El antropólogo como autor

by Clifford Geertz

Este libro pionero supone uno de los primeros intentos de establecer una lectura en extensión y en profundidad de algunos de los más importantes textos de la antropología, con el fin de caracterizar las semejanzas y diferencias de los textos antropológicos respecto de los de otras disciplinas, tanto de las ciencias como de las humanidades, y contribuir a la teoría literaria desde la perspectiva de la escritura antropológica. La esencia del libro está constituida por el análisis desde diversos ángulos de cuatro figuras muy distintas de la antropologí Claude Lévi-Strauss, Edward Evan Evans-Pritchar, Bronislaw Malinowski y Ruth Benedict. Así, Tristes trópicos se analiza como un texto hojaldrado, configurado por diferentes géneros de escritura, superpuestos unos a otros. La obra de Evans-Pritchar se aborda desde el punto de vista de las técnicas retóricas que emplea para caracterizar a la sociedad africana. Se estudia a Malinowski desde la perspectiva de la construcción del <> del etnógrafo en el interior del texto etnográfico. Y, finalmente, Geertz analiza cómo las dos más famosas obras de Ruth Benedict -El hombre y la cultura y El crisantemo y la espada- sirven para criticar la cultura americana mientras se dedican a describir culturas contrapuestas.

Genres: Anthropology, Nonfiction, Ethnography, History, Writing, Sociology, Social Science

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1988

About the author

Clifford James Geertz was an American anthropologist and served until his death as professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey.

Reviews

[Conor · Rating 5 out of 5]

An amazing mix of literary criticism and ethnological overview. I was worried that since I haven't read most of the source material, that I'd be a bit in the dark, but Geertz does an excellent job of making the writings in question (and even the work of Foucault and Barthes that he uses to look at them) accessible.

As an added bonus, for me at least, this appears to be the unmentioned source text for an ethnographic methods course I took a few years back. Whereas that was fairly ham-fisted and mostly featured graduate students who hadn’t read the course's books talking long and loud about them, Geertz proceeds with powerful and yet light writing and, clearly, a deep knowledge of everything he's working with.

In that course a few years back, some of those same grad students spent lots of hot air bashing Evans Prichard as an ethnocentrist, a colonialist, a white man, an englishman, and (dare I say it?) a man in general. Geertz, who for modern anthropologists is probably much more important than Evans Prichard, does not glorify the man, but he does add "let him who is free of his century's imaginings cast the first stone."

After reading so much in school that was damaging critique (especially Said), I only wish I had read this earlier. It's probably the only really constructive criticism of ethnography I've enountered.

[Alene · Rating 4 out of 5]

Geertz is my favorite anthropologist and in this text talks about how anthropologists write--admittedly, he writes more aesthetically than most, and has been accused of being non-objective, but no anthropologist can report on a culture without the bias of his upbringing. He doesn't exaggerate, or fabricate, but relays things as he sees them--as beautiful, fascinating, sensual, etc. He's an artist really.

[Abby]

Essentially a lit crit style review of some major works from anthropology, drawing out some of (past) anthropology's primary literary qualities and concerns. Which is cool, I guess. I admit I was hoping for more--hoping he would use that analysis to tell us something broader and deeper. But apparently that's someone else's job.

[Lytle]

Meta-anthropologists are, at the end of their fieldwork, allowed to take on the name Clifford--signifying a special combination of observing from the cliff and participating as one fords the river of fieldwork.

[A · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ignoro qué tan conveniente es leer un libro acerca de la autoría de ciertas etnografías cuando aún no las he leído. Mínimamente me ha servido de fuente de sugerencias de lectura. Máximamente me pareció bastante esclaceredora la discusión que hace sobre cómo se manifiesta la relación entre autor(a) y sujeto descrito a través de la narrativa etnográfica y del papel de la misma en la conformación de la disciplina. Geertz describe el carácter co-occurrente, concurrente y mutuamente interferente de los textos de Lévi-Strauss, las representaciones visualizables de fenómenos culturales de Evans-Pritchard, la credibilidad de los descrito a través de la credibilidad de la propia persona de Malinowski y la presentación de lo extraño como familiar para cuestionar las certidumbres occidentales de Benedict. Ciertamente me predispuso a leer de una manera específica cada una de las obras que revisa. Por lo pronto, ya inicié con «Tristes trópicos».

[Louisa]

has geertz always written like this?? i’ve been missing out, really makes me wanna do my phd in the US where this stylistic tradition is stronger. book made me laugh in more than one place and it’s still so sharp, points well taken. been exploring diff tones for myself lately, this is def something i would aspire to

[Roby · Rating 5 out of 5]

An important resource for anthropologists.

[Mark Rance · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book about many things, but maybe it is mostly about deepening the burden of authorship.

[Franditya · Rating 3 out of 5]

karya geertz ini seolah ingin melebur dikotomi antara pengarang dan penulis dalam sebuah narasi etnografis. Antropologi sebagai etnosains sejak 1920-an telah menghadapi kebingungan epistmologi dalam menentukan subjek kajian. karya-karya antropolog klasik yang ditelaah Geertz dalam buku ini mencerminkan peluang bagi etnosains menapaki lembaran baru etnografi, tantangan bagi Antropologi melihat manusia mengorganisasikan pengalaman-pengalaman dan gagasan dalam sejarah materialisme.

[aldo zirsov]

cuma 10rb di IBF 2011