Paper 3: Rethinking Culture and the Politics of Representation 

Due: Wednesday Dec 18, midnight, Moodle upload

Length and Format: 7-8 pages, double-spaced, 1 inch margins all around, 12 point fonts.  Please spellcheck.  They should be well-organized, with a clear argument supported by evidence from readings and other relevant sources. Give parenthetic citations (author year: page; i.e., Sapir 1924: 517) for all quotations or direct paraphrases of ethnographic and theoretical passages. Any sources outside of the assigned readings should be listed in an attached bibliography. Wikipedia is NOT an appropriate source for an academic paper.

Evaluation: I will evaluate and respond to papers based on (in order of priority):

  1. Degree to which you respond to the assignment and incorporate ideas and issues from class materials in your discussion;
  2. Extent to which you responsibly summarize theories and demonstrate clear understanding of basic terms presented in the course;
  3. The creativity and originality of your ideas
  4. The clarity of your organization and writing

Instructions: To bring in your theorists from the syllabus, be sure to engage in responsible critique: any critique of a theorist's arguments should be grounded in an accurate theory synopsis of their approach, including a few direct quotes. All main theorists should be introduced with theory synopses.

Prompts (Choose one):

1) As your main theorist, draw on either Charlotte Coté’s ethnography, Spirits of our Whaling Ancestors or Kamala Visweswaran's "Defining Feminist Ethnography," to evaluate the appropriateness, relevance, and politics of anthropological strategies of representing "culture" in an increasingly interconnected world. How have the politics of anthropology changed over time? What alternate representational strategies are available, and what are their benefits and pitfalls? Your essay should bring in and engage at least three other readings from the syllabus. These theorists should be put in dialogue with with Coté or Visweswaran, and not just dropped in separately.

2) Watch the film Tongues Untied and consider that filmic portrayal in light of Kamala Visweswaran's critique of "feminist ethnography." How does Riggs' portrayal of Black men's experiences and histories of race/gender/class/sexuality in the United States jibe or not with Visweswaran's anthropological critique of ethnographic practices and writings? Your essay should bring in and engage at least two other readings from the syllabus, who should be in dialogue with Visweswaran and not just dropped in separately, plus at least one background reading on the film from the 'further readings' or 'links' tab of the relevant week.

3) Choose one of the films Trobriand Cricket or Cannibal Tours and compare their portrayal of the challenges of cultural survival in a world of commodification in relation to Charlotte Coté’s ethnography of the revival of whaling among indigenous nations in British Columbia. Consider the film's portrayals of cultural difference as a mode of resistance to colonialism or to capitalist modernity and what an anthropological critique like Coté’s can contribute to (or challenge in) such politics. Your essay should bring in and engage at least two other readings from the syllabus, who should be in dialogue with with Coté and not just dropped in separately, plus at least one background reading on the film from the 'further readings' or 'links' tab of the relevant week.

 

Anth 211 Introduction to Anthropology: History, Theory, Method

Final Paper Templates

Grounded in ethnographic methods, cultural anthropology emphasizes an 'inductive" approach to research and cross-cultural understanding. We seek ways to bring our own deeply held cultural and linguistic assumptions into critical dialogue with those of others. We do this in order to avoid as much as possible projecting our values, categories and worldviews onto others' experiences and situations. The aspiration is for the approach to be more "bottom up" than "top down" (e.g., in "deductive" forms of research that start with a preconceived model). This also means that anthropologists must constantly test the applicability of social theories that claim to explain human experience across vast cultural, linguistic and political economic differences.

Thus any good anthropology paper includes both explicit discussion of theory and method and compelling ethnographic and/or historical description. We try to make our theoretical and methodological assumptions, as well as any potential problems with them, clear at the beginning of the paper. Write for Clueless Reader! What would a reader who has not read the texts need to know to be persuaded by your argument?

Here are some basic paper templates for each of the prompts:

Prompt 1 template

1) Optional epigraph/quote from your main theorist

2) Intro paragraph laying out the issue, your thesis on the culture concept, change, and/or the politics of representation

  • -use your thesis to develop an argument about how your chosen theorists' arguments support or counter each other
  • -Briefly, let Clueless reader know how you will demonstrate that, with what examples.

3) Body of essay: segue to introducing Cote or Visweswaran as your main theorist

  • Provide a 2-3 paragraph theory synopsis: speaking directly to the main issue of your thesis
  • Bring in your illustrating examples and come back to your main theorist with paraphrases and some direct quotes.
  •  Develop your argument by building in several more theorists: each makes a subpoint or amplifies a point you want to make.

4) 1-2 paragraph conclusion

  • Return to your main terms and the questions you raised in the opening
  • Clarify and render compelling (don't just summarize) what you concluded
  • Emphasize the larger stakes of these dynamics (power, inequality, resistance, etc)
  • Suggest alternatives, perhaps those suggested by your theorists

5) Bibliography

 

Film prompts template

1) Optional vignette from film

2) Opening paragraph:

  • Brief intro to the film, year, who made, content
  • segue to brief introduction to Cote or Visweswaran as your main theorist
  • thesis statement: what will you argue about how their approach applies or not to the film? which other theorists will you bring in and why?

3) Body of analysis

  • More fleshed out description of film and its making, its aftermath/reception
  • Include some biographic info on the filmmaker/ethnographer, their filming techniques/methods and perhaps later criticisms

4) Back to Cote or Visweswaran as your main theorist

  • 1-2 paragraph theory synopsis and how their approach applies, which ways
  • Weave in the two other theorists: provide a short synposis of their approaches when you first mention

5) 1-2 paragraph conclusion

  •  Return to your main terms and the questions you raised in the opening
  •  Clarify and render compelling (don't just summarize) what you concluded
  •  Emphasize the larger stakes of these dynamics (power, inequality, resistance, etc)
  •  Suggest alternatives, perhaps those suggested by your theorists

6) Bibliography