Upload
angel-sanchez-gamboa
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
1/25
Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. The Anthropological Messenger as SeducedSeducer
Author(s): Klaus-Peter KppingSource: Paideuma, Bd. 45 (1999), pp. 209-232Published by: Frobenius InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40341771.
Accessed: 15/11/2014 13:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.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 formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Frobenius Instituteis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Paideuma.
http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=frobinsthttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40341771?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40341771?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=frobinst8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
2/25
Paideuma 5:209-232
1999)
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN
ETHNOGRAPHIC
PRAXIS
The
Anthropological essenger
s Seduced Seducer
Klaus-Peter
opping
Experiencing
In
England eople
make
much f
becoming
otallyispassionate
nd
free-thinkers
n
moralmatters:
pencer,
tuart
ill.
But
hey
o
nothing
utformulate moral enti-
ments.
omethingltogether
ifferents
required:
or
nce,
o feel
something
ifferent
(something
ther)
nd obe able
houghtfully
o
nalyse
hisfterwards.hat
means,
ear
moralist,
ew
nner
xperiences
Nietzsche
969:203;
y
ranslation;
mphasis
n
he
rig-
inal).1
One
could
not
asily magine
more
ithy
tatement,
r
passionate lea
n
response
o
the
dilemma
esetting
he
anthropologicalrofession
ince ts
nception
s
empirical
study
with
he until
ecently unspoken greement
f
the
majority
f ts
practition-
ers
about the
canon
of
methodology
s
introduced
y
Malinowski
hrough
he
oxy-
moron
participant
bservation'. ietzsche's
revaluation'
s indeed
turning
pside-
down
of the
greed
modern
ractice
f
doing
cience
y putting
thics s
experience
before pistemology.
What
field s
better
quipped
han
nthropology
o
put
these
recepts
nto
prac-
tice,
where,
s Malinowski
ormulated
t,
fieldworkersim
"to
grasp
henative's
oint
of
view,
his relation
o
life,
o realizehis vision f his
world"
Malinowski 961:25)
through
hat
he abelled
plunges
nto he ife
fnatives"
1961:22).
n
thefirst
uar-
ter
fthis
entury,
he
new science f
mankind' as based on the
methodological
ri-
macy
f
experience
f Otherness ia
the Selfwhich ould be called an 'immersion
therapy'.
n the ast
quarter
f
the
century
hediscussion bout
thnography
eems
o
revolve
round he
problem
f
analysis
not of data but of
writing
about
others,
ot
ofthe method
of
being
with
thers,
ut
merely
f
he
product,
the
process
of
knowledge cquisition ecoming xpendable.
While
he
nstigator
f thick
escription',
lifford
eertz,
as
doubtlessly
one
the
ong-overdue
ob
of
deconstructing
he
process
f
writingthnography,
is
critique
of
ll
attempts
o
bring
he
uthor nto
he ext eems o have
gone
o
the
xtremear-
1
"In
England
meint
man
Wunder,
ie
freisinnig
ie
hochste
iichternheit
n
SachenderMoral
mache:
Spencer,
tuart
Mill. Aber chliefilich
ut
man
nichts
ls seinemoralischen
mpfindungen
u
for-
m u
1 e r e n. Es erforderttwas
anz
nderes:
wirklichnderes inmal
empfinden
zu konnen
und Besonnenheit interher
u
haben,
um dies
zu
analysieren
lso neue nnere
rlebnisse,
meine
wertenMoralisten "
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
3/25
210
Klaus-Peter
opping
castic
position,
ossibly
orn
from
espair
bout the
mpossibility
f the
task,
f de-
claring
ll such
attempts
o
far s
basically
utile. n theother
and,
he
does
under-
state he mportancef the elf-reflectivetancewhich nly he ncountern thefield
can
generate.
he deconstructionftexts
must emain icarious
s
long
s
the
decon-
struction
r
otherwisefthe
field-work
aradigm
s
not
taken
n
seriously.
If
the
ethnographicnterprise
s
supposed
o
range
rom
articipation
hrough
mediation
o
communication,
r from
nderstanding
o
interpretation,
s
I once
put
it2
whereby
ts
knowledge
s authenticated
y
participation
hile he ommunication
could
potentially
ead to
emancipation
f self
nd
others,
he
atter ot
needing
s to
authenticatehem
,
then
o establish
he tatus
fthat
ind f
knowledge
hich
ar-
ticipatory
esearch
btains
must emain n
urgent
ask,
oming
efore onsideration
of
theform
which hetransmissionf this
knowledge
akes
s entertained
s
a moral
andepistemologicaluestion.
The
anthropologist
ay
ften eel ike
he
mythical
lind
eerTeiresias
ho
after
having
een
granted
he boon of
changing
is
sex,
when
rechanged
nto
man and
askedhow
t felt
o be female
ouldnotrecall he
xperience.
ut
then he
nthropol-
ogist
knows
hat the
ther
stablishesme
n
truth:t s
only
with heother
hat feel
I
am
myself"
Barthes
990:229);
without
retending
o
be the Other'
n the
Dil-
theyan
mode of
empathetice-experiencing'
Nachempfindung),
he
nthropologist
s
morebeholden o the
nsight
hat
he me'
thathe writes bout
s a self stablished
s
a
composite
fter
having
ncountered
he
Other,
as
Self transformed.
t s
this ransformation
rocess
which shall
pursue
n
the
followinghrough
diversity
f
perspectives.
The
Metaphor of Hermes
Over
the
years,
variety
f
different
etaphoric omparisons
as been
applied
by
practitioners
o the
nthropologist's
ield-work
ctivities
n
order
o
convey
he
mpor-
tance s well s the
xistential,
pistemological
nd moral ialecticnherent
n the
figu-
re of
the
tranger
ho as
participant
bserver as to shuttle etween
ontrasting
tti-
tudes o the
Other,
between
earness
nd
distance,
ngagement
nd
detachment,
involvementnd critique, xperience nd analysis. ollowing revious uggestions
(Kopping
985,1989;
Crapanzano
987,
1992),
shallrefer o Hermes
n
his
function
as
messenger'
ho straddles he
worlds f
gods,
humans nd
thedead.
thereby
ake
cognizance
f
two
spects
f
Hermes'
nature,
n theone handofthe
bridge
rom e-
ing
with others to
writing
about
others,
hile
n theother
hrough
he
intimationf
Hermes s seducer refer
gain
to the double
bind,
between
elf nd
other
n
thefield
s well s the
researcher's
elf
n
relation o readers.
2
"vonder
Teilnahme ber
die
Mitteilung
ur
Vermittlung"
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
4/25
8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
5/25
212
Klaus-Peter
opping
to
thefourfold
conicity
f
Prometheus/Faust,
f
Hamlet,
fDon
Quixote
nd of
Don
Juan
whichArnold
Hauserhas
previously
hown o be
emanationsf
a narcisstic
on-
sciousnessHauser1964),andI have cometo theconclusionhat ll four lsotypify
European
orms f tricksterhood
Kopping
1985).
try
ere hen o extend
hefour-
folddivision
y
he
figure
fHermes
who shares number
f raits
ith he
ther
our
while
acking
ome
of
theirs.While
Hermes s
critic nd
nterpreteroes
beyond
he
self-referentiality
f theother our
ricksters,
e shares
he nventiveness
nd
cunning
ofPrometheus
who
ackscharmwhile
Hermes acks he
other's
ibido ciendi
s well
as the
rebellious
ttitude,
eing
more
diplomat
han
evolutionary);
he
harm
f
Don
Juan
lacking
is
desparation,
ut
charming
is
way
out
of
desperate
ituations);
he
playednaivety
f
Don
Quixote
lacking
is delusions
nd
showing
ot
muchof the
holy
ool
rait).
imilarities
ith hevacillations
fHamlet
eem east
developed
while
inhisbeguilingmusicalitye resembleshe inger rpheus.Hermes'main raits his
multilingualism,
s
it
were,
is
bility
o
carrymessages
etween ifferent
ealms f he
universe,
eing
ble to cross
boundaries,
rotecting
ravellers,
nd to be
'persuasive'
in
his functions
diplomat, sychopomp
nd
adjudicator.
s master
f
dissimulation,
he couldtake n
strange isguises
nd
play
he
part
f
he
perfect
hief.3
e is also
the
master
nd
guardian
f secret
knowledge'
dduced
ater
o
him
as
a
double
of the
Egyptian od
Thot who invented
ciences,
writing,
umbers nd
books),
and
his
charmwas
apparentlytrong
nough
o attract
phrodite
ut ofwhich nion
heher-
maphrodite
as born
see
also Brown
969).
Seduction
and
Annihilation:
Europe's
Quest
I
here
putmy ptions
n
Hermes s
metaphoricmage
or hefieldwork
ncounter
other
rickstercons
would
certainly
hrow different
ight
n our
understanding
f
the
essence f
ethnographic
ork because
of the seductive
ualities
f
his
dialogic
disposition
nd because
European history
tartswith
he
metaphor
f
a seduction
through
he
tory
f
Europa
and
Zeus,
a seduction hich
according
o Steiner's
es-
simistic
ssessment
f
hemodern
uropean
onsciousness ends
n
a boundless
triv-
ing
for
estructiveness
hich an
only
ind
tsfulfilment
n
utter nnihilation.
hether
anthropology's
earch or hisOther s an
attempt
o overcomehedestructive
mpul-
ses
which
permeate eality
where
reality
vertakes
nthropologyy
throwing
ts
essentialistheoretical
oncept
f cultural ifference
ack at t
through
sing
t to
le-
gitimate
enocide
nd other trocities
,
whetherts ndeavour
an be
perceived
s an
3
In
this
ssay intentionally
bstain
rom
omparing
ermes s
thief ith
nthropologists
s
appro-
priators
f
ndigenous
nowledge.
uch
equation
wouldbe an
oversimplification
hich
owever as
been
madeoff nd
on also
by ndigenousnthropologists.y
ontentionsbout
re-appropriation
ill
become lear
n a
later ection
hrough
ecourse o themusical
mode of recital'.
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
6/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC PRAXIS
213
answer o the
only
isionwhich ould
in Steiner's
hinking
savethe ccidental on-
sciousness
rom nnihilation
y merging
he
Judaeo-Christian
nd the Greco-Roman
worlds,
he unfinished
roject
of the Renaissance o weld Athens nd
Jerusalem
together,
emains
n
open
challenge.
t s the
hallenge
hich
hilosophy
as
begun
o
accept
hrough
he
writings
f
Levinaswho
develops
whathe
himselfalls
an anti-to-
talitarian,
nti-Platonic
nd
anti-Heideggerian
hilosophy
hich ests ot
on
the laim
for
Being
nd
Subject
s
self-fashioned,
ut
n
which he
Other ecomes s much f a
focus s does
desire
nd themessianic
mpulse
f
Judaism
Levinas1961).
Anthropology
as
Redemptive
Process?
The question emains hethernthropologyancontributeo the Salvationistnter-
prise
f
welding
ulturally
ivergent
ntologies ogetherhrough
hemoral tance
f
exposing
heSelf
o them.
orms
f
perceiving
nthropology
s
a
redemptiverocess
were ntertained
y
ome
of
ts
practitioners.
evi-Strauss
ave negative
nswerwith
his notion
f cultural
ntropy.
y
contrast e
may
nfer more
positive
mage
from
Malinowski's
ision
of the aims
of
anthropological
ield-work,
he
metaphorical
suggestiveness
f
which
has
to
my
knowledge
otbeen
perceived
least
of
all,
by any
of the
busy
deconstructionists
ho still
eem to
revel
n
anti-imperial
ounding
f
other
chests).
There
xists
owever
n
original
metaphorical
elation o
redemptiverocesses.
In his ntroductionf 1922to "Argonautsf theWestern acific",Malinowski efers
to the
collecting
f
demographic
nd census nformation
f
kinship
erms nd
genea-
logies
s
"dead
material"
1961:5)
which
ecome,
nevertheless,
he
"firm
keleton
f
the
ribal
ife"
1961:11).
This,
s
may
e
recalled,
e ater
esignates
s the
firm oun-
dation
or he"constructive
rafting
...]
of
he harters
fnative
nstitutions",
here-
by
those
whose
ife
s
largely
etermined
y
them re
not awareof
the values
gov-
erning
he
institutions
r
are unable
to
formulate hese
coherently
Malinowski
1935:137).
The second
feature
o be aimed
for s
the "intimateouches
f
native
ife"
(Malinowski 961:17),
o
acquire
the
feeling"
nd
"being
n touchwith
henatives"
(1961:8).
He
summarizes
hisdouble
requirement
y contrasting
is own
approach
with reviouscientificork: [...] we aregiven n excellentkeleton,
o to
speak,
f
the
ribal
onstitution,
ut t
acksflesh
nd blood"
(1961:17),
nd
repeating
mphat-
ically:
[....]
thefull
ody
nd blood
of actual
native ife ills
ut soon the
keleton
f
abstract
onstructions"
1961:18).
These
are obtained
hrough
ttention
o the
thno-
grapher
s
breaches
f
tiquette
1961:8)
or
those
im
ponder
ab ilia
of actual
life"
(1961:18;
his
emphasis)
uch
as the
routine ctivities
f
body
care,
food
preparation
and
eating,
s
well s
through
knowledge
fthe
meaning
f the
"intimacy"
f
family
life as
opposed
o the deal
concept
as
expressed
n
"the
ffection,
hemutual
nter-
est,
he
ittle
references,
nd
the ittle
ntipathies"
1961:19).
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
7/25
214
Klaus-Peter
opping
The third im
of scientific
ield-work,
s he calls
t,
s
recording
the
native's
views nd
opinions
nd utterances" hichmake
up
the
spirit"
f
native
ife
s
well s
ethnographicork 1961:22), nd, eekingo "convince hoseHere that ne has been
There",
laimed s an
important
ovelty y
some deconstructionists
nd
textualists,
Malinowski dds a
"third ommandment":o "formulate
heresults
n themost
on-
vincing
manner"
1961:23).
What
hen id Malinowski
nd
up
with:
nthropomorphi-
zation f data or
redemption
ftheresearcher?
A
Personal
Encounter
It has become ustomaryor nthropologistso authenticateheir ataordeliberations
through
eferenceo a
field-incident,
s
exemplified
y
the
ndignant
eply
f Levi-
Strauss o hiscritic urvitch:
They
re
my
witnesses". shall
herefore
ollow uit
nd
relate ne such ncident rom ield-work
n
Japan
n
1966,
because
the ncident
s one
which irstmademe aware f he
precariousness
f he
thnographic
ethod
nd thus
ultimately
ed
to
the
present
meta-discoursen
participation.
When
approached
he founder f one
of the
many ost-war
o-called
New
Religions"
Shinko
hukyo)
n
Japan,
he ate Mrs.
Sayo
Kitamura
f Odoru
hukyo
("DancingReligion")
r Tensho otai
Jtngu yo "Religion
f
the
Heavenly
hining
Goddess
and
the Sacred
Shrine"),
he
got
rather ired f
my
nsistent
uestioning
about her relation o thedeity, hichwas assumed o speakthrough ermouth nd
reside
n
her
belly,
nd of
my
nquiring
bout
he tate f
"non-ego"
muga)
which
ol-
lowers
werebelieved o achieve
hrough articipation
n theritual dance of
oosing
one's
ego" {muga-no-odori)
She
curtly
dvisedme:
"Bakayaro"
"you simpleton"
r
"stupido")
"You
try
o
grasp
with
your
head what
you
can
only
chieve
hrough
your
heart
kokoro).
ou should
participate
n
the dance of
non-ego"
see
Kopping
1967,1968,1994)
The
meaning
f Mrs.
Kitamura's dvice eems lear: he
meantme to abandon
my
uestioning,bserving,
nterviewing
nd all forms
f ratiocination
n
order
o
gain
'understanding'
r
nsight y oining
n
thedance of her
followers,
hich
would
help
me
to reach he tate f
emptiness
hichwouldreveal he
divinity
nd
thereby
nswer
all
my uestions
hroughxperience.
o
put
t
differently,
he
message
eemed o be -
and t
was
startling
orme at
that ime nd has remained
tartling
ntil
oday
that
surrendero the
occasion,
eavingmy cholarly
nterestsnd orientationsnd
my
ra-
tionality
side. For
the sake of the
participatory
equirement,
realized hat he was
right,
ut also realized
hat couldnot
give
n
to the
occasion
for,
s Gouldner
ut
it
once,
had
to
satisfy
oth
requirements
f
myprofessional
ife,
hose f
passion
s
well as of
reason.Because
without
assion
"manwould be a
computer,
ut without
reason
he wouldbe a
naked
pe".
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
8/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PRAXIS
215
Mrs. Kitamura
was
right
nsofar s
my
professed
elief
n
gaining nowledge
through
articipation
hould
ntail mmersion
n
the
activities,
ut besides
observing
my
wn elfnthis
rocess
f
participation,
ndthe ctivitiesf
others,
was also com-
mitted
o
conveying
y nsights
o theoutside
world.
The
atter
equired
me to attain
distance
nstead
f
nvolvement,
etachment
nstead
f
engagement,
r
at east
lways
the
pplication
f rational
nalysis
n
order o
gain
horizon f
reflexivity,
nd
reflec-
tionon
what
he
group
was
trying
o
do
in
the
ight
f a wider
ontext,
e
it
that
f
modern
apan
r that
fthe
correlation
fmessianicmovements
o
social,
political
r
economic
ircumstances
n
other
imes nd
other
laces.
My
nitial elf-set
askwas
for
comparative
nalysis,
nformed
y
theories s
well
as
descriptions
lready
vailable
n similar
henomena
utside
apan.
ittlewas
I
prepared
o
encounter
wall
of
non-comprehension
or
my
ask
f
writing
bout*
y
inquiringromoutside' mong hepractitionersf thegroupwho, ike thefounder,
wanted
me
to become
member,
part
f their
ommunity
fbelievers.
Selected
Contexts
of
the Field
Encounter
The
founder
nd the
group
members
largely
he everal
ozen
key
dministrators
nd
missionaries
t
headquarters
n
the
town
f
Tabuse,
s well as several
undred
mem-
bers
coming
n
pilgrimages
r work-duties
or everal
ays,
ometimes
wo
weeks,
o
theheadquarters,nd latermanyndividualmembersll overJapan nd overseas)
were
prepared
o et
me as
foreigner'
hare
n their
xperiences.
hiswas
a relief
nd
surprise
orme
at the
ame
time as
it would
be for
nyone
lse who has
tried o do
participant
esearch
n
Japan
since
foreigners
re
usually category
f
persons
who
are considered
crazy'
r
odd'
{henna
aijin):
f
hey ry
o emulate
apanese
ways
oo
closely,hey
asily
ecome
laughing
tock s well
s a source
f embarrassment.
The
group
encountered
ad no
qualms
bout
my
notion f
participation
hich
often
reates
he
greatest
ifficulties
n
other
esearch
reas:
Anthropologists
ho are
neither
octors
r
nurses,
or
development
gents
with
pecialized
nowledge,
annot
easily
ustify
r
egitimate
heir
resence,
ot
to
speak
of theirwish
o
participate
ike
'oneof hem'.However,hemembersfthis eligiousroup ouldnotunderstandhe
reason
or
writing
bout
them
hrough
hetool
of rational
nquiry:
he
onlyway ny
writing
as
to
be done
was
as
'testimony'
o
conversion
nd to the
experience
f
di-
vine
lessing
n
order
o
spread
he
ruth
f heir
ospel.
,
on the ther
and,
was
will-
ing
o
participate
nd share
n their
xperiences,
appy
o
get way
rom
he ften
nly
vicarious
ay
f
gazing
t otherness'
o common
n
most
ield-work,
ut was not
pre-
pared
o surrender
o the
degree
f
becoming
ne of
hem',
o fake onversion
r even
to
give
up my
nalytic
ask.
The
compromise
eached
n
the
end was for he
group
o
accept
he dea of
my
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
9/25
216
Klaus-Peter
opping
writing
bout hem
s
approximating
heir otion f
conversion
iterature hile
rant-
ing
the
foreigner
he freedom r
spleen
of a learned
man'
erai
hito)>
s
thosewho
write ooksfor livingnJapanese ocietyreknown y people nthecountryside.
However,
eing
n
close
contactwith
many
dherents
t the
headquarter
f a founder
of
teachings
hichwere
iterally
aken s 'God's
truth' orworld
alvation,
t a
place
whichwas to be the future
aradise' tengoku)
n
earth,
was also
often
hallenged
in
myprivate
elfwhen nvolved
n
questions
f truth
r of
my
beliefs'.
soon
realiz-
ed that could not
bring
ff 'neutral'
tand,
or could
fakebelief
n
their
pecific
truth:he ncountered me
to rethink
y
wnbeliefs
fwhich
my rofessional
nthro-
pological
ursuits
re an
inseparable art.
Authentication
My example
ouches
irectly
n
the
ssue
of the
authenticity
f the
researcher.
hile
it has become
customary
o claimthat written
thnographyains
ts
authenticity
through
eferenceo
field-work,
n
therecent econstructionist
iteraturehe
concept
seems o be devalued o meanthe
persuasiveness
f
fiction' nd
not the
existentially
and
morally
more
challenginguestion
f what
uthenticityruly
ntails,
he
being
true o
oneself.
The
question
whichwe
ought
o
be able to answer
s notwhether
e
are
convincing
o a
readership
ut whether
ur
findings ely
n an
authentic
uman
being'snvolvementith ther uman eings, nd that uestion anonly e assessed
through
ttentiono the
primaryraxis
f
field-work,
ot
by
reference
o
good
or bad
writing
r to rhetoricaldumbrations. hatdoes
being
rue o oneself
ntail,
n
gen-
eral
terms,
or he
anthropologicalrofession?
urely,
he readerwill
say,
no answer
can be
expected
r
given
n
detail s
only
heresearchersould answer
his or
hem-
selves.
recently
rote
onfidently
n this s follows:
The
only
uthenticity
e
may
claim
n
this
nterprise
e derive rom ur
participation
n
other
ways
f
perceiving
reality,
nd not
from
he
casual
voyeurism
f
thetourist r the
persuasiveness
f our
'fictions'n
our world"
Kopping
1994:25).
stillmaintain his
position,
ut with
n
extension r rather
ddition
esulting
rom
variety
f nfluences
hich orcedme to
re-think
yposition,
nfluences
anging
rom
re-creating'
he field-encounter
n
my
memory
o the iteraturef the
writing
ulture'
dherents,
rom
eaching
ield-work
methods o
undergraduateshrough ereading arefully
alinowski'sntroduction
o
"Argonauts"
o
encounteringolleagues
hinking
bout imilar
roblems uring
on-
ferences.
s thereaction o
my
participatory
ttempts
n
thefield howed o me
then,
and
more
pronouncedly
how
now,
my
nformants
id
share o a
degree
my
wn dea
of
true
knowledge
o be
gained hrough
ction
nd
experience,
ut we
parted
t the
point
where
insisted n
holding
o
my
wnbeliefswhich ncluded he im
of
writing
about them
n
an
analytic ay.
Nevertheless,
n
spite
of
disagreements
rue
dialogic
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
10/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PRAXIS
217
interactions
id
develop,
because
of the differences
eing
maintained,
would
think,
ecause
we
-
informants
nd
myself
were ndeed
mutually
urious nd
willing
not
only
o
suspend re-
udgements,
utalso to
suspend
isbeliefnthe
possibility
f
a
meeting
f
thought
nd
feeling.
Two Forms
of
Access to Reality:
Knowledge of
the Head and the Heart
Littlewas
I
prepared
o encounter
cultural
etting
here
split
of
two kinds
of
knowledge
was
taken
for
granted,
here
knowledge hrough iving
n and
surren-
dering
o
experience
as considered
he
highest
orm f
realizing
ull
humanity
hile
all ratiocinationas consideredn inferiororm f iving, formwhich hefounder
Mrs.
Kitamura
made
responsible
or he decline
of the world'
using
he Buddhist
term
mappo,
he
third f three
ges
after
he deathof
Shakyamuni,eing
he
age
of
decline
efore he
Apocalypse).
While
was
not
prepared
o
relinquish
my
wn
pursuit
f rational
nalysis,
he
encounter
ith
his
different
oncept
of
knowledge
made me
aware not
only
that
anthropology
as
caught
n the ame
bind whichMrs. Kitamura
as
describing,
ut
that he
close
encounter
f
participation
as
indispensible
s a
praxis
n
order
o be
able
to detect
he
similarity
r
difference
n a more han
ntellectualevel of
game-
playing.
was
challenged
n
my
elief hat could
possibly
eepmy ersonal
elf
epa-
rate rommy rofessionalelf.And nowbecame ware hat heprofessionalrienta-
tion o
write
nd be
involvedwith
nalysis
oes
belong
o
my uthenticity.
Authenticity
hus
ncompasses
he ombination
f
whatGouldner
alled he wo
forms
f
knowledge,
nowledge
s
information
s well as
knowledge
s awareness
(Gouldner 972:493;
or similar
osition
merging
ee
also Kauffmann
990),
where-
by
the
atter
s self-
eflective
ode cannot ome
aboutwithout
articipation
nd en-
gagement
ith
oncrete
thers.
his
engagement
nd
participation
oes involve he
full
elf,
not a
compartmentalized
ection
f
t,
ince,
s
Diamondonce
expressed
t,
when
we talk
bout
generalized
thers
we are
most nauthentic.
oland
Barthes
ut
t
very
ptly
y quoting
Nietzsche:
Supposinghat e xperiencedhe thershe xperiencesimselfwhichchopenhauer
calls
ompassion
ndwhich
might
ore
ccurately
e called union
within
uffering,
unity
f
uffering
we should
ate he
ther hen e
himself,
ike
ascal,
inds imself
hateful
Barthes
990:174).
In hisown
comment
arthes ontinues
his
ine
of
hought:
Now,
whatever
he
power
of
ove,
hisdoes
notoccur:
am
moved,
nguished,
or
t s horrible
o see those ne
loves
suffering,
ut at the
same time remain
ry,watertight. y
identification
s
imperfect"
1990:57).
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
11/25
218
Klaus-Peter
opping
There s no
guarantee
hatwe can ever
ridge
uccessfully
he
gap
between
xpe-
rience
nd
analysis
r between hetwo
forms f existence
hich evinas
abelled he
differentttitudeso theworld: itherwe aregivingn to it and aretaken verby t
(then
we are
existing
n
themode of
ecstasy),
r we
appropriate
nd assimilate
t to us
(then
we are
n
the mode of
knowledge),
ut
prior
o
both are
forms f
enjoyment
(jouissance)
nd all
enjoyment
s a
way
f
being
Levinas
987:63).
But,
we
might
dd,
our
way
f
being
s
n
differentorlds.
While
we
may
each
n
understanding
hrough
reaching
ut to the
Other,
y magination,
r
by negotiation
f
meaning,
e willnot
be able to
change
laces.
Rosaldo's
xample
f
understanding
he
head-hunter's
age
refers o the flash
f
recognition
f
meaning hrough
ur
own hurt nd
the accom-
panying
natural'
eaction f
rage,
ut
t s his' hurt
nd
rage,
r
n
Laura
Bohannan's
words: The
greater
he xtent o which
ne has
ived nd
participated
n a
genuinely
foreignulture ndunderstoodt, hegreaterhe xtento which ne realizes hat ne
could
not,
without
iolence o one's
personal ntegrity,
e of
t"
Bowen
1964:291).
Appropriations
of Self
and
Other
Rethinking
hefield-encounter
ith
religious
ounder,
would
now state
hat
nly
through
his ncounter
ould become
ware fthe econd
pole
of
my
uthenticity
s
anthropologist
nd
person:
he im o
analyse
nd write
r what
RolandBarthes
ould
have called thepleasure f thetext'.Yet, couldonlygive ntothat yhaving irst
given
n
to the ncounter.
husbothforms f
praxis
elong ertainly
o
the
nthropol-
ogist's uthenticity,
nd no matter ow
many
exts read
previously
r
subsequently,
the
ncounter emains
he
primary
ource
or he
reflexivity
o take
place.
The exam-
ple
of the encounter
lso makes t
clearthatno form
f
text-positivism',
o
laying
open
all
possible
memories
f
influences,
hether
efore,
uring
r after
he
field
encounter,
an
help
to elucidate he ources
f
my nterpretations
f
Japanese
ttitudes
to
knowledge,
hich
while
artial
nspite
f all the bove
given
ontextual
nalysis
are
my
wn
map'
to
make ense
f
plethora
f
ingle
ncidences;
hether
t
provides
a
readerwith he
ame
map
s
open
to debate.
The encounter larified
many
uestions
had about
Japanese
eligiosity
nd
many reviously
ncomprehensible
ehaviouralncidences ell nto
place.
