Lila Abu-Lughod - xcelab.net

1 43 WritingAgainstCultureLilaAbu-LughodWriti ngCulture(CliffordandMarcus1986),thecoll ectionthatmarkeda majornewformofcritiqueofculturalanthropo logy'spremises,moreorlessexcludedtwocrit icalgroupswhosesituationsneatlyexposeand challengethemostbasicofthoseprem-ises:fe ministsand"halfies"-peoplewhosenationalo rculturalidentityis mixedbyvirtueofmigration,overseaseducati on, Inhisintroduc-tion,Clifford(1986a)apolog izesforthefeministabsence; ,butinthespecialdilemmastheyface,dilemma sthatrevealstarklytheproblemswithcultura lanthropol-ogy'sassumptionofa explorehowfeministsandhalfies,bythewayth eiranthropologicalpracticeunsettlesthebo undarybetweenselfandother, willarguethat"culture"operatesinan-throp ologicaldiscoursetoenforceseparationstha tinevitablycarrya ,an-thropologistsshouldnowpursue,without exagger-atedhopesforthepoweroftheirtexts tochangetheworld,a ,I exploretheadvantagesofwhatI call"ethnograph-iesoftheparticular"asins trumentsofa (especiallyasit functionstodistinguish"cultures")

2 ,despitea thattherelationshipbetweenanthropologymd feminismis try- -understandwhyfeministscholarship,in spiteof~rhetoricofradicalism,hasfailedto fundamen-Dllvalteranthropology,andwhyfem inismhas~ ,sheargues,arisesfromthefact;::atdespite a commoninterestindifferences, "differentlystructuredinthewaytheyorgani zemowledgeanddrawboundaries"(Strathern19 87::39)andespeciallyin"thenatureoftheinv estiga-~ors'relationshiptotheirsubjectma tter"(1987::M).Feministscholars,unitedby theircommonJPpositiontomenortopatriarchy ,producea dis-.:oursecomposedofmanyvoices;they"dis covertheidfbybecomingconsciousofoppressi onfromtheOther"(1987:289).Anthropologist s,whosegoalis"wmakesenseofdifferences"(1 987:286),alsoconstitutetheir"selves"inre lationtoanother,butdonotviewthisotheras" underattack"(1987:289).

3 InhigWightingtheself/otherrelationship, (granted~ formativeinfeminism)inherstrangelyuncrit ical~ disciplinethat"continuestoknow;LSelfasth estudyofsocialbehaviororsocietyin:ermsof systemsandcollectiverepresentations"1987 :281), , 'savowedgoalmaybe"thestudyofman[sic],"ou tit isa disciplinebuiltonthehistoricallycon-stru cteddividebetweentheWestandthenon-West.: t hasbeenandcontinuestobeprimarilythestudy of thenon-WesternotherbytheWesternself,even ifinitsnewguiseit seeksexplicitlytogivevoicetotheOtherorto presenta dialoguebetweentheselfandother,eithertex tuallyorthroughanexplicationof:hefieldwo rkencounter(asinsuchworksasCra-panzano19 80,Dumont1978,Dwyer1982,Rabinow1977,Ries man1977,Tedlock1983,andTyler1986).Andthe relationshipbetweentheWestandthenon-WRIT INGAGAINSTCULTURE467 West,atleastsincethebirthofanthropology, self-constructionthroughoppositiontoothe rs-processesthatbeginfromdifferentsideso fa (1988:70)hascalled"thehegemonyofthedisti nctive-othertradition"inanthropologyis [.]

4 ]conductingfieldworkin theUnitedStatesorEuropewonderwhetherthey havenotblurredthediscip-linaryboundaries betweenanthropologyandotherfieldssuchas "other." "culture"[..], 'sownsociety,somethingthataffectsindigen ousanthropologists(Westernornon-Western) .Thesec-ondisa tacitunderstandingthatanthropologistsstu dythenon-West; anthropologycontinuestobepracticedasthes tudybyanunproblematicandunmarkedWesterns elfoffound"others"outthere,feministtheor y,anacademicpracticethatalsotrafficsinse lvesandothers, ,withintwodecades,towhatsomemightcalla crisisinfeministtheory,andothers, ,ithasbeenacceptedthat,atleastinthemoder nWest,womenhavebeentheothertomen' movementdevotedtohelpingwomenbecomeselve sandsubjectsratherthanobjectsandmen' (relatedtoacrisisinthewomen'smovement)th atfollowedontheheelsoffeministattemptsto turnthosewhohad468 LILAABU- lughod beenconstitutedasotherintoselves- or,tousethepopularmetaphor,toletwomenspe ak-wastheproblemof"difference.

5 "Forwhomdidfeministsspeak?Withinthewomen 'smovement,theobjec-tionsoflesbians,Afri can-Americanwomen,andother"womenofcolor" thattheirexperiencesaswomenweredifferent fromthoseofwhite,middle-class, clearthatmasculineandfemi-ninedidnothave ,aswesay,thesamemeaningsinothercultures, nordidThirdWorldwomen'slivesresembleWest ernwomen' (1986:246)putsit,theproblemis that"once'woman'isdeconstructedinto'wome n'and'gender'is recog-nizedtohavenofixedreferents,femini smitselfdissolvesasa theorythatcanreflectthevoiceofanaturaliz edoressentializedspeaker."sFromitsexperi encewiththiscrisisofselfhoodorsubjecthoo d, ,theselfis alwaysa con-struction,nevera naturalorfoundentity,evenif ,theprocessofcreatinga systemofdifferenceisintersectedbyothersy stemsof difference,including,inthemoderncapitali stworld, (1987:286)characterizesherasex-periencin ga tension- "caughtbetweenstructures.

6 Facedwithtwodifferentwaysofrelatingtoher orhissubjectmatter."Themoreinterestingas pectofthefeminist'ssituation,though,is whatsheshareswiththehalfie:a ,althoughindifferentways,theselfissplit, amlesscon-cernedwiththeexistentialconseq uencesofthissplit(thesehavebeeneloquentl yexploredelsewhere[ ,Joseph1988,Kondo1986,Narayan1989])thanw iththeawarenesssuchsplitsgenerateaboutth reecrucialissues:positionality,audience, "other"thattheanthro-pologistisstudyingi ssimultaneouslyconstructedas,atleastpart ially,a self? ,possi-bility, ,intertwinedobjectionstotheworkoffeminis tornativeorsemi-nativeanthropologists,bo threlatedtopartiality, (asbiasorposition) (incomplete) , ' ,theOtheris incertainwaystheself, beingwhomuststandapartfromtheOther, (1977:1-2),whoperceptivelyanalyzedtheeff ectsthisout-siderstancehasontheanthropol ogist's(mis)under-standingofsociallife, definiterelationwiththeOtherofthestudy,n otjustasaWesterner,butasa FrenchmaninAlgeriaduringthewarofindepend ence,anAmericaninMoroccodur-ingthe1967 Arab-Israeliwar, a pos-itionwithina ,the"wholie"is ina ,feministanthropologistsaredismissedaspr esent-ingonlya , themarkedform,tooreadilysectionedoff,asS trathern(1985) 's(1976)ofMalinowski'sTrobriandIslanders orBell's(1983)ofthewell-studiedAustralia naboriginesindicate.

7 It (1986a:6),amongothers,hasconvincinglyarg uedthatethnographicrepresenta-tionsareal ways"partialtruths." theeffectsoflivingina ,thatofotheranthropologists,feministanth ropolo-gistswriteforanthropologistsandfo rfeminists, ,feministcirclesin-cludenon-Westernfemin ists,oftenfromthesoci-etiesfeministanthr opologistshavestudied, ' ,theywriteforotheranthropologists, ,orsubcultureswithinit,theyarecalledtoac countbyeducatedmembersof ,notjustbecausetheypositionthemselveswit hreferencetotwocommuni-tiesbutbecausewhe ntheypresenttheOthertheyarepresentingthe mselves,theyspeakwitha complexawarenessof ,unlikeanthropologistswhoworkinWesternso cieties(anothergroupforwhomselfandothera resomewhattangled),forceustoconfrontis ,theymayhaveexperienced-aswomen,asindivi dualsofmixedparentage,orasforeigners-bei ngothertoa dominantself, ,Britain,orFrance,orin , ,however,is structural, ,blacks, "whitemen"(tousea shorthandfora complexandhistoricallyconstitutedsubject -position) becomesa ,despitea longhistoryofself-consciousoppositiontor acism,a fast-growing,self-criticalliteratureonan thropology'slinkstoco-lonialism(forexamp le,Asad1973,Clifford1983,Fabian1983,Hyme s1969,Kuper1988),andexperi-mentationwith techniquesofethnographytorelievea discomfortwiththepowerofanthropologistov eranthropologicalsubject, "lettheotherspeak"indialogic(Tedlock1987 )

8 Orpolyvocaltexts-decolonizationsonthelev elofthetext-leaveintactthebasicconfigura tionofglobalpoweronwhichanthropology,asl inkedtootherinstitutionsoftheworld,is ,allthatis neededis "letwomenspeak"intheirtextswhiletheycont inuedtodominateallknowledgeaboutthembyco ntrollingwritingandotheracademicpractice s,supportedintheirposi-tionsbya particularorganizationofeconomic,so-cial ,andpoliticallife?470 LILAABU-LUGHODB ecauseoftheirsplitselves,feministandhalf ieanthropologiststraveluneasilybetweensp eaking"for"andspeaking"from."Theirsituat ionenablesustoseemoreclearlythatdividing practices,whethertheynaturalizedifferenc es,asingenderorrace,orsimplyelaboratethe m,asI willarguetheconceptofculturedoes, "culture;'notoriouslyresistanttodefiniti onandambiguousofreferent,is professionaldiscoursethatelaboratesonthe meaningofcultureinordertoaccountfor,expl ain,andunderstandculturaldifference,anth ro-pologyalsohelpsconstruct,produce, (andtheseparationbetweengroupsof peopleitimplies) ,theconceptofcultureoperatesmuchlikeitsp redecessor-race- eventhoughinitstwentieth-centuryformit ,andunlikeeventhenineteenth-centurysense ofcultureasa syno-nymforcivilization(contrastedtobarb arism), ;theshiftto"culture"("lowercasec withthepossibilityofa final5.)

9 'asClifford[1988a:234]putsit)hasa 'sadvantages,however, setofbehaviors,customs,tradi-tions,rules ,plans,recipes,instructions,orprograms(t olisttherangeofdefinitionsGeertz[1973:44 ]furnishes),cultureis ,however,~ easiertoseeif weconsidera fieldinwhichtherehasbeena scholarlydiscourse(amongotherthingsis,ac cordingtoSaid(1978:2),"astyleofthoughtba seduponanontologicalandepistemologicaldi s-tinctionmadebetween'theOrient'and(most of ~time)'theOccident'."Whatheshowsisthatin mappinggeography,race,andcultureontoonea nother,Orientalismfixesdifferencesbetwee npeopleof"theWest"andpeopleof"theEast" ,culturaldifference,notrace,hasbeentheba sicsubjectofOrientalistscholarshipdevote dnowtointerpretingthe"cul-ture"phenomena (primarilyreligionandlanguagetowhichbasi cdifferencesindevelopment,eco-nomicperfo rmance,government,character, , Gandhianappealtothegreaterspiritualityof a HinduIndia,comparedwiththematerialismand violenceoftheWest,andanIsla-micistappeal toa greaterfaithinGod,comparedwiththeimmoral ityandcorruptionoftheWest, , "womenaremade,notborn.)

10 "It hasbeenimportantformostfeministstolocate sexdifferencesinculture, systemofdifference,formanyothersithasled toexplorationsofandstrategiesbuiltonthen otionofa women' ( )takesmanyforms,butit (1985a,1985b),Cixous(1983),andKristeva(1 981),masculineandfeminine,if notactuallymaleandfemale, "describe"theculturaldifferencesbetweenm enandwomen- Gilligan(1982)andherfollowers( , )whoelaboratethenotionof"adifferentvoice " "explain"thedifferences,whetherthrougha sociallyinformedpsychoanalytictheory( ,Chodorow1978),a Marxist-derivedtheoryoftheeffectsofthedi visionoflaborandwomen'sroleinsocialrepro duction(Hartsock1985),ananalysisofma-ter nalpractice(Ruddick1980),orevena theoryofsexualexploitation(MacKinnon1982 ).Muchfemi-nisttheorizingandpracticeseek stobuildorreformsociallifeinlinewiththis "women'sculture.