What do you think?
Rate this book
Reflections on Fieldwork in Morocco
In this landmark study, now celebrating thirty years in print, Paul Rabinow takes as his focus the fieldwork that anthropologists do. How valid is the process? To what extent do the cultural data become artifacts of the interaction between anthropologist and informants? Having first published a more standard ethnographic study about Morocco, Rabinow here describes a series of encounters with his informants in that study, from a French innkeeper clinging to the vestiges of a colonial past, to the rural descendants of a seventeenth-century saint. In a new preface Rabinow considers the thirty-year life of this remarkable book and his own distinguished career.
208 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1977
23 people are currently reading
559 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
August 19, 2021
to ask or not to ask
What do anthropologists do? Well, they do a vast number of things, studying people in Peoria or Papua, Boston or Burma, finding out about law, warfare, religion, family life, enculturation of children, pilgrimage, art, ideas about health.....you name it, an anthropologist has probably written a Ph.D thesis on it. Anthropologists have been accused of aiding the CIA, the colonial regimes of yesteryear, and drug companies (among other things). But in today's world, there is really no way forward without some sort of understanding of "the Other's" point of view. We hope to widen our scope by reading the various works of anthropology written over the years, but since the world is changing very fast, today's anthropology becomes the social history of tomorrow. So, we continuously need more fieldwork. But how is that fieldwork actually done? You are going to get just a vague idea about that in this book because the trouble is that nobody can really describe your fieldwork experience for you before you have it !
As Rabinow says in this short but very effective book, nobody really can teach you how to do fieldwork. Most authors never let on how they got their opinions and information, we never meet the people who spoke to them. You study all kinds of theories and models in graduate school, read some of the great studies of the past, but if you don't do fieldwork, you never really join the fraternity of anthropologists. Even if today's anthropologists no longer search for "untouched cultures" (in quotes because these scarcely existed and your presence puts an exclamation point on such an idea), they still undergo similar experiences. You arrive at your destination, whether in a Greek village or on a remote Pacific island, a New York slum or a group of Sri Lankan hospitals. What should you do first? Whom should you contact? Do you speak the language well enough? What are appropriate questions here? What ideas and preconceptions have you brought with you? What will be the consequence of linking up with this person instead of that one? The list of questions is endless and it can be a bewildering experience, at least at first. Rabinow tells the whole story (I think) of his own fieldwork experience and reflects on it at the same time. It's a magnificent effort which should be read by anyone planning to do fieldwork in anthropology. Along with Hortense Powdermaker's "Stranger and Friend", David Maybury-Lewis' "The Savage and the Innocent", Nigel Barley's "Adventures in a Mud Hut (or "The Innocent Anthropologist"), and maybe Malinowski's "Diary in the Strict Sense of the Word", this volume can abuse anyone of the idea that you just waltz in, ask your questions, eat some local food, "like really dig the culture" and head home. If you have already done field work, it will bring back a lot of memories and may help you to make more sense of your own experience.
What do anthropologists do? Well, they do a vast number of things, studying people in Peoria or Papua, Boston or Burma, finding out about law, warfare, religion, family life, enculturation of children, pilgrimage, art, ideas about health.....you name it, an anthropologist has probably written a Ph.D thesis on it. Anthropologists have been accused of aiding the CIA, the colonial regimes of yesteryear, and drug companies (among other things). But in today's world, there is really no way forward without some sort of understanding of "the Other's" point of view. We hope to widen our scope by reading the various works of anthropology written over the years, but since the world is changing very fast, today's anthropology becomes the social history of tomorrow. So, we continuously need more fieldwork. But how is that fieldwork actually done? You are going to get just a vague idea about that in this book because the trouble is that nobody can really describe your fieldwork experience for you before you have it !