However,
the
meaning
fwhat
Mrs.Kitamura aid also
was nformed
y
previous xperiences
n
Japan,
ncluding
misunderstandings.
oreover,
he
epistemological
nd
existential
impossibility
f
he ask f
nthropology
ecame lear o
my
tartled
e-cognition:
ow
could haveor
pretend
o have similar
articipatory
ccess
to half dozen
messianic
groups?
My
above
given
ranslationsnd
interpretations
f
Japanese oncepts
f know-
ledge
re
certainly
eappropriations
f
my
wn
xperiences
or ther
urposes,
ike he
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
12/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC PRAXIS
219
one
at hand
of
presenting
n
essayisticpproach, eappropriations
n
the
ight
f nfor-
mation
nd
purposes
whichwerenot at ssue at the ime
f
the ncounter
n
thefield
orof tsfirst
nalysis.
The encounter
ltimately
lso made sense
of
my nthropological
ocation
for
the time
being),
but foremost ade me realize
my
difference
hrough
he
alterity
f
the
Other,
throwing
e back
upon my
wn
alterity
nd
forcing
e to
explain
my-
self
o
myself,
uthenticatingyself
ot
only
o
the
Other,
ut also to theSelf
and
n
this ense
of course
lso
legitimating
y
ontinuationf research
s
well as
writing).
The encountertself
s
possibly
esponsible
or
my uoting
f Levinas
n
this
ontext,
but
certainly
s decisive
here and now
-
for
my agreement
ith
or
critique
f
Malinowski
r other
olleagues
who
have ddressed
he
problem
f
otherness
n
field-
work
nd
writing,
r
for
my
uoting
ertain uthors
nd not others
n
the
essay:put
simply,readmy wn culture istoryndmy ntellectualeritagenthe ight f the
field-encounter.
nd that
s,
after
ll,
what
omparativenthropology
s
really
bout,
namely
o re-read
nd
re-interpret
heSelf
s individual
ife-history
s well
s
from he
point
f a collective
memory,
hus
ritically
e-appropriating
t
for
personal
and
pro-
fessional)
urposes.
For
an extension
fthis
dea
by
a researcher ho
readshis field-
work
hrough
orster's
orks nd vice
versa,
ee
Rapport
994.)
Jean
Pouillon
put
the
dilemma
ery ptly
s follows:
The notionwe have
of
others
s a function
fwhat
we are
ourselves",
nd,
o
he
continues,
proper
nthro-
pology
omes bout
through
he
ntegration
f our
"prejudiced"
deas and whatwe
know bout
others.
ut
how,
he
asks,
an
our
"prejudiced"
deas become rue
know-
ledge: Thismeans dmittinghat e the nthropologist)an become onscious f he
traditions
hich rient
is
hought,
hat e
can
udge
hem nd need
no
onger
ubmit
to
them
ven
f
he
still
ccepts
hem"
Pouillon
1980:37-39).
This
does sound
ike
the adviceof
Gadamer hatwhile
we
may
not be able to
overcome
ur
prejudices
he
hance t east
xists to free
urselves
hrough
eflection
from
hat
which therwise
ppresses
s unbeknown
o us".4This still eaves
open
the
question:
ow
do reflection
nd self-reflection
reflexivity)et
et ntomotion? efore
trying
o
prove
hat
elf-referentiality
oes
not
open
the
way
to
this,
take a detour
through
discussion
f another
amiliarorm f
re-appropriation
n
thefield
f
artis-
tic
re-creation
n the
musical
modality.
Original
and Copy:
Citation
and
Re-cital
While
the research
ubjects
partners
f a
dialogue)
provide
he
original
nformation
(possibly
maieutically
nduced),
hey
nd
up
disembodied
n the iteral ense of the
4
"die Reflexion
efreit,
ndem sie durchschaubar
macht,
von
dem,
was einen
undurchschaut
beherrscht"
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
13/25
220
Klaus-Peter
opping
word,
made over ntonew bodies
n
the
body
of
thetext'
providing
he
pleasure
f
the
text' o distanced
eaderships,
hus
oosing
ontrol nd
power
n
a similar
ay
s
do researchershenwriting,lthoughhe atters disempowerments at eastmitigat-
ed
by
he
ontrol
ver
he uthorial
haping
f exts
s woven
hings'
I
shall
ater
is-
cussthe
power
f eduction
he nformant
etains).
his
problem
elates
o
the
appro-
priation'
f
knowledge
n
the
writtenext o which
shall
urn
ow.
An
ssue
hat elates
irectly
o the
notion
f
appropriation
s that f
the ransla-
tion
from
xperience
o
expression
Dilthey's
on
der
Erfahrung
um
Ausdruck),
he
problem
f citation'.
ome textualists
onvey
he
mpression
hat
we would
be closer
to
the ruth
r would
gain
more ccurate
icture
fthe
Other
or
theOther
nd the
Self f heresearcher
n
their
nteractions)
f
we
only
ad
all the
field-notes
nd
diaries
of
field-workersnd
thus ould
re-construct
heir
path'
a
typical
xample
with hese
aims s thecollection ffield-notesr rather f meta-discussionsn field-notesn
Sanjek
1990).
t should
be
abundantly
lear hat
return
o a
new
textpositivism
s
fu-
tile
s
every
ext s
the
bsorption
nd transformation
f
other exts
for
n
ncisive
ri-
tique along
these
ines,
ee Kauffmann
990).
Since
Schleiermacher,
nterpretation
always
ntails
he
ppropriation
f a
'text',
he
past,
while
ddressing
he
present
nd
the
future.
he
original
s thus
ppropriated
or
he
present
udience's
and
nterpret-
er's)
relevances.
ouillon
ut
t
cogently
ypositing
s
minimum
equirement
o trans-
late
"faithfully
rom
he
language
f
departure'"
nd
"intelligibly
o the
language
f
arrival'"
Pouillon
1980:38).
It is for
hisreason hat
onductors
f Beethoven's
ymphonies
nd
performers
of Schubert's ieder re hailed s creative' ersons,s theyre-create'ndare nsofar
original
nd creative
ecause
while
aking
oth
ides
nto ccount
hey
re
appraised
by
the taste'
f
the
present
s
to how a
symphony
r a
Lied should
ound,
while
he
audience
arely
ares
whether eethoven
r Schubert
ould
have
played
r
sung
t
n
the
ame
way.
t is
notthe
dentity
f the
copy,
he xact
replica,
which s
desired
ut
a
'convincing'
endering
f an
original
n
what s
appropriately
alled
a
're-cital'.
he
very roblem
f
the
ge
ofexactmechanical
r electronic
eproduction
the
xamples
of
Disneyland
r
of
Hearst'scollection
mania are
the serious
xamples,
he
ronic
breaking
f
his ad n theworks f
Roy
Lichtenstein
r
Andy
Warhol
he
playful
om-
ments
n
t)
s that t eaves he
udience ather
istless,
s
a million
aphael
Madonnas
or the
rebuilding
f
Medieval
ownships
reknown o be
exactly
hat
hey
ry
o
hide:
fake
mitations,
ithoutife r
spirit'.
By
contrast,
ach
re-creation'f
a
piece
of music
r a dramatic
ole
by
a
gifted
artists considered
nique, ivetting,
oul-stirring
nd
possibly
cathartic'
n Schiller's
sense,
ecausethe
nterpretergot
t
right'
n
accordance
with he aste
nd
the
magi-
nation
s well s thedesire
the
fantasy)
fthe udience.
his
experience
s
replicated
and
re-experienced
y anybody
ho reads
poem
the
first r the
hundredth
ime
or
private leasure
or
edification),
henthe
pleasure
s
not
derived
rom
he author's
intentionsut from
he
relevances
he
reader,
istener
r viewer
ttaches
o theocca-
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
14/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC PRAXIS
221
sion.Clifford'statement
hat
ethnographers
an
no
onger
laim his
ort
f
originary
or creative
ole,
or
hey
must
lways
eckonwith
redecessors",
ecause "one writes
among, gainst,
hrough,
nd in
spite
of
them",
s utter onsensen the
ight
f an
interpretative
ramework
it
would
barely
hold
in
a
positivistic
nvironment;
ee
Clifford
990:55).
Australian
boriginal eligious ractitioners
nd artists ould
have
taught
Clifford
different
erspective.
borigines
f
the Northwest
f
Western
Australiatouch
up'
the
paintings
n rockswhere he Dreamtime reator
eings
eft
their
imprint':
his
e-painting
ctivity
s enacted
n
periods
f
acred
ime,
uring
ea-
sonal
increase'
eremonies,
n
truly
re-creationaT
ime,
n
ordernot
only
o remem-
ber'
(or
anamnetically
e-collect
he ancestor
reators),
ut
specifically
o
effect he
increase
f all
species,
hus
perceiving
re-creation'
s a
creative
ct
(repeating
he
Dreaming
s the
Creation).
Byre-creationhepresent erformersppropriatendeed hepowers f heorig-
inal
creators,
nd n this ense ach
appropriation
as to
encompass
n
apprehension
or rather
omprehension,
n
understanding
f he reative
riginal rocess.
ach read-
ing
or
writing
r
playing
fmusic
r
conversation)
s
an
original
xperience:
hat s the
true
message
fthe rt f
nterpretation.
his also
empowers
ach reader s last nter-
preter
hile
he
uthor oses control
ver he
production,
s does
themediator.
n
my
present
rame
f
reference,
he nformants well
s the
ranslator/mediator-anthropol-
ogist
must
mpower
he
reader
o make sense of the
product.
As
I
tried o show
through
he
xplication
f a
personal
ield-encounter,
nother eature
ets
hort hrift
if
originality'
n
appropriation
nd
re-casting
n
nterpretation
s denied: he ransfor-
mation f heresearchernvolvedn anencounteras to be takennto ccount,npar-
ticular he
hanging
f
histheoretical
erspective
r
personal
rame
f
nterpreting
is
and other
ultural
rrangements
n
critical
re-appraisal'
r what have called
pre-
viously
he
emancipatory'
ffect
f research
which
may
work lso for he research
partner).
A
Break-Down of Occidental
Confidence?
In regard o the Malinowskianspirit' f gained nformation,eertzspeaks
of an
"ethnographic
entriloquism:
he
laim o
speak
not
ust
bout nother
orm f ife ut
to
speak
from ithin
t"
Geertz
1988:145),
making
Malinowski's
thnography
mean-
ing
his
field-work)
n
"oddly
nward
matter,
question
f
self-testing
nd self-trans-
formation,
nd
making
f ts
writing
form
f self-
evelation",
hich,
o
concludes
Geertz,
ramatized or
Malinowski
his
hopes
of
self-transcendence",
hile
ormost
descendants,
itdramatizes
heir
ears f
elf-deception"
Geertz 988:22-23).
t
s dif-
ficult o
imagine
hat
Geertz
s
advocate
f thick
description'
ere resorts o
such
pessimistic
iews bout
nthropology's
earch
or
what s human
n
us all.
An
unchar-
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
15/25
222
Klaus-Peter
opping
itable
xplanation
ould
be to
see this emark
ot
s rhetorical
yperbole
ut s based
on theworld-viewf
hermeneuticsf
uspicion
which
may
e the
ogical
utcome
f
an attitude fmisanthropyseeKopping1995).Asoriginallyefined yKant ndfur-
ther
eveloped y
Helmuth
lessner,
he
misanthrope
s
convinced
hat uman
ature
is
governed yegoism
nd
deceit,
esulting
ften rom
feeling
ffailure
see
Plessner
1974:213).
This
s a trait iscernible
ery arly
n
n
the
written
orks fGeertz.
hus
in
1968
he claimed hat the
relationship
etween n
anthropologist
nd
his
nform-
ants
rests n
a set
of
partial
ictions
alf een
through",
aving
irst sserted
hat
he
tearswhich
many nthropologists
ee
in
the
eyes
of
nformants
are not
really
here"
(Geertz
968),
for
which he
unacknowledged
riginal
s
Evans-Pritchard's
ote
"
[...]
an
anthropologist
as failed
nless,
whenhe
says
goodbye
o
the
natives,
here
s on
both ides he orrow
f
parting"
Evans-Pritchard
951:79).
Wemay uibblewith vans-Pritchardhether ll field ncountersreamiable,
as
in
many
ield ituationshere
may
have been
a mixture f
hate and
ove,
of
greed
and
anger,
here
may
havebeen moments
f
uspicion
nd
disgust,
nd there
may
lso
be relief t the
parting
f the
tranger
ho
knows
o
much,
who was such
pestering
nuisance,
nd
on
the
thnographer's
ide
the
xpectation
f
reward,
ame nd
re-union
with
civilised' ife.But therewill
always
e sorrow n
both ides
f
engagement
nd
negotiation
ver
a
long period
have occurred
other
orms f
anthropological
ield
work re
not
under
discussion
ere).
Otherwise,
e
find hat
which vans-Pritchard
labelled
competent'thnographic
ork,
ut
f
twas
only
won
through hysical
rox-
imity
nd
if
field-work
id not
affect
the ntire
ersonality,
hetotal
human
eing",
no"deeperevel fUnderstanding"illhavebeen reachedEvans-Pritchard951:82).
Twenty
ears
ater,
eertz tates
ategorically
hat
modern
nthropology
in
con-
trast o the
founding
athers
nd mothers o whomhe
grants
uperior
hetorical
kills
-
has becomethebusiness f "half-onvincedwriters
rying
o half-convince
eaders
of
their
alf
onvictions"
Geertz
1988:139).
As clue to the
onvictionbout
he
"pre-
valence
of
deceit"
to
use
one
of
Bailey's
recent
itles)
he
ncidentwhich
Geertz
reports
bouthis field-workffers
tself,
hen
he
refused
o end his
typewriter
o
an
indigenous
riter hich ed to a
break-up
f he
relationship.
eertz
uts
his nto
he
following
rameworkf
polite
deceit:
Borrowing
...]
my
nformant
as,
acitly,sserting
is demand
o be taken
eriously
s an
intellectual...], .e. a peer; endingt, was,tacitly,rantinghatdemand ...].Weboth
knew hat hese
greements
ould
be
only artial:
e arenot
really olleagues
...] (Geertz
1968).
As Simmel
ointed
ut at the
beginning
f this
entury
boutthe
emptiness
f social
courtesy,
e
shouldnot
nfer
rom heir bservance
ny
steem r devotion
Simmel
1950:400).
Early nsight
o this
ffect omes
from
ascal's
treatise
Troisdiscourse
ur a
condition es
grands"
f
1560
where e
advised
hat
ne can
require
hat
ne
greets
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
16/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PRAXIS
223
duke
but one cannot
require
hat
one holds him
n
esteem.
One
could
argue
with
Geertz
gainst
imself: e
did
not
ee the
winks',
utmistook
ourtesy
n his ide
for
showing
f esteem
the
base reason
may
havebeen
plain
nconvenience)
nd nferred
that he
nformant's
equest
or
ourtesymplied
n
equality
e,Geertz,
id
notbelieve
to be there
n
the
first
lace,
result
if
may peculate possibly
f the ack of the
very
ameconfidence
hichhe
requires
f
present
riters
f
ethnography.
While
chiding
Geertz
for
trying
o wheedlehis
way
out
of
this conundrum
through
ecourse o
a
theory
f cross-cultural
ommunion' or a case which s
a
straightforward
ersonal
miscommunication
r a clash of
personalities,
obert
Jay
admits
n
the ame
breath hat
he
too
mismanaged
ersonal
elations,
s he
could not
remember
singlepersonal
nformant,
nd
that
any
wareness had of
particular
individuals
s
they
elated
ersonally
o
me,
o
others,
nd to their wn
ives,
xcept
s
itboreonmy erceptionf uchpatterning"of ystemsfrice griculturesdynam-
ic
of social
and economic
ower "slipped
by
me, or,
f
registered
ecause
of
some
intimacy
n
my
elation
ith
hem,
ot
et
apart
nto he
eparate
ealm f
my
private
life"
Jay
969:376).
Jay
dmits
n
retrospect
hat he
facile istinction hich
he made
in
his
earlier
ieldworketween
elevance
nd
responsibility,
heformer
eing
related
to the scientific
roject,
he
atter
eingrelegated
o the
private'
r
personal'
evel,
cannot
e
maintained,
ecauserelevance
s
knowledge
nd
responsibility
s action
re
inextricably
ntertwined
n the
relationship
etweenresearcher
nd informant
Jay
1969:377-378).
Humour,
self-irony
and
surrender
to seduction
Jay's
confessions'
re an
example
of
insight
bout
the imitations
f the Selfwon
after
field-work;
ut t s the
very
ttentiono scientific'
nthropology
hich
rings
about
his
ealisation
f he
ack,
dimly
elt
n
the
field,
eading
owto a new self-real-
isation',
ejecting
he
old
'me' and
creating
futureme' with
different
rientations,
thus
eading
o
a
changed
morality
f
being
n
theworld.
This
s
also
the conclusion
o
whichLevi-Strauss
omes
n his
reading
f Rous-
seau's "Confessions":he longreliance fEuropeanthoughtn theself-fashioning
Cartesian
cogito"
annot
stablish he
Self s a
reflexive
bject
of
the
reflecting
ub-
ject.
For
Levi-Strauss,
ousseau's
mportance
ies
n his realisationhat
against
he
attempt
f
Montaigne
the elf
has to
be
established
s a third
erson hrough
he
dia-
logic
nterrogation
nlypossible
hrough
he
presence
f
others,
n
order o arrive t
the
nsight
fRimbaud's
je
est
un autre".
evi-Straussherefore
grees
withRousseau
in
the
pronouncement
hat
when
hear
music,
am
hearing
myselfhrough
t".5
t is
5
See Levi-Strauss'
ddress n Genevafor he
50th
nniversary
f
Rousseau's irth
Levi-Strauss973).
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
17/25
224
Klaus-Peter
opping
from his
perspectiveurprising
hat
evi-Strauss,
ho had
previously
ndicated
hat
no
particular
iew
of theworld hould
be considered
s
superior
nd
that
nthropol-
ogistshave to followRousseau's dagethat ne has "to refuse neselfn oneselfn
order
o
accept
neself
n
others
(Levi-Strauss
973:242),
oes
not
get
o the
point
f
criticising
is own
society
ut rather eels
himself s a
"manipulated
eing"
Sontag
1966:69-81).
At the same time
hiding
hose
nthropologists
ho
criticise
heir
wn
society
hile
becoming
most onservative
n
supporting
ven
he bstruse
ustoms
s
soon as
they
nter
hefield. ut
f
no
society
as the
prerogative
f he
good
ife',
hen
criticism
t both nds hould
e
possible.
tanding
loof rom
ngagement
s
that
ery
attitude
which came
into
prominence
with
the notion
of
Scheler
and
later of
Mannheim bout
he
"free-floating
lassof
the
ntelligentsia",
nd
t s an
attitude
he
anthropologist
annot fford.
f
anthropology
hooses
to
deny
ts
own
precepts
f
the suspension of disbelief inthe mpossibilityfthe psychic nityf
mankind'
nderlying
he
field-work
ndeavour,
t hould
ndeednot
be
surprised
o be
taken
by
nformants
nd
readers)
s
untrustworthy
s
that
osmopolitanism
hich
Rousseau
regarded
ith
reat
uspicion.
We cannot
etain he
ttitude
f the
imping
Oedipus
f
we want
o do field-work.
he adherents
f
the
writing
ulture'
orm
f
deconstruction
if
taken
s
majorpursuit
f cultural
tudies'
are
feeding
nto
nd
relying
n the
very
notion
of the
untrustworthiness
f all
re-creative
roductions,
maybe
ecause,
s
J.A.
Barnes
uggested,
hey
re
"discouraged
ith
he
partial
nd
philosophical
ifficulties
f
discovering
hat
goes
on
in
thereal
world" nd
therefore
diverting
their
nergies
o
exegesis
o
the
ndustry
nd other
elf-contemplating
ur-
suits" Barnes 979:188).
In
contrast
o Robert
ay's
ttitudetands
hat fLaura
Bohannan
who
during
field-workealizedher
own tricksterhood'
s follows:
I
was
one who
seems
o be
what he is not and who
profess
sic ]
faith
n
what
he does not
believe"
Bowen
1964:290).
he achieved he
upreme
eat f
elf-irony
hen
he
oined
n
the
aughter
of her
nformants
erforming
pantomime
n
her
face about
the
anthropologist
s a
writer,
ut also
perceived
he
unacceptable
ide of
heOtherwhen
hey aughed
bout
a blindman
tumbling
bout,
tating:
In
an environment
n
which
ragedy
s
genuine
an
[sic ]
frequent,
aughter
s essential o
sanity"
Bowen
1964:295),
nd further:
"These
people
know
he
reality
nd
augh
t
t. Such
aughter
as ittle
oncern
with
what
s
funny.
t s often itter
nd
sometimes
little
mad,
for t s the
augh
under
he
maskof
tragedy,
nd also the
aughter
hatmasks ears.
They
rethe same" Bowen
1964:297).
But she could
not share
n
that
aughter,
r as she
put
t:
"It is an error
o
assume
hat o know s to understand
nd to understand
s to ike"
Bowen
1964:291).
Here we
are on different
round, rgued
rom he evelof
experience
ith
therness,
of
being-for
to
use
Heidegger's
nd
Zygmunt
auman's
erminology)
n
togetherness,
not the
distancing
eflection
f one's own
writing.
ohannan hus
voided
he
pitfall
of moral
ndifferencer condescension
hichBauman
haracterized
nce
as the tti-
tude
"you
re
wrong,
am
right,
...]
thefact
hat bearwith
your
therness
oes
not
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
18/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC PRAXIS
225
exonerate
our
rror,
t
only provesmy generosity"
Bauman 1992:XXI).
Bauman
thereforealls
for
dialogic cknowledgement
f the
equivalence
f
knowledge-pro-
ducing
discourses,
henwe take this
egitimacy
f the nterestsf others
eriously.
That
would be true
olerance s well as
a
sign
of
solidarity
the
only
value Bauman
wants o save
from
modernity's
roject).
Bohannan chieves
hiskind
f
nsight
hrough
sense
ofthe
narchic
ower
f
humour
which,
s the artof
balancing
etween
elf-enjoyment
nd
sympathy
or
he
suffering,
as
been
perceived
s a
sign
of true
humanity
ince Roman
times;
r
as
Friedrich
chlegel,
he
great
heoretical
ind f the
German
RomanticMovement f
the
1820s
put
t:
"Irony
ontains
omething
f and creates
feeling
or he nsoluble
struggle
etween
he
mpossibility
nd
at
the ametime he
necessity
f
compete
ia-
logue.
With
rony
ne
surpasses
ne's self".
Any ther ttitude,uchas the ndignation"but was a field-worker"r "that
is
beyond
he
bounds
of
scholarly
ivility")
f some members
f the
anthropological
profession,
ho
reacted
iolently
gainst
he
harge ySangren
nd
Jarvie
hat econ-
struction as
the
best excuse for
rmchair-ethnology
ince
Frazer,
would have been
regarded
y
heRomans s
thevice
of
gravitas,
hat heaviness' hich s
the
very
ppo-
site f
the
evity
fthe
poetic
magination
fwhich
chlegel
gain
aid n
unsurpassed
clarity
he
following:
Behind
hecreative
mpulse
tands he
buffoon,
nd
the
nspi-
rational
orce
f
poetry
s thedivine
reath f
rony,
ermeated
y
truly
ranscenden-
tal
buffoonery".
It s this
uffoonery
f
he ricksterho
delights
n his
own
pranks
nd thefaults
orfollyfothers,ras La Rochefoucauldaid:"Ifwe hadnofaults e wouldnotde-
rive
so much
pleasure
discovering
hem
n
others"6
La
Rochefoucauld
959:72),
whichmakes
he
encounter
ith
he other
salutary xperience.
he limitations
s
well s
the
urpassing
fboundaries
nly
ecome
lear o us when
we see ourselves s
third
arties
hrough
ncountering
heOther.But
field-works beset
with he
very
l-
liberality
n whichwe
are
caught,
ollowingchlegel,
hen
we are creative.
herefore,
to be
able to
analyse
we have
to embrace
istance,
or
nly
hendo we
gain
freedom
from ur
undivided
ttention
o a task.
We have
hen,
fter
ll,
o revert
o
writing,
nd
writing
eads
to the
rreverent
reedom
f he
buffoon,
he
rickster,
he
ender fmes-
sages,
o
Hermes
s herald.
There s a very ine xample f reflectiony
an
ethnographer
bout
the
ttempt
to
escape
the
self-referentiality
f the
monologic isposition
nd the
temptation
o
write.
Michel
Leiris
ommentedn
the
Djibouti-Dakar
xpedition
s follows:
Intense
ork,
o
which
give
myself
ith certain
ssiduousness,
utwithoutn ounce
of
passion.
'd rather
e
possessed
han
tudy ossessedeople,
ave arnal
nowledge
f
6
"Si nous
n'avions
oint
de
defauts,
ous ne
prendrions as
tantde
plaisir
en
remarquer
ans es
autres."
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
19/25
226
Klaus-Peter
opping
Zarina,
atherhan
cientifically
now ll bout er. or
me,
bstract
nowledge
ill ever
be
anything
ut he econd
est
Leiris
934:324).
Leiris was
one of the few
who saw that
dangerous oison
which ies behind
the
demand nd the imto
publish
n
ethnography
f ived
xperience,
hatwhich
usan
Sontag
has called
the
revenge
f
the ntellect
pon
art,
s each
nterpretation
mplies
that he
riginal
s not
good
enough.
uch
hermeneutic
s
not
only ggressive
ut lso
impious:
From he
start,
riting
his
ournal,
have
struggled
gainst
poison:
the
idea of
publication"
Leiris1934:215).
He
adds
also a melancholic
ote:
"In the
year
1933
returned
nd had at east
destroyed
ne
legend:
hat
f
travelling
s the
possi-
bility
r
escaping
neself
...] (1939:202-203).
Whenhe
produced
inally
text,
eiris
says
bout
t:
"I
like
very
muchwhatGenet
oldmewhenwe
met
irst: write
n
order
to be loved'
-
that eems o
me of unconditional
incerity"
1934:209).
Thus,
while
wishing
n vain o embraceheresearch
ubject,
e ends
up
yearning
to embrace
hereader: rom
he
mpossible
o the
potential.
his s
possibly
he
ame
attitude hich
Devereux
uspected
ehind
ll
writing:
he
surpassing
f
anxiety
of
Otherness
n
the
Self?)
hrough
method
i.e.
writing).
Letting
go
Behind
eiris tands
nother
roblem,
hat f
the
onstant
eduction
fthe
Other
nd
bytheOther.AsBurridgence formulatedt, nthropologytands tthecross-roads
of
European
philosophies,
etweenPlatonicEros
and
Christian
ove,
between
he
"faith
n
the
rationally
bjective"
s antidote
o whathe calls:
"[...]
the
nertial
uman
drift oward
viewpoint
ased
wholly
n the
participation
nd interrelatedness"
(Burridge
973:12).
Michael
Jackson
eferred
o t
recently
n similar erms:
My
wn
ield-work
mong
heKurankoad
reflected
profound
ilemma.n
onehand
I
found
myself
triving
or wealth fdata
which could onvert
nto
book,
durable
object
which
might
ake
my
ame. ut n
the ther and
felt
my go
hreatened
y
world
f
opaque anguages,
izarre
ustoms,
nd
oppressive
iving
onditions.
unning
counter
o thiswill o amass
nowledge
as
profound
esire
o
give p
and
et
go,
o
allow
my
onsciousness
obe flooded
y
heAfricanmbience
Jackson
989:163).
Jackson's
onclusions or
nthropology
re
worth
uoting
s well.
Relying
n Gadam-
er's
notion
fthe
ongoing
raditionnd tsreflective
ppropriation,
e states:
An
nthropology
hicho
forthrightly
eflects
pon
he
nterplay
f
biography
nd radi-
tion ndmakes he
ersonality
f he
nthropologistprimary
atum ntails
different
notion
f
ruthhan hat
o
which scientific
nthropology
spires.
t s a notion
f ruth
based ess
pon pistemological
ertainties
han
pon
moral,esthetic,
nd
olitical
alues
(Jackson
989:167).
This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:12:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/10/2019 Kopping - Engagement and Critique in Ethnographic Praxis. the Anthropological Messenger as Seduced Seducer
20/25
ENGAGEMENT
AND
CRITIQUE
IN ETHNOGRAPHIC PRAXIS
227
For
Jackson
meanings
re created
ntersubjectively
s well
as
intertextually,
mbodied
in
gestures
s
well s
in
words:
[...]
quite
imply",
e
says,
people
cannot e reduced
to texts
ny
more han
hey
an be reduced o
objects" Jackson
989:184).
The dilemma
ppearing
ere,
hat etween
giving
n'
to theOther nd
giving
n'
to the
ext,
was
clearly
erceived
y
Kurt
Wolff ho offeredhe
prospect
f urrender
as a methodical
nswer,
erived rom
henomenology
nd
existentialism,
s a
synonym
for total
x