervasive notion of fieldwork as the experience of an individual from one culture in another." A monograph is not about "other cultures" but rather another culture. this notion of inquiry and interpretation from a liminal perspective clearly cannot be dismissed.142 on Mon. But the point that is profoundly mystified in contemporary anthropological consciousness concerns the forms and diversity of the differences at issue. The second suggestion might seem compelling. Though elaborated for the purposes of collective professional self approbation. It could also. Mormons. because it addresses only one form of difference among many" (1987:9). However. Hence. the number of cases in which showcase counterpositioning overtly animates analysis is considerable. class. and the fact that this must at some level be treated as a bounded and stable system makes implicit contrast with a home-point almost inevitable even where there is no explicit one-to-one juxtaposition. If one is seeking out contexts in which a sense of "not fitting" or "being elsewhere" facilitates heightened awareness of the singularity and contingency of both the culture of the situation and one's own assumptions. Insofar as this is what ethnographic writing is about. the distinctiveness of a "culture. between those who hold fast to what is valorized as local identity and those who appear to abandon it to become Christians. or communists.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 311 and with what is locally distinctive. while difference might also be situated between the sort of self-conscious exposition of local culture that is often offered by senior men. be situated in difference among anthropologists. From this perspective. to express the point differently. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. as well as the implicit ethnic categories that separate different "cultures. The contrastive operation discussed is almost inherent in any text that explicates. exoticism can only be disposed of by disposing of ethnography. by breaking from one-to-one presentation into modes that disclose This content downloaded from 177. All the crucial questions are passed over because a multiplicity of cultural differences are condensed.

An enormous amount of anthropology is motivated by questions at a high level of generality. There is. This is to open up a second line of criticism seemingly less motivated by a political consideration (the objectionable aspect of inventing alterity) than a theoretical one: the view that the ethnographic genre localizes ques- tions and thus refracts rather than generates any wider theoretical resolution or cultural critique. the nature of gift exchange. this epistemological argument is also grounded politically: exoticism conveys a false view of historical entanglement and the trans- position of meaning. may attempt to depict or analyze something that is external to it. and theoretical categories are conflated in the very process of revealing and rendering. for instance.101. an obvious difference between the ostensibly apolitical theoretical discourse upon politics in the academic discipline of political science. These have a systemic character. but a dialectical account must do justice to the transposition of meanings. interpretative agency. A discourse of something. the second type makes strong claims to external authority and supposes an analytic apparatus that is not subsumed by the matter with which it deals.312 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY other registers of cultural difference and that replace "cultural systems" with less stable and more derivative discourses and practices. the basis of gender asymmetries.8. even ironic renderings (the body in the video library) seem merely to reproduce an established style that is not just unoriginal but seems rapidly to be becoming sterile. while the particularizing effect of ethnographic discourse is not merely unproductive theoretically but also associated with professional in- troversion and a failure to engage in wider discussion. It might thus be argued merely on literary grounds that it is about time for the rhetorical form to be disfigured. their local incorporation. " The question here is of the extent to which writing is or is not contained by the process of representing its object. and the dis- course of politics manifested in the speech of a professional politician or activist.jstor. Anthropological texts legitimize the specificity of their case materials and the localized and particular character of analysis by their bearing upon problems that are taken to be theoretically consequential-the efficacy of ritual. The authoritative claims of the latter are highly . 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. 10 It might be added that the theme of the difference of the other has been as overplayed in anthropology as has the body in the library in detective fiction.142 on Mon. However. But what operation does the analytic technology of ethnography perform upon these questions? The argument here presupposes that our genre is a discourse of ethnography and not a discourse upon it. the ritual structures of divine kingship. This content downloaded from 177. but constantly creates discursive and analytical effects that can only be understood in terms of categories that are already internal to the discourse. and so on. the intersection of status and power. The Subsumption of Theory The status of ethnography might also be problematized from an epistemological perspective. there can be no external validation of statements because the object. on the other hand.

In this case. is that writing ethnography into the premises of analysis is a basic condition of the genre. . For example. cases stand by themselves. Such an impression instead derives merely from distinct subjective reactions to different theoretical paradigms and devices such as Munn's neologisms. questions of interest do not relate to the relative proportions of these terms-that quantitative epistemological metaphor having been eschewed-but instead concern the particular ways of seeing permitted or disabled by available disciplinary forms. explication of the terms for transcription. The most conspicuous feature of the discourse of ethnography is a disjunction between general questions in social and cultural theory of the kind mentioned This content downloaded from 177. disci- plinary procedures. but from the perspective of this argument. The premise here is that any scholarly discourse is an illustrative outcome of a conjuncture of theoretical interests. What for one reader appear as clear tools are highly contrived for another. The view adopted here. for . Of course. the synthetic aims of adequate description . the analysis is brilliantly effective. Munn's book might be regarded as an extreme case. but there are few spaces for adjudicating plausibility or implausibility independently of internal coherence. The assessment of a useful ethnographic book depends above all upon the persuasive fictions of its analysis. Strathern's claims about her own methods may not reflect views about the general condition of ethnographic writing. it would be incorrect to consider this state of textual self-referentiality as a quantity present in some works to a greater degree than others. with Freeman's "falsification" of Mead).142 on Mon. . I take Strathern to endorse Runciman's sug- gestion that the conventional understanding of the relationship between explanation and description be inverted: "Good descriptions in turn have to be grounded in theory . theory and analysis are characterized by a high degree of mutual dependence.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 313 The mode of representation recursively intertwines the moments of transcription. and the explanatory devices that posi- tion the products of transcription. like all similar analytic fictions. and case materials. it is clear that these binary categories.101. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. cannot ultimately be sustained as polar types. . This is very obvious in some recent cultural ethnographies.8. or the reverse-that the elaboration of theoretical vocabulary is merely illustrated by indigenous counterparts. . but the proposition put forward here is in fact that depiction. I am not saying that prior assumptions play too substantial a role in the production of accounts of other cultures. and there is little scope for rereading ethnographic material that is separable from the analysis from the perspective of a different kind of inquiry. and their adequacy depends more on the effects created through internal analytical narration than either external theoretical validation or an interest in the replicability of findings (setting aside the naive positivistic claims associated. must deploy deliberate fictions to that end" (1988:10). which may be counterintuitive. but the distinction can have theoretical effect if it is associated particularly with the discourse of ethnography. in The Fame of Gawa (Munn 1986) there is a strong sense that no operation takes place outside the elaboration of indigenous categories in theoretical terms.jstor. Ethnography thus establishes things in an empirically isolated and strictly illus- trative manner.

I am not." Hence the narrative and biographical genres of conventional history were ultimately more important than the fact that certain kinds This content downloaded from 177. Culture and Gender offers no basis for any theory comparable to Ortner's. could not be seen as a cultural universal. Insofar as prehistory is a discourse of archaeology. Departures At this point I wish to establish a certain distance from the argument that I have developed. by stressing that analogous propositions could be developed about any academic discourse that is tightly connected with a particular methodology or form of writing.101. but any revelations are ethnographically contained. of course. and was not necessarily articulated with gender.8. see also Gewertz 1988 on Bamberger 1974). and it is not surprising at all that the equally significant and generalized arguments of Rosaldo and Chodorow. Some similar points might be made about the inevitability of denying the worth of oral traditions from the perspective of archive-bound conventional history. While similar contrasts sometimes were present.314 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY above and a way of writing that by its nature cannot resolve them. This may be briefly illustrated through reference to the ethnographic cri- tiques of Ortner's important argument that universal gender asymmetry could be explained on the basis of pervasive associations between the male/female and culture/nature contrasts (Ortner 1974). Ethnography thus disposed of a general argument and affirmed the difference and specificity of other cultures. into shallower water. but appears to be capable of moving only in one direction. The point here is not simply that the particular thesis advanced by Ortner was ethnographically disfigured. such devaluation arises necessarily in a discipline that defines itself around rigorous work on a certain kind of material. This was transposed to the register of ethnog- raphy in an influential collection of critiques (Strathern and MacCormack 1980) that argued that the nature/culture opposition was a singular form in Western thought. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. Culture and Society (Rosaldo and Lamphere 1974) have been criticized on analogous grounds (Moore 1987:22-24. it is a prisoner of a certain kind of historical. The dominant process that takes place as issues of theoretical consequence are worked through ethnographically is subsumption. and behavioral reconstruction that is at once partial and inevitably circular. social. The illustrative material can be seen in a singular way. it should be stressed that the discipline's investment in the practice of fieldwork is less disabling than the dominance of a narrow range of ways in which fieldwork is "written up. but am concerned with the epistemological point that the discipline is supposed to tack between general questions and ethnography. but that there was no way of moving back from these critiques to any similar argument at the same level of generality. Nature. arguing that the various criticisms were not reasonable.jstor. the effect of the critique was to expose a form of difference between these societies and Western thought that had passed unrecognized in Ortner's analysis.142 on Mon. Although there is a direct parallel with the dismissal of travelers' reports in anthro- pology. and were associated with gender in indigenous symbolic systems. which epitomized the scope and force of .

a discourse that uses ethnography to generate a wider argument. At the same time the one-to-one juxtaposition that this form nor- mally entails can only establish stability at a certain distance from the culture im- puted to the reader. though. It is perhaps necessary to reiterate the earlier point that these arguments have nothing to do with fieldwork. The value of a method not contained by ethnography is apparent from its use from some feminist perspectives (Collier and Rosaldo 1981): there is still a sense of political urgency about clarifying the broader nature of This content downloaded from 177. however. which is obviously a crucial way of learning. The association between exoticism and the marked tendency for ethnography to render theoretical questions internal to local analyses is thus not entirely contingent.jstor. of course. but to suggest that crucial flaws are associated with the canonical model. in analysis that works upon larger problems toward a wider generative account of social and cultural phenomena. through the claim to fix up one line of inquiry by adding from another. A book absorbed by a culture absorbed in a book cannot produce a discourse upon ethnography. It follows from this. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about.101. The persistence of exoticism arises from the fact that it is precisely what ethnography is directed to produce.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 315 of "primary" research might be privileged. the positive alter- natives are not to be constituted through the old game of interdisciplinary borrowing. The point here. Leach 1954. which presents cultures as unitary .'2 Here. if the hegemonic genres of anthropological writ- ing now present themselves mainly as styles to be disfigured. this would presumably have been expunged long ago. From this perspective the reinvigoration of comparative anthropology appears to be crucial. White 1981) are likely to be less enmeshed in this orientalizing and particularizing logic to the extent that dimensions of difference disconnected from the us/them fiction are analytically consequential. The argument is rather that fieldwork should be drawn into other kinds of writing that move into the space between the theoretical and universal and the local and ethnographic. I argue for an approach that in a sense is more grounded in conventional interests in an interpretative project. that ethnographies that turn upon local comparison (e. the truth of the ethnographic case depends upon its original and nonderivative relation with the "us" to which it is opposed. and that are energized by forms of difference not contained within the us/them fiction. rather than some superficial subjective interest in cultural authenticity. Fox 1977. is that while this is a critique of ethnography's anthropology.142 on Mon. it is not one that supposes that some other scholarly discipline provides a model for a relationship between initial general questions and the analytic form of the genre where the latter sustains rather than subverts the former..8. The potential responses are diverse.g. If there was merely a problem of self-deception. Both of these features of contemporary anthropology have a strong association with the dominance of ethnographic writing. Montage clearly refracts and displaces the pursuit of stable cultures through a succession of historical and experiential contexts (as in Taussig 1987) and offers the most effective and radical assault upon anthropology's tendency to fix a unitary symbolic system at a distance. The aim of this article is not to condemn anything like the whole discipline.

3 I do not appeal in a messianic manner to a style of work that is unprecedented. though. Many areal categories. and with more theoretical ambitions. It should be able to combine nuanced firsthand knowledge of particular localities with the interpretation of a broader range of "secondary" ethnographic or "primary" historical descriptions. Other work is often consigned to a secondary or residual category. which has resisted the tendency for these questions to be subsumed within a localized ethnography of gender relations. which would be supposed to magically transcend the orientalizing contrivance and particularism characteristic of the discipline at present. The importance of comparison emerges also from the fact that some kind of explicit discussion of regional relationships and histories is necessary if older ethnological categories and adjudications are not to be implicitly perpetuated. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about.316 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY sexual asymmetries.101. a kind of writing that incorporates ethnography but is not subordinated to it. The interest is thus in altering the marginal status of that genre. while misleading typifications of regional social structures and cultural forms provide silent contexts for ethnographic case studies (cf. but this would partly misrepresent the claims and inten- tions of the present article. one that perhaps operates at a higher level of generality. To the contrary. it is obvious that much anthropological writing is not to be subsumed within that canon. This is not to say. A new kind of post-ethnographic anthropological writing would presume the sort of local knowledge that has always been critical for representing circumstances both at home and abroad. At a theoretical level this should be able to displace discourses of alterity by representing difference within cultures and difference among a plurality (as opposed to one-to-one con- trast). that there is an established style of comparison that should simply be adopted and generalized. and elaborating upon it in certain directions. but nevertheless one that is essentially parasitic upon the richness of what can be described as "primary sources" (Strathern 1988:10). If case material from a range of associated places cannot expose the historical contingency and particular determination of social and cultural forms that might otherwise be up- This content downloaded from 177. where there is a strong if generally implicit idea that writing ought generally to be based on one's own specialized and original research. Since this critique is directed at a kind of canonical work.8. and that examples of comparative analysis already exist. it appears that much comparative work is inadequate because it is set up as a project secondary to ethnography.142 on Mon.jstor. even though it is obvious that many theoretically crucial works have not derived from work that was primary in an empirical sense. such as "Melanesia" and "Polynesia" live on in contemporary anthropological parlance as though they had linguistic or prehistorical validity. At this point it might seem desirable to present an example of the kind of project envisaged here. such as that of the "literature review" or textbook. This is why it seems important to establish an intermediate level of writing between problematic universalism and ethnographic illustration. but would refuse the bounds of conveniently sized localities through venturing to speak about regional relations and histories. This type of grounding thus depends upon a model of knowledge rather different to that implicit in various academic disci- plines. Thomas 1989b).org/terms .

contemporary global processes of cultural circulation and reification demand an interest in meanings that are explicit and derivative.101. but a form of analysis that uses a regional frame to argue about processes of social change and diversity. it is difficult to see any other approach that could sever anthropology's roots in the colonial imagination.8. that is critically conscious of its own situation in a succession of European representations of such places. We cannot understand cultural borrowings. Otherwise the risk is that our expectations about other cultures. is not the old kind of positivist comparison that seeks to establish general theories. What I'm suggesting. that develops its arguments strategically and provisionally rather than universally. Pascal Boyer.jstor. or locally distinctive variants of cosmopolitan movements. will prevent us from seeing anything in local mimicry or copying other than an inauthentic masquerade. like those of Lord Valentia. while we privilege the richness of localized conversation and the stable ethnography that captures it. It's not clear that the unitary social system ever was a good model for anthropological theory. The nuances of village dialogues are unending. The significance of regional comparison arises from the fact that it is concerned with a plurality of others. but it should not be presumed that any of these people agree with the positions advanced. rather than a fact of cultural stability. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. 'The discursive entity is obviously diverse. but the shortcomings are now more conspicuous than ever. but if we are to recover an intelligible debate beyond the multiplicity of isolated tongues we must surrender something to the corruptions of pidgins and creoles. Notes Acknowledgments. Derivative lingua franca have always offended those preoccupied with boundaries and authenticity. 2The arguments here should not be read to denigrate the work of writers such as Clifford and Marcus. My interest here is not in establishing that what is said applies to any single work (which would prove nothing about the genre) or the statistical extent to which the claims apply to the range of work. While I take much of what they have This content downloaded from 177. but they offer a resonant model for the uncontained transpositions and transcultural meanings which cultural inquiry must now deal with. trading others' grammars for our own . and their plays of tense and person beguiling. and does not take the radical form of alterity in a gulf between observers and observed. and Margaret Jolly made it possible for me to write this article. The encouragement and comments of Henrietta Moore. and the reification required by any disciplinary critique must be inaccurate with respect to a variety of idiosyncratic and innovative works. The contexts that can be explored are not necessarily fenced around as "other cultures" but include historical processes and forms of exchange and communication that have permitted cultural appropriation and transposition.142 on Mon.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 317 held as relativizing ethnological exhibits. Difference is thus historically constituted. The second strand of this conclusion is thus that while anthropology has dealt effectively with implicit meanings that can be situated in the coherence of one culture. then. accretions. a field in which difference emerges between one context and the next. upon which they obviously depend.

but not made properly explicit.g. but believe that most anthropological critics have neglected the sense in which Orientalism is a work of specifically literary scholarship and secondly that it is but a part of a series of works that operate at distinct levels of generality and with distinct purposes (Said 1978. as if the epistemological status of analytical fictions excludes both sub- stantive claims. 6Strathern however implies that her propositions are simply intended to generate novel theoretical effects.101. 1979. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. like other forms of knowledge. may offer an account of things in the world that is adequate for the purposes of a historically situated community or array of people. 4This was intended. 'This form of words may suggest that I do not regard criticisms of Said's project as justified. 3This perhaps accounts for the curiously prevalent misconception that the authors of Writing Culture (Clifford and Marcus 1986) were putting reflection. Insofar as a fiction is seen to be representative. since the historical character of the work makes it ob- This content downloaded from 177. it would seem at odds with what are in fact substantive propositions in the body of the text. The present article is intended to some extent to be an amendment to that critique. My view. 1986. and towards ever more barren criticism and meta-criticism" (Spencer 1989:161). partial (in the sense of being both interested and in- complete). 1984. Rabinow 1989) and not works of "metacriticism. my complaint is that the question of exoticism in contemporary anthropology has been passed over-as though such works as Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter (Asad 1974) had expunged the problem. but draw attention to the fact that Orientalism has been criticized for not doing things that Said actually has done elsewhere. and also a stance that rather disables one's own analysis. complaining about incomplete bibliographies. in Out of Time (Thomas 1989a). and disputation based on the noncorrespondence of a fiction with evidence. criticism or some kind of theoretical self-consciousness in the place of primary research. this article departs from both Writing Culture and its aggrieved detractors by insisting on a fieldwork/ethnography distinction and using that as a basis for doing what the reflexive theorists have been unjustifiably accused of doing-arguing that ethnography's time has passed.." The notion that the 1986 collection and associated publications represented an assault on ethnography is thus clearly false. "it seems more than likely that the book will provoke a trend away from doing anthropology. and because of this condition (rather than in spite of it). I am not. of course. I hope to explore the topic of the reception of Said's work in a separate article.318 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY advanced to be essential to any novel and critical anthropology. as the central project of the discipline. it might also be pointed out that since Writing Culture was published some contributors at least have produced other substantive studies (e. but can note briefly here that I agree with some of the points made by Clifford. its substantive claims are as true as any of the other things we believe. If this is in fact the position of the preface to The Gender of the Gift. but most authors cite nothing other than Orientalism. which may or may not diverge from a posi- tion that Strathern did not succeed in expressing unambiguously. It was quite clear from Anthro- pology as Cultural Critique (Marcus and Fisher 1986) that at least two of the writers saw a kind of critical ethnography.142 on Mon.8.jstor. even though it does not take up the question of ethnography's lack of history. which was central to my book. rather than any criticism detached from ethnography. 1981. Said and Hitchins 1988). is that analytical fictions are. 7My use of Negara as a model of the one-to-one contrast that is fundamental to ethnographic writing is quite . Some of these works are referred to by Clifford.

however.jstor. . the form of "cultural criticism [offered] as epistemological critique .org/terms .101. and thus to see it as part of our world. while the perspective advanced here takes the feminist critique of perspectival and political difference within cultures as a model for breaking from a discourse preoccupied with difference between. . however. arguably risks that authorial encompassment is relocated covertly through the refusal to enunciate precise arguments and methodological claims (cf. 160- 162) and the ways in which consciousness has moved "to locate [an other culture] in a time and space contemporaneous with our own. The problem arises from the fact that these hardly exemplify global processes or even later phases of colonial contact. The question that is not addressed. the assumption that these societies work on some autonomous cultural-logic cannot be entertained. world systems theorists argue "that since the hinterland societies anthropologists habitually study are open to radical change. 145) as though they operated only upon the "Western" ideas that are displaced. It should be noted. "This distinction is abducted from the work of Peter De Bolla (1989:34 and passim). ed. Talal. and is an apt approach (irrespective of the plausibility of realizations) for histories of early contact. It is notable that what is loosely called reflexive anthropology has not engaged much with feminism. . as Marcus and Fisher have noted with respect to that book. events and external intrusions are creatively turned to the purposes of a local cultural order. This is a confusion between an open system and a lack of system" (1985:viii). '2There are. '0According to Sahlins. however. References Cited Asad. their suggestions that cultural critique would revolve around anything other than juxtaposition or the repatriation of meth- ods employed to study the exotic are weakly developed. However. 1974 Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter.8. agree with Sahlins that global systems theory is not up to the task of accounting for "the diversity of local responses to the world-system-persisting. moreover. transcultural movements of material culture. '3A comparative study of exchange. . It will be obvious to anyone who consults this book that I have distorted and recontextualized the contrast for my own purposes. 134). however. is also characteristic of many other such works in anthropology" (1986:145). rather than as a mirror or alternative" (p. us-them juxtaposition" (pp. Kapferer 1988). personal communication. However.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 319 vious that ethnography can and must be understood at a separate level from fieldwork. This content downloaded from 177. in its wake" (1985:viii). 8Martha Macintyre. This is to save structural anthropology's set of original meanings from historical transposition. here the cultural ramifications are analogous to linguistic creolization. and colonial history in the Pacific (Thomas in press) does however attempt to exemplify the style of comparative and historical analysis advocated here. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. It is still possible to take arguments proceeding through phrases such as "By contrast. is quite what this openness generates: in Sahlins' view. externally imposed by Western capitalist expansion.142 on Mon. Balinese conceptions of the state . London: Ithaca." (p. that they do discuss some of the shortcomings of the "static. I do. 9This point that these varieties of cultural critique have a dark side is generally passed over in Marcus and Fisher's discussion of various "techniques of cultural critique in anthro- pology" (1986:137-164).

Lanham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pierre 1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge. James. Dening. Princeton. Altman 1989 Observing the Economy. Bruce 1988 The Anthropologist as Hero: Three Exponents of Post-Modernist Anthropology. Sherry B.: University Press of America.: Harvard University Press. Louis 1980 Homo Hierarchicus. Dumont. Marcus.: Princeton University Press. Geertz. Cambridge. De Bolla.. C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.142 on Mon. Nicholas B. and George E. Critique of Anthropology 8(3):77-104.jstor. Fabian. C. Peter 1989 The Discourse of the Sublime: Readings in History. and J. Bourdieu. Fox.: Harvard University Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. N. 1988 Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire (New Cambridge History of India 11. Clifford 1980 Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth Century Bali. Ortner and Harriet Whitehead. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. Mass. Deborah 1984 The Tchambuli View of Persons: A Critique of Individualism in the Works of Mead and Chodorow. Dirks. A. Robert 1987 Making History: Pukapukan and Anthropological Constructions of Knowledge. Rosaldo 1981 Politics and Gender in Simple Societies. 1989 Exotic Readings of Cultural Texts. Greg 1988 History's Anthropology: The Death of William Gooch.8. Mass.1). In Sexual Meanings: The Cultural Construction of Gender and Sexuality. Aesthetics and the Subject.101. Gregory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.320 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY Bayly. Borofsky. Berkeley: University of California Press. James J. This content downloaded from 177. 1987 The Hollow Crown: Ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom. Md. Clifford. Gewertz. James 1988 The Predicament of . New York: Columbia University Press. American Anthropologist 85:615-629. London: Routledge. Robert 1984 The Great Cat Massacre and Other Episodes in French Cultural History. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Kapferer. Keesing. and Michelle Z. A. London: Routledge. Jane F. Clifford. Current Anthropology 30:459-479. 1986 Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Second edition. Johannes 1983 Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object. Roger M. eds. eds. Darnton. Collier.J. C. 1977 Harvest of the Palm.

No Culture: The Hagen Case. Mass. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Rosaldo. Fischer 1986 Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experimental Moment in the Human Sciences. 211-213. Man 24:145-164. Munn.AGAINST ETHNOGRAPHY 321 Leach. New York: Pantheon. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Michelle Z. 1987 Feminism and Anthropology. London: Athlone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.. 1979 The Question of Palestine.101. and Louise Lamphere. Current Anthropology 30:27-41. Rabinow. 1980 Nature.: Harvard University Press. Nancy D. and Michael M. Marilyn. Edward. Colonialism and the Wild Man. Thomas. Rosaldo and Louise Lamphere. Said. Sherry B. eds. Spencer. the Indian Gift. Culture and Gender. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to http://about. in press Entangled Objects: Exchange. eds. 1984 The World. Mass. Sahlins. Stanford: Stanford University Press.: MIT Press." Man 21:453-473. Said. Michael 1987 Shamanism. Michelle Z. 1989b The Force of Ethnology: Origins and Significance of the Melanesia/Polynesia Division. London: Routledge. and Christopher Hitchins. 1974 Woman. Edmund 1954 Political Systems of Highland Burma. Edward 1978 Orientalism.142 on Mon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This content downloaded from 177.. 1988 Blaming the Victims: Spurious Scholarship and the Palestinian Question. MacCormack. Berkeley: University of California Press. 1974 Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture? In Woman. Marshall 1985 Islands of History. Taussig. Nicholas 1989a Out of Time: History and Evolution in Anthropological Discourse. Marilyn 1980 No Nature. In Nature. the Text and the Critic. London: Faber and Faber. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. and the "Indian Gift. Culture and Society. Paul 1989 French Modern: Norms and Forms of the Social Environment. 1988 The Gender of the Gift. . Oxford: Polity Press.jstor. Jonathan 1989 Anthropology as a Kind of Writing. Marcus. Material Culture and Colonialism in the Pacific. Parry. Jonathan 1986 The Gift. Strathern. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Culture and Gender. London: Verso. Henrietta L. Moore. and Carol P. London: Routledge. 1986 The Fame of Gawa. New York: Times Books. eds. Strathern. Culture and Society. eds. George E. 1981 Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World. Cambridge. 1986 After the Last Sky: Palestinian Lives.8. Ortner.

142 on Mon. . 1806. London: William Miller. . Caroline 1981 Patrons and Partisans. Ceylon. and Egypt.101.jstor.8. This content downloaded from 177.322 CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY Valentia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Abyssinia. in the years 1802 . White. 11 Apr 2016 19:33:57 UTC All use subject to . Viscount George 1809 Voyages and Travels to India. the Red Sea.