The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology

The paper offers an alternative interpretation of the genesis of the literary turn in anthropology, as an "interim solution" in the context of the ideological incorrectness of radical anti-colonial theories in a liberal democracy. Critical anthropology in the 1960s and 1970s drew considera...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Miloš Milenković
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN FR SR
Publicado:	University of Belgrade 2016
Materias:	Anthropology GN1-890
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/f4ec2a7215e94d73a37510d974400636
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:f4ec2a7215e94d73a37510d974400636
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:f4ec2a7215e94d73a37510d9744006362021-12-02T01:16:38ZThe Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology0353-15892334-8801https://doaj.org/article/f4ec2a7215e94d73a37510d9744006362016-02-01T00:00:00Zhttps://eap-iea.org/novi-ojs/index.php/eap/article/view/271https://doaj.org/toc/0353-1589https://doaj.org/toc/2334-8801The paper offers an alternative interpretation of the genesis of the literary turn in anthropology, as an "interim solution" in the context of the ideological incorrectness of radical anti-colonial theories in a liberal democracy. Critical anthropology in the 1960s and 1970s drew considerable inspiration from reformational currents in neo-Marxist sociology and social philosophy, arousing ideological opposition among the numerous participants of methodological debates. This opposition would prove crucial for their subsequent modest development. This activistic ideological ballast actually slowed down the development of potent externalist analyses of the social determination of anthropology and academe in general, leaving room for studies of ethnographic writing. Anticipating, in terms of themes and trends, "nonmethodological" solutions to methodological problems, it had a direct effect on the substitution of poetics and contextual reflection for methodological regulation. Thus, paradoxically, extremely externalistically oriented analyses, which attempted to merge ethical, political and methodological debates, reduced the methodological focus of the disciplinary community from issues of research objectivity and the reliability of ethnographic records to issues concerning style and the writing of anthropology. In this context, debates on relativism, realism, representation, authority and reflexivity, typical of 1980s postmodern anthropology, have become a socially acceptable alternative to the critical and neo-Marxist anthropology of Afro-Americans, feminists or of the otherwise oppressed/studied when they in turn become nativistic anthropologists. The "literary turn" in postmodern anthropology is generally interpreted as an externalist critique of traditional ethnographic realism, offering an ethical and political interpretation of reflexivity as per se more correct than traditional positivist ethnography.Miloš MilenkovićUniversity of BelgradearticleAnthropologyGN1-890ENFRSREtnoantropološki Problemi, Vol 4, Iss 3 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN FR SR
topic	Anthropology GN1-890
spellingShingle	Anthropology GN1-890 Miloš Milenković The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
description	The paper offers an alternative interpretation of the genesis of the literary turn in anthropology, as an "interim solution" in the context of the ideological incorrectness of radical anti-colonial theories in a liberal democracy. Critical anthropology in the 1960s and 1970s drew considerable inspiration from reformational currents in neo-Marxist sociology and social philosophy, arousing ideological opposition among the numerous participants of methodological debates. This opposition would prove crucial for their subsequent modest development. This activistic ideological ballast actually slowed down the development of potent externalist analyses of the social determination of anthropology and academe in general, leaving room for studies of ethnographic writing. Anticipating, in terms of themes and trends, "nonmethodological" solutions to methodological problems, it had a direct effect on the substitution of poetics and contextual reflection for methodological regulation. Thus, paradoxically, extremely externalistically oriented analyses, which attempted to merge ethical, political and methodological debates, reduced the methodological focus of the disciplinary community from issues of research objectivity and the reliability of ethnographic records to issues concerning style and the writing of anthropology. In this context, debates on relativism, realism, representation, authority and reflexivity, typical of 1980s postmodern anthropology, have become a socially acceptable alternative to the critical and neo-Marxist anthropology of Afro-Americans, feminists or of the otherwise oppressed/studied when they in turn become nativistic anthropologists. The "literary turn" in postmodern anthropology is generally interpreted as an externalist critique of traditional ethnographic realism, offering an ethical and political interpretation of reflexivity as per se more correct than traditional positivist ethnography.
format	article
author	Miloš Milenković
author_facet	Miloš Milenković
author_sort	Miloš Milenković
title	The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
title_short	The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
title_full	The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
title_fullStr	The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
title_full_unstemmed	The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology
title_sort	intradisciplinary affinities of postmodern anthropology part i. the consequences of merging ethics, politics and methodology in 1960s critical anthropology
publisher	University of Belgrade
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/f4ec2a7215e94d73a37510d974400636
work_keys_str_mv	AT milosmilenkovic theintradisciplinaryaffinitiesofpostmodernanthropologypartitheconsequencesofmergingethicspoliticsandmethodologyin1960scriticalanthropology AT milosmilenkovic intradisciplinaryaffinitiesofpostmodernanthropologypartitheconsequencesofmergingethicspoliticsandmethodologyin1960scriticalanthropology
_version_	1718403172262739968

The Intradisciplinary Affinities of Postmodern Anthropology Part I. The Consequences of Merging Ethics, Politics and Methodology in 1960s Critical Anthropology

Ejemplares similares