As Rabinow says in this short but very effective book, nobody really can teach you how to do fieldwork. Most authors never let on how they got their opinions and information, we never meet the people who spoke to them. You study all kinds of theories and models in graduate school, read some of the great studies of the past, but if you don't do fieldwork, you never really join the fraternity of anthropologists. Even if today's anthropologists no longer search for "untouched cultures" (in quotes because these scarcely existed and your presence puts an exclamation point on such an idea), they still undergo similar experiences. You arrive at your destination, whether in a Greek village or on a remote Pacific island, a New York slum or a group of Sri Lankan hospitals. What should you do first? Whom should you contact? Do you speak the language well enough? What are appropriate questions here? What ideas and preconceptions have you brought with you? What will be the consequence of linking up with this person instead of that one? The list of questions is endless and it can be a bewildering experience, at least at first. Rabinow tells the whole story (I think) of his own fieldwork experience and reflects on it at the same time. It's a magnificent effort which should be read by anyone planning to do fieldwork in anthropology. Along with Hortense Powdermaker's "Stranger and Friend", David Maybury-Lewis' "The Savage and the Innocent", Nigel Barley's "Adventures in a Mud Hut (or "The Innocent Anthropologist"), and maybe Malinowski's "Diary in the Strict Sense of the Word", this volume can abuse anyone of the idea that you just waltz in, ask your questions, eat some local food, "like really dig the culture" and head home. If you have already done field work, it will bring back a lot of memories and may help you to make more sense of your own experience.
July 10, 2013
Rabinow theorizes that the three things Moroccans protect most fiercely is their language, their women, and their religion. He suggests that they learned French so readily in order to make sure the colonizers didn't need to learn Arabic. As for their women, they threw Berber prostitutes the way of the French and, in so doing, managed to keep intermarriage a rare occurrence. As for religion, Rabinow only gets to glimpse what goes on in the secret brotherhood gatherings after earning the respect of his Moroccan "informant" host by breaking the basic rules of ethnographic methods and etiquette during a test of wills where phrases such as "Fine, I'll walk home then" and "Just get back in the car" form the basis of the cultural exchange.
One of the other reviewers mentions that this book is assigned to anthropology students to demonstrate how not to do fieldwork. While I know next to nothing about ethnography, that sounds plausible. Nonetheless, an enjoyable and informative read.
One of the other reviewers mentions that this book is assigned to anthropology students to demonstrate how not to do fieldwork. While I know next to nothing about ethnography, that sounds plausible. Nonetheless, an enjoyable and informative read.
September 24, 2012
To be honest, I expected to like this book far more than I did. As an anthropology student, I appreciated the commentary on modern anthropology and fieldwork, but it felt dry to me. I feel like it could have been much longer, and I would have been much more interested in knowing more about his actual fieldwork than all the self-reflective stuff that came out of it.
Or, for that matter, what happened while he was gone. I mean, what it was like to come back to an America deep in the Vietnam war, and that political climate. I also didn't particularly understand the very last passage, about learning Vietnamese. I feel very ignorant because of that, because I feel like it's obvious and I'm not sure how I'm missing it, but there you have it.
Overall, it's interesting from a student's perspective. Quite an easy read, as class reads go, but it was wholly underwhelming.
Or, for that matter, what happened while he was gone. I mean, what it was like to come back to an America deep in the Vietnam war, and that political climate. I also didn't particularly understand the very last passage, about learning Vietnamese. I feel very ignorant because of that, because I feel like it's obvious and I'm not sure how I'm missing it, but there you have it.
Overall, it's interesting from a student's perspective. Quite an easy read, as class reads go, but it was wholly underwhelming.
March 27, 2023
A lovely account of Rabinow's fieldwork in Morocco in the 60s, alternating between sharing interesting experiences, stories that he has been told, and psychological and philosophical reflections on his journey, on himself as an anthropologist, and the nature of fieldwork. This way, in a limited sense, the reader gets to be an adventurous anthropologist by proxy, comfortably carried by the good and accessible writing.
At the surface, it was very interesting to learn about some concrete stark differences between western and Moroccan culture. In Morocoo, probing someone's limits and asserting dominance to get one's way are very normal, if not respected things, whereas in the west this is often considered rude. Also, Rabinow observed that rational inconsistency was less troubling to the Moroccans: keeping more options open (even contradicting ones) enables one to try their luck better. Gaining material advantage and "possessing someone" is, to them, perfectly compatible with humbleness and generosity.
A final striking thing I'd like to mention is that alone time was also considered very odd by the Moroccans, to the point of it being rude. Rabinow clearly struggled with this from time to time.
Of particular interest to me is Rabinow's comparison of the (then) more modern philosophical views of anthropology to more classcial and romantic ones. The anthropologist as the romantic adventurer who comes to study "the primitives"; the anthropologist as "passive [and neutral] observer"; and then, the modern anthropologist as an active agent, one that can only understand "facts" through their own subjective interpretations. If I'm not mistaken, we witness the influence of post-modernism here.
One core point of Rabinow is that the "passive observer" is an oxymoron. He argues that both the anthropologist and their informants are altered in the process. First of all, the anthropologist, like anyone else, has been born into a certain culture and perhaps religion, raised by parents who instill in them certain norms and values, in a certain time which codetermines much of the society and culture one is being shaped by. That's to say: the anthropologist is by no means merely a neutral observer. These preconceptions influence everything the anthropologist observes and interprets. On top of that, there is no way to actively partake in society while remaining absolutely passive. The presence of the anthropologist unconditionally influences those whom they interact with, rendering them an active agent. You are being changed.
The informants with whom the anthropologist works most closely provide them with much valuable information on the one hand, but with them in particular comes a great challenge. First of all, the informant needs to be able to objectify their own cultural, religious and other preconceptions. This requires a great deal of self-consciousness and the ability to reflect on oneself, but also the intelligence to overcome psychological and emotional hurdles that might arise, as well as the ability to explain whatever rationalization the informant has come up with. On top of that, they need to be sufficiently aware of the anthropologist's preconceptions, in order to make what one might call 'the right translation' necessary to convey their explanation such that it will be interpreted properly. It's almost as if the informant needs a "second consciousness" with which they experience life with an awareness of how the anthropologist might perceive things. The informant, therefore, is also changed.
I want to close with a rather large quote that I think highlights another of the key points Rabinow's book has taught me, namely that the facts "out there" seem so obvious. This, however, is often a naieve view. Rabinow writes:
"The passage from broad assertions- that neo-colonialism is the cause of poverty in Morocco, for example- to individual cases must be mediated by particular determinations, because otherwise there is no way to differentiate one village from the next, one country from another." (pg. 121)
Followed by:
"What seemd, to my own naive consciousness, to 'speak for itself' proved to be the most in need of interpretation." In this instance, the economic conditions could only be understood when the history of the religious, social, ecological, political and psychodynamic determinations were brought into play. The problem was to connect my abstract concepts with the immediately perceived realities of everyday village life. This could only be done by tracing particular mediations, which otherwise would remain sterile truisms. The rest of my fieldwork was devoted to that task." (pg. 124)
Rabinow has taught me a lot about what it means to be an anthropologist in a fittingly qualitative and experiential way. A great read indeed.
At the surface, it was very interesting to learn about some concrete stark differences between western and Moroccan culture. In Morocoo, probing someone's limits and asserting dominance to get one's way are very normal, if not respected things, whereas in the west this is often considered rude. Also, Rabinow observed that rational inconsistency was less troubling to the Moroccans: keeping more options open (even contradicting ones) enables one to try their luck better. Gaining material advantage and "possessing someone" is, to them, perfectly compatible with humbleness and generosity.
A final striking thing I'd like to mention is that alone time was also considered very odd by the Moroccans, to the point of it being rude. Rabinow clearly struggled with this from time to time.
Of particular interest to me is Rabinow's comparison of the (then) more modern philosophical views of anthropology to more classcial and romantic ones. The anthropologist as the romantic adventurer who comes to study "the primitives"; the anthropologist as "passive [and neutral] observer"; and then, the modern anthropologist as an active agent, one that can only understand "facts" through their own subjective interpretations. If I'm not mistaken, we witness the influence of post-modernism here.
One core point of Rabinow is that the "passive observer" is an oxymoron. He argues that both the anthropologist and their informants are altered in the process. First of all, the anthropologist, like anyone else, has been born into a certain culture and perhaps religion, raised by parents who instill in them certain norms and values, in a certain time which codetermines much of the society and culture one is being shaped by. That's to say: the anthropologist is by no means merely a neutral observer. These preconceptions influence everything the anthropologist observes and interprets. On top of that, there is no way to actively partake in society while remaining absolutely passive. The presence of the anthropologist unconditionally influences those whom they interact with, rendering them an active agent. You are being changed.
The informants with whom the anthropologist works most closely provide them with much valuable information on the one hand, but with them in particular comes a great challenge. First of all, the informant needs to be able to objectify their own cultural, religious and other preconceptions. This requires a great deal of self-consciousness and the ability to reflect on oneself, but also the intelligence to overcome psychological and emotional hurdles that might arise, as well as the ability to explain whatever rationalization the informant has come up with. On top of that, they need to be sufficiently aware of the anthropologist's preconceptions, in order to make what one might call 'the right translation' necessary to convey their explanation such that it will be interpreted properly. It's almost as if the informant needs a "second consciousness" with which they experience life with an awareness of how the anthropologist might perceive things. The informant, therefore, is also changed.
I want to close with a rather large quote that I think highlights another of the key points Rabinow's book has taught me, namely that the facts "out there" seem so obvious. This, however, is often a naieve view. Rabinow writes:
"The passage from broad assertions- that neo-colonialism is the cause of poverty in Morocco, for example- to individual cases must be mediated by particular determinations, because otherwise there is no way to differentiate one village from the next, one country from another." (pg. 121)
Followed by:
"What seemd, to my own naive consciousness, to 'speak for itself' proved to be the most in need of interpretation." In this instance, the economic conditions could only be understood when the history of the religious, social, ecological, political and psychodynamic determinations were brought into play. The problem was to connect my abstract concepts with the immediately perceived realities of everyday village life. This could only be done by tracing particular mediations, which otherwise would remain sterile truisms. The rest of my fieldwork was devoted to that task." (pg. 124)
Rabinow has taught me a lot about what it means to be an anthropologist in a fittingly qualitative and experiential way. A great read indeed.
March 24, 2022
3,5
This was a required read for university.
I feel like the strong point of it was the way Rabinow describes Field Research, specially the insides he gives about the not so positive side of it. I am currently finishing my degree in anthropology and thought it was insightful.
On the other hand I didn't particularly like the experience of reading this book, and his ethnography on Moroccos didn't really grab my interest.
This was a required read for university.
I feel like the strong point of it was the way Rabinow describes Field Research, specially the insides he gives about the not so positive side of it. I am currently finishing my degree in anthropology and thought it was insightful.
On the other hand I didn't particularly like the experience of reading this book, and his ethnography on Moroccos didn't really grab my interest.
July 21, 2016
OK, I read this back in the day when it was brand new, on the recommendation of a friend who was a young anthropologist. It's an enjoyable and thoughtful work of what we might call meta-anthropology.
November 7, 2015
Best ethnography I've ever read that truly depicts what it takes to be an Anthropologist in the field.
February 25, 2014
It really shows that ethnographic work entails much more than what we often think of
July 3, 2017
In this eight chaptered book, Paul Rabinow shares his fieldwork experience starting from leaving Chicago to returning to New York in the 60s. He mostly focuses in writing in an accessible manner about the interactions with the people and community members, language teacher and research informants in Sidi Lahcen and Sefrou. He offers anthropologists realistic lessons of what to expect in the field as well as cautions them on what not to do and their changing roles as well as persona in the community. Rabinow clearly illustrates that sometimes the anthropologist and the informant can read each other wrongly but with time opportunities to clarify the misreadings emerge. He also teaches the anthropologist that there are many types of informants and that one should be ready to interact with many informants even within one project. Informants are not neutral, they are political, inside outsiders, profiteering, intelligent, well meaning, hold multiple identities and stories, gatekeepers of their communities, can resist and have contradictions.
Rabinow is successful in showing the clash and contradictions that can occur between researchers and informants. To him, these are not necessary bad, they offer a source for learning and some of them resolve themselves. He speaks of there being a fundamental Otherness between the informant and him that is informed by difference but can be changed through dialogue.
He writes of the changes that the anthropologist brings to the culture such as teaching the informant to objectify their way of life while acknowledging that even before the anthropologist enters a culture there exists a sense of objectification and self-reflection. He argues that the interaction between the informant and the researcher brings forth a conscious doubling. Thus allowing for the acknowledging of the place of history and culture in the interpretation of informants. Importantly, he cautions that there are possibilities of cross-cultural understandings.
