Kültürel form olarak metin: Antropolojide paradigma değişimi

Year 2022, Issue: 44, 20 - 25, 31.12.2022

Mehmet Ali Sevgi

https://doi.org/10.33613/antropolojidergisi.1130910

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Antropologların, kendi disiplinlerinin tarihsel ve kavramsal çerçevesini eleştirel bir değerlendirme ile ele aldıklarında, disiplinlerini inşa eden kültür kavramlarına şüpheyle yaklaşmaya başladıkları ve etnografik metinleri özünde metinler hakkında metin inşası olarak tartıştıkları gözlemlenmektedir. Özellikle edebiyat kuramından devşirilen yöntemler ve okuma pratikleri ile etnografik metinlerin saha çalışmaları ile desteklenmiş otoriter metinler olma özelliği sorgulanmaya başlanmıştır. Böylece, tıpkı edebiyat kuramcıları gibi antropologlar da kültür eleştirisinde temsilin politik oluşu üzerinde çalışmalar yürütmüşlerdir. Bu çalışma, antropolojide temsilin politik oluşuna dair benzer yaklaşımlar sergileyerek disiplinin kendini yeniden sorgulaması adına kuramsal girişimlerde bulunan Clifford Geertz ve James Clifford’un eserlerinden yola çıkarak antropolojideki bu paradigma değişikliğinin izlerini sürmektedir. Bu bağlamda, bu iki antropoloğun klasik etnografileri yeniden okumaya tabi tutarken disiplinin geleneksel olarak temel aldığı otoriter öz ve naif öteki söylemlerine yaptıkları itirazlar ele alınacaktır.

Keywords

James Clifford, Clifford Geertz, Levi-Strauss, Malinowski, Metinsellik, Etnografi

Text as cultural form: Paradigm change in anthropology

Abstract

It is observed that when anthropologists approach the historical and conceptual framework of their discipline with a critical evaluation, they begin to discuss the concepts of culture that constructs their disciplines with suspicion and re-read ethnographic texts as text constructions about texts in essence. In particular, the methods and reading practices borrowed from literary theory and the feature of ethnographic texts as authoritative texts supported by field studies have begun to be questioned. Thus, just like literary theorists, anthropologists have also worked on the political nature of representation in cultural criticism. This study traces this paradigm shift in anthropology, based on the works of Clifford Geertz and James Clifford, who have made theoretical attempts to re-examine the discipline by displaying similar approaches to the politicalness of representation in anthropology. In this context, the objections of these two anthropologists to the authoritarian self and naive other discourses, on which the discipline is traditionally based, while rereading classical ethnographies will be discussed.

Keywords

James Clifford, Clifford Geertz, Levi-Strauss, Malinowski, textuality, ethnography

References

• Asad, T. (1973). Anthropology & the colonial encounter. Ithaca Press.
• Atay, T. (2017). Sosyal antropolojide yöntem ve etik sorunu: Klasik etnografiden diyalojik etnografiye doğru. Moment Journal, 4(1), 189-206. https://doi.org/10.17572/mj2017.1.189206
• Boon, J. A. (1972). From symbolism to structuralism: Levi-Strauss in a literary tradition. Harper & Row.
• Clifford, J. (1988). The predicament of culture: Twentieth-century ethnography, literature, and art. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674503724
• Debaene, V. (2010). L’adieu au voyage: L’ethnologie française entre science et littérature. Gallimard.
• Debaene, V. (2013). A case of cultural misunderstanding: French anthropology in a comparative perspective. Cultural Anthropology, 28(4), 647-669. https://doi.org/10.1111/cuan.12031
• Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1953). Nuer spear symbolism. Anthropological Quarterly, 26(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/3317047
• Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1957). Zande kings and princes. Anthropological Quarterly, 30(3), 61. https://doi.org/10.2307/3316548
• Fabian, J., ve Bunzl, M. (2002). Time and the other: How anthropology makes its object. Columbia University Press.
• Geertz, C. (1989). Works and lives: The Anthropologist as author. Stanford University Press.
• Johnson, R. (1986). What is cultural studies anyway? Social Text, 16, 38-80. https://doi.org/10.2307/466285
• Kükrer, M. (2020). Antropolojide paradigma değişimi: Metinselliğe dönüş ve edebiyat. Sosyoloji Notları, 4(1), 16-32. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sosnot/issue/55689/749549
• Leach, E. R. (1984). Glimpses of the unmentionable in the history of British social anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.13.100184.000245
• Malinowski, B. (1967). A diary in the strict sense of the term. The Athlone Press.
• Mascia-Lees, F. E., ve Sharpe, P. (1992). Culture, power, and text: Anthropology and literature confront each “other”. American Literary History, 4(4), 678-696. https://doi.org/10.1093/alh/4.4.678
• Okely, J., ve Callaway, H. (Ed.). (1992). Anthropology and autobiography. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203450536
• Pacukiewicz, M. (2011). An unwritten Tristes Tropiques: Claude Lévi-Strauss and Joseph Conrad. Yearbook of Conrad Studies, 6(1), 43-56. https://doi.org/10.4467/20843941YC.11.005.0029
• Said, E. W. (1993). Culture and imperialism. Vintage.