Local Scholars, Global Experts: from a Native’s Point of View
Keywords:
Eastern European , anthropology, hierarchies, publishing, ethnographic writing, anthropology at homeAbstract
In recognizing the hierarchies among different kinds of scholars and scholarships, my paper tackles the problem of the absence Eastern European anthropologists from mainstream scholarly discourse. Going against a line of thought which explains this absence in terms of “Western hegemony,” the paper shift s attention to different issues, asking: is Eastern European absence necessarily detrimental? What are the conditions of translating local concerns into global ones and what is the cost of this process? And finally, in which ways is Western scholarship present in the works of local anthropologists and what are the problems that local anthropology is facing? Although the paper discusses developments in Poland, I hope it may shed light on a broader Eastern European context. I also trust that the discussion on the presentday challenges of anthropology in Eastern Europe may be helpful for addressing dilemmas and queries within anthropology at large.
References
Buchowski, Michał. 2004. “Hierarchies of knowledge in Central-Eastern European anthropology.” The Anthropology of East Europe Review 22(2): 5-14.
Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. 2006. Engaging Anthropology. The Case for a Public Presence. Oxford: Berg.
Echeverria, Begoña. 2007. “Learning and working in Basque: Implications for Basque identity.” In Language of the Land: Policy, Politics and Identity, edited by Katherine Schuster and David Witkosky, 179-194. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Hann. Chris. 2005. “Reply to Michał Buchowski.” The Anthropology of East Europe Review 23(1): 194–197.
Kapferer, Bruce. 2013. “How anthropologists think: configurations of the exotic.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 19.
Laas, Anu. 1997. “Provocations of European Ethnology” (Part: “The Role of Europe in the Study of Anthropology”). American Anthropologist 99(4).
Mallkii, Liisa. 1995. Purity and exile. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nayaran, Kirin. 1993. “How Native is a ‘Native’ Anthropologist?” American Anthropologist 95(3): 671-686.
Pelkmans, Mathijs. 2013. “A wider audience for anthropology? Political dimension of an important debate.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 19: 398-404.
Rogers, Susan Carol. 1997. “Provocations of European Ethnology” (Part: “Explorations in Terra Incognita”). American Anthropologist 99(4): 713-730.
Salecl, Renata. 1994. The spoils of freedom. Psychoanalysis and feminism after the fall communism. London: Routledge.
Sanjek, Roger. 2004. “Going public: responsibilities and strategies in the aftermath of ethnography.” Human Organization 63.
Stocking, George. 1983. “The ethnographer’s magic: Fieldwork in British anthropology from Taylor to Malinowski.” In Observers observed: Essays on Ethnographic Fieldwork, edited by G. Stocking. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Urla, Jacqueline. 1993. “Cultural Politics in an Age of Statistics: Numbers, Nations and the Making of Basque Identity.” American Ethnologist 20(4): 818-843.
Young, Donna. 2005. “Writing Against the Native Point of View.” In Auto-ethnographies: The Anthropology of Academic Practices, 203-215. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.
Zimniak-Hałajko, Marta. 2010. „Antropologia etyczna? O powinnościach badacza ruchów społecznych.” In Granice kultury, edited by A. Gwóźdź. Katowice: Śląskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Zowczak, Magdalena. 2000. Biblia ludowa. Interpretacje wątków biblijnych w kulturze wsi. Fundacja na Rzecz Nauki Polskiej, Monografi e FNP. Seria Humanistyczna, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Funna.
Zowczak, Magdalena. 2011. „Antropologia, historia a sprawa ukraińska. Taktyka pogranicza.” Lud 95: 4568.