Rabinow acknowledges that an anthropologist cannot be involved in providing aid or in activism but throughout the books he points out to the ability of the anthropologist to see the problems of the people or sometimes they mention it to him or her for instance, Sidi Lahcen villagers acknowledge that they are not going to gain any social mobility because another village was chosen. One man man aptly asked Rabinow “We’ll all have to go to Paris – right, Monsierur Paul?” p.124.
Even though the project of Rabinow was to trace the lineage of saint Sidi Lahcen he had a keen eye for what was going on in Sefrou and Sidi Lahcen be it prostitution, the place of women in the society, race and racism, patriarchy, class, colonialism, neocolonialism, unemployment, labor migration, remittance and its affordances and engaged with community members about this.
Perhaps the most interesting chapter is the penultimate one where he looks at friendship through culture and situates it within the work of an anthropologist, we read of his last days in Morocco and his coming to America – where friends have changed but not his home.
Rabinow closes by reminding anthropologists and informants their role in anthropological research and also describes and gives meaning to characters he engaged with and in Sefrou and Sidi Lahcen.
Rabinow is successful in showing the clash and contradictions that can occur between researchers and informants. To him, these are not necessary bad, they offer a source for learning and some of them resolve themselves. He speaks of there being a fundamental Otherness between the informant and him that is informed by difference but can be changed through dialogue.
He writes of the changes that the anthropologist brings to the culture such as teaching the informant to objectify their way of life while acknowledging that even before the anthropologist enters a culture there exists a sense of objectification and self-reflection. He argues that the interaction between the informant and the researcher brings forth a conscious doubling. Thus allowing for the acknowledging of the place of history and culture in the interpretation of informants. Importantly, he cautions that there are possibilities of cross-cultural understandings.
Rabinow acknowledges that an anthropologist cannot be involved in providing aid or in activism but throughout the books he points out to the ability of the anthropologist to see the problems of the people or sometimes they mention it to him or her for instance, Sidi Lahcen villagers acknowledge that they are not going to gain any social mobility because another village was chosen. One man man aptly asked Rabinow “We’ll all have to go to Paris – right, Monsierur Paul?” p.124.
Even though the project of Rabinow was to trace the lineage of saint Sidi Lahcen he had a keen eye for what was going on in Sefrou and Sidi Lahcen be it prostitution, the place of women in the society, race and racism, patriarchy, class, colonialism, neocolonialism, unemployment, labor migration, remittance and its affordances and engaged with community members about this.
Perhaps the most interesting chapter is the penultimate one where he looks at friendship through culture and situates it within the work of an anthropologist, we read of his last days in Morocco and his coming to America – where friends have changed but not his home.
Rabinow closes by reminding anthropologists and informants their role in anthropological research and also describes and gives meaning to characters he engaged with and in Sefrou and Sidi Lahcen.
January 24, 2022
Kultura je interpretace.... Mělo by jasně zaznít, že představa "primitiva" jako bytosti, kterou řídí neměnná pravidla, která žije v absolutní harmonii s prostředím a v zásadě stižena kletbou vědomí sama sebe, je souborem kulturních projekcí. Žádný "primitiv" není. Jsou jiní lidé, kteří žijí jiné životy.(s.137-138)
No... tahle kniha je nesmírně zajímavá, ryzí a otevřená. S jakou lehkostí v ní Rabinow hovoří o některých věcech - obzvláště ta příhoda, kdy se vyspal s berberskou dívkou, která mu byla "nabídnuta", je úžasné. Autor je upřímný, vyjadřuje své pocity, přesto však zachovává po celou dobu určitý vědecký(antropologický) úzus a kniha nepůsobí jako obyčejná zpověď jedné výzkumné cesty. Knihu jsem četl poměrně delší dobu, protože jsem nad ní potřeboval uvažovat a rozkouskovat si ji. Za sebe mohu říci, že se jedná o mimořádně zajímavé dílo, které je přínosné nejen pro zájemce o Maroko nebo antropologii, ale také pro každého, kdo se zajímá o lidskou kulturu všeobecně.
No... tahle kniha je nesmírně zajímavá, ryzí a otevřená. S jakou lehkostí v ní Rabinow hovoří o některých věcech - obzvláště ta příhoda, kdy se vyspal s berberskou dívkou, která mu byla "nabídnuta", je úžasné. Autor je upřímný, vyjadřuje své pocity, přesto však zachovává po celou dobu určitý vědecký(antropologický) úzus a kniha nepůsobí jako obyčejná zpověď jedné výzkumné cesty. Knihu jsem četl poměrně delší dobu, protože jsem nad ní potřeboval uvažovat a rozkouskovat si ji. Za sebe mohu říci, že se jedná o mimořádně zajímavé dílo, které je přínosné nejen pro zájemce o Maroko nebo antropologii, ale také pro každého, kdo se zajímá o lidskou kulturu všeobecně.
February 15, 2025
This is required reading for a course I'm taking on ethnography, which has been covering the history of how people have written ethnographies and the implications of the things they often leave out, for instance, details about fieldwork itself. This book definitely gives a clear idea about the challenges Rabinow faced, and I found some of his statements about anthropology very incisive. Overall, though, it is a bit of a dry read compared to other 'confessional' works we've been set to read.
February 12, 2026
Hmm so i thought it was good but a bit boring. I thought the message was good about cultures and the bit about racsim. I wish it was a bit more focused on dialogue and actual interactions, which i know is hard bc its a book of reflections. Anyway, i think i liked it but i wouldnt read something of the same type and style. Maybe i would read a fieldwork sorta book but one that is in real time if that makes sense.
March 31, 2022
This book is the kind that puts into perspective how complex the field work is, showing us how complex human relations are able to show us more than what meets the eye, and how important it is to know the place before you know its people.
January 26, 2024
"Fieldwork has been, and remains, the defining mark of the discipline of anthropology. Or, more accurately, doing fieldwork has been, and remains, the defining requirement for becoming an anthropologist in the twentieth-first century."
January 31, 2019
I couldn't help but tear through this!
Read
February 23, 2021no rating bc it was for school. but I liked the narrative/story telling style. Paul Rabinow was giving me slight Holden Caulfield vibes though...
October 4, 2023
An interesting capsule from a previous form of ethnography. Many of the reflections can carry into modern ethnographic fieldwork, even if the theoretical stances and some actions are dated
Read
January 2, 2024ANTH110
October 13, 2024
Entertaining but I don’t see why its so relevant
Read
November 27, 2024first of the $1 westport book sale where mya brought us
December 1, 2024
i read this for anthro… honestly not too bad
January 5, 2025
Reminded me of why I love anthropology
May 25, 2025
me gustó mas de lo que esperaba para ser una lectura obligatoria de la facultad!!
January 6, 2024
‘To think that a culture which thrives on the agnostic clash of wills, where assertions of characters and denials of those assertions are the fabric of social life, where domination is highly valued and conflict an everyday occurrence — to think that all of this should suddenly at my appearance, be transformed into a concord of mutual respect, understanding and open acceptance is laughable,’ p.77.
The quote above sums up the book.
I'm still perplexed as to why this bigoted and badly crafted ethnography is required reading in Anthropology. I'm curious if this book would be considered sacred if written by an Arab or African.
Rabinow, a graduate student at the time, was dissatisfied with his education at the University of Chicago. He wished to play an important part in the generation of information about culture, society, and civilisation. To accomplish this, the young man chose to conduct fieldwork in Morocco. Why Morocco in particular? Because it was a French colony, and other European/American anthropologists 'aided' in the civilisation of the MENA region by their voluminous orientalist work.
Rabinow couldn't speak Arabic, hadn't read enough about different versions of Islam in different parts of the world, didn't have a thesis statement when he decided to do his ethnography in Morocco, and yet he writes descriptively about Moroccan men and their subordination of women, about the idiocy of his informants and the intelligence of Franchised Moroccans, all thanks to French colonialism and imperialism. Rabinow remarked in one of the pages that the villagers should be grateful that an American leaving a privileged life behind is attempting to enhance their lives and livelihood. It must be amazing to be an American with such self-assurance, even if you lack basic skills.
Only one word to describe Rabinow’s fieldwork: Orientalist. A modern orientalist who perceives him selves a hero rescuing the orient from the obscurity, religious restrictions and rigid social life.
As a Muslim and Arab, I find Rabinow's work repulsive. He looks down on Arabs, Africans, Muslims, and non-Europeans in the same manner that the Portuguese did. Anthropologists like Rabinow believe that without their involvement, the MENA region will perish. To become 'modern' or 'civilized,' the globe does not need to be Americanized or Europeanized.
I am going to stop before I slap someone.
The quote above sums up the book.
I'm still perplexed as to why this bigoted and badly crafted ethnography is required reading in Anthropology. I'm curious if this book would be considered sacred if written by an Arab or African.
Rabinow, a graduate student at the time, was dissatisfied with his education at the University of Chicago. He wished to play an important part in the generation of information about culture, society, and civilisation. To accomplish this, the young man chose to conduct fieldwork in Morocco. Why Morocco in particular? Because it was a French colony, and other European/American anthropologists 'aided' in the civilisation of the MENA region by their voluminous orientalist work.
Rabinow couldn't speak Arabic, hadn't read enough about different versions of Islam in different parts of the world, didn't have a thesis statement when he decided to do his ethnography in Morocco, and yet he writes descriptively about Moroccan men and their subordination of women, about the idiocy of his informants and the intelligence of Franchised Moroccans, all thanks to French colonialism and imperialism. Rabinow remarked in one of the pages that the villagers should be grateful that an American leaving a privileged life behind is attempting to enhance their lives and livelihood. It must be amazing to be an American with such self-assurance, even if you lack basic skills.
Only one word to describe Rabinow’s fieldwork: Orientalist. A modern orientalist who perceives him selves a hero rescuing the orient from the obscurity, religious restrictions and rigid social life.
As a Muslim and Arab, I find Rabinow's work repulsive. He looks down on Arabs, Africans, Muslims, and non-Europeans in the same manner that the Portuguese did. Anthropologists like Rabinow believe that without their involvement, the MENA region will perish. To become 'modern' or 'civilized,' the globe does not need to be Americanized or Europeanized.
I am going to stop before I slap someone.
December 7, 2022
Een van de weinige dingen die ik wel voor studie heb gelezen :p. Was wel interessant en niet super veel jargon, vond ook nice dat hij heel reflexive is over zijn methodes en onderzoek
December 21, 2019
Not sure why i had a hankering to read this again. I remember reading it for an introductory anthropology course in college and it being the first book that really compelled me to learn. The book is at once one mans journey to understand himself and his own culture, an essay on studying other cultures, an a study of rural Moroccan mountan village culure. I enjoyed it again. I appreciate how self-aware he is of his cultural bias and that, try as the scientist might, learning another culture requires experiencing it, which changes both the observer and the observed.
February 2, 2016
My anthropology professor borrowed Reflections of fieldwork in Morocco by Paul Rabinow to me, and I hastily read it. It 19s thin, true, and easy to read, and quite a breath of air in the sea of anthropological books not dealing with fieldwork, which I deem just so important and under-discussed. It 19s a good read for anyone interested in anthropology, although it could have been longer and more detailed.
August 28, 2017
Following a young anthropologist in the late 1960s into a foreign land, making sense of the social implications of each step along his exploratory process to learn about Moroccan culture and the complex mixture of Arabic and French there, Paul Rabinow documents his journey in an easily understandable way. His approach is very relaxed yet erudite, and students seeking this type of fieldwork experience could learn much from reading Rabinow's text.
November 16, 2010
I read this book after returning from Morocco, and it really got the feel right. My professor said it wouldn't only make sense to someone after they return, but I think it would be a good introduction. If anything, perhaps read Morocco 'Culture Shock' before it because it would help put actions into perspective.
May 17, 2014
As someone who doesn't come from a background in anthropology, I thoroughly enjoyed the way Rabinow presents to the reader an anthropologist's thoughts while doing fieldwork. I also enjoyed the parallels I observed between his experiences and my own from when I was studying abroad in Rabat. It also made me very nostalgic!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews