Why do we read the classics?

Giovanni Da Col, Claudio Sopranzetti, Fred Myers, Anastasia Piliavsky, John L. Jackson, Yarimar Bonilla, Adia Benton, Paul Stoller

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Abstract

    Debates on the epistemological, ethical, and historical constitution of the anthropological corpus are one of the reasons why anthropology has always thrived. Whether in terms of the complex relation between the production of anthropological knowledge and the political systems in which it takes place, or the proliferation of the language of "mutual constitution" as a way to bypass questions of causality, the question of the "suffering" vs. the "good," the attribution of "colonial" or "white male privilege" to ethnographic classics, or the hackneyed debates on the precariousness of academic life, contemporary anthropology is traversed by critical shortcuts, worn paths we often take, without reflecting on them. This first installment of a new journal section titled "Shortcuts" aims to investigate and question the analytical, historical, and interpretive arguments that have become common knowledge in anthropology, intuitively true and agreeable, yet rarely subject to rigorous scrutiny and discussion. The first "Shortcut" engages with the question "Why read the classics?" and offers six varied responses by scholars who deal with how the anthropological canon is produced and what is at stake in preserving it, going back to it, or getting away from it.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)1-7
    Number of pages7
    JournalHAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory
    Volume7
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

    Fingerprint

    anthropology
    constitution
    precariousness
    common knowledge
    causality
    political system
    proliferation
    attribution
    privilege
    language

    Keywords

    • Anthropology
    • Canon
    • Classics
    • Colonialism
    • Culture
    • Curriculum
    • Education

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Anthropology

    Cite this

    Da Col, G., Sopranzetti, C., Myers, F., Piliavsky, A., Jackson, J. L., Bonilla, Y., ... Stoller, P. (2017). Why do we read the classics? HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 7(3), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.3.002

    Why do we read the classics? / Da Col, Giovanni; Sopranzetti, Claudio; Myers, Fred; Piliavsky, Anastasia; Jackson, John L.; Bonilla, Yarimar; Benton, Adia; Stoller, Paul.

    In: HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, Vol. 7, No. 3, 01.01.2017, p. 1-7.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

    Da Col, G, Sopranzetti, C, Myers, F, Piliavsky, A, Jackson, JL, Bonilla, Y, Benton, A & Stoller, P 2017, 'Why do we read the classics?', HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.3.002
    Da Col G, Sopranzetti C, Myers F, Piliavsky A, Jackson JL, Bonilla Y et al. Why do we read the classics? HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory. 2017 Jan 1;7(3):1-7. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.3.002
    Da Col, Giovanni ; Sopranzetti, Claudio ; Myers, Fred ; Piliavsky, Anastasia ; Jackson, John L. ; Bonilla, Yarimar ; Benton, Adia ; Stoller, Paul. / Why do we read the classics?. In: HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory. 2017 ; Vol. 7, No. 3. pp. 1-7.
    @article{e5c74789362e426ea20a669359142b48,
    title = "Why do we read the classics?",
    abstract = "Debates on the epistemological, ethical, and historical constitution of the anthropological corpus are one of the reasons why anthropology has always thrived. Whether in terms of the complex relation between the production of anthropological knowledge and the political systems in which it takes place, or the proliferation of the language of {"}mutual constitution{"} as a way to bypass questions of causality, the question of the {"}suffering{"} vs. the {"}good,{"} the attribution of {"}colonial{"} or {"}white male privilege{"} to ethnographic classics, or the hackneyed debates on the precariousness of academic life, contemporary anthropology is traversed by critical shortcuts, worn paths we often take, without reflecting on them. This first installment of a new journal section titled {"}Shortcuts{"} aims to investigate and question the analytical, historical, and interpretive arguments that have become common knowledge in anthropology, intuitively true and agreeable, yet rarely subject to rigorous scrutiny and discussion. The first {"}Shortcut{"} engages with the question {"}Why read the classics?{"} and offers six varied responses by scholars who deal with how the anthropological canon is produced and what is at stake in preserving it, going back to it, or getting away from it.",
    keywords = "Anthropology, Canon, Classics, Colonialism, Culture, Curriculum, Education",
    author = "{Da Col}, Giovanni and Claudio Sopranzetti and Fred Myers and Anastasia Piliavsky and Jackson, {John L.} and Yarimar Bonilla and Adia Benton and Paul Stoller",
    year = "2017",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.14318/hau7.3.002",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "7",
    pages = "1--7",
    journal = "HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory",
    issn = "2575-1433",
    publisher = "HAU Society for Ethnographic Theory",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Why do we read the classics?

    AU - Da Col, Giovanni

    AU - Sopranzetti, Claudio

    AU - Myers, Fred

    AU - Piliavsky, Anastasia

    AU - Jackson, John L.

    AU - Bonilla, Yarimar

    AU - Benton, Adia

    AU - Stoller, Paul

    PY - 2017/1/1

    Y1 - 2017/1/1

    N2 - Debates on the epistemological, ethical, and historical constitution of the anthropological corpus are one of the reasons why anthropology has always thrived. Whether in terms of the complex relation between the production of anthropological knowledge and the political systems in which it takes place, or the proliferation of the language of "mutual constitution" as a way to bypass questions of causality, the question of the "suffering" vs. the "good," the attribution of "colonial" or "white male privilege" to ethnographic classics, or the hackneyed debates on the precariousness of academic life, contemporary anthropology is traversed by critical shortcuts, worn paths we often take, without reflecting on them. This first installment of a new journal section titled "Shortcuts" aims to investigate and question the analytical, historical, and interpretive arguments that have become common knowledge in anthropology, intuitively true and agreeable, yