A Convegerence between Anthropology and Literature: How Reading, Writing, and Ethnography Intertwine

Munirah AL-Gharib

Abstract


This text examines the convergent and double-sided relationship between anthropology as an ethnological study, which of necessity uses literary language - and writing itself as a subject for ethnography. Cultural Reader-response theory shows that every text involves some participation on the reader’s part and is not a solitary unchanging object. This response will itself be a function of social and cultural relations. At the same time, cultural and social life, studied by anthropologists, only becomes explicable through language and the results of ethnographic fieldwork are always, therefore, mediated by linguistic forms. The development of literary anthropology gained momentum in the 1980s but had already germinated in the pioneering work of Levi-Strauss whose work on kinship structures in the 1940s and his study of myth turned the attention of anthropologists towards the important and neglected dimension of language. Since then it has been recognised that an anthropologist’s work is diminished if theoretical and linguistic aspects are unaddressed. and the realm of socio-anthropology has been enriched. Disciplinary and genre distinctions have become very fluid in the past few decades and many university departmental studies now blend literary criticism with culture studies, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, folk discourses, and hermeneutics. While a standard definition of one of any two terms may be possible, it may not always be practical. Therefore, the definition of these two terms—anthropology and literature—needs to be updated from time to time to reflect ongoing developments and the advancements taking place in various fields. In particular, it is evident that coinciding with the linguistic turn’ in English literature studies, the discourse of anthropology has become permeable. A broad ‘literary anthropology’ can become possible as a science only if it maintains a dialogue between ideas, actions, and texts. The results and conclusions of this study substantiate the inseparable and interdependent relationship between two traditional approaches to investigating man as a social being.

Keywords


Anthropology, Literature, Ethnography, Culture, Discourse

Full Text:

PDF

References


Archetti, E. ed. (1994). Exploring the Written. Anthropology and the Multiplicity of Writing. Oslo: Aschehoug AS.

Byler, D. Dugan-Iverson, D. S. (2008). Literary Anthropology. Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

Byler, D. and Iverson, D.S. (2012). ‘Introduction to Literature, Writing & Anthropology: A Curated Collection of Five Cultural Anthropology Articles’. Cultural Anthropology. Web.

Cohen, M. (2013). Novel Approaches to Anthropology: Contributions to Literary Anthropology. Minneapolis: Lexington Books.

Clifford, J. and Marcus, M. (1986). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Culler, J. (2007). What is Literature Now? New Literary History, 38(1), 229-37.

Denzin, N.K. (1997). Interpretive Ethnography. Ethnographic Practices for the 21st Century. London: SAGE Publications.

Sage Publications. Crystal, D. (2011). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. (6th ed. ). Oxford: Blackwell.

De Angelis, R, Ed. (2002). Between Anthropology and Literature: Interdisciplinary Discourse. London: Routledge.

Eliade, M. (1959). The Sacred and the 21st Century. Newbury Park, CA: Profane: the Nature of Religion. Trans. Willard R. Trask. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace and World.

Freeman, D. (1984). Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth. London: Pelican.

Geertz, C. (1977). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books.

Grimes, R. L. (1993). Reading, Writing and Ritualising: Ritual in Fictive, Liturgical and Public Places. Pastoral Press.

John, E and McIver Lopes, D. (2004). Philosophy of Literature: Contemporary and Classic Readings. An Anthology. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lindisfarne, N. Rodwin L., Hollister R.M. (Eds.),eds). (1984). Cities of the Mind. Environment, Development, and Public Policy. Images and Themes of the City in the Social Sciences Boston, MA: Springer.

Rapport, N. (2000). Social and Cultural Anthropology: The Key Concepts London: Routledge.

Rapport, N. (2012). Anyone. The Cosmopolitan Subject of Anthropology. (1994). Oxford: Berghahn Books.

Reyna, S. P. (1994). Literary Anthropology and the Case Against Science. Man. 29 (3), 555-81.

Ridington, R. (1982). Telling Secrets: Stories of the Vision Quest. Canadian Journal of Native Studies. 2, 213-19.

Sartre, J. (2001) What is Literature. Abingdon: Routledge Classics.

Todorow, T. (1973). The Notion of Literature. New Literary History, 5(1), 3-16.

Van Oort, R. (2004). The Critic as Ethnographer. New Literary History, 35 (4), 621-61.

Waterson, A. and Vesperi, M., Eds. (2009). Anthropology off the shelf: Anthropologists on Writing. Oxford: Blackwell.

White, K. The Wanderer and his Charts: Essays on Cultural Renewal. Edinburgh: Birlinn.

Wolf, E. (1974). Anthropology. New York: W. W. Norton & Co Inc.

Wulff, H. ed. (2016). The Anthropologist as Writer: Genres and Contexts in the Twenty-First Century. New York. Berghahn Books.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.9n.5p.91

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2020 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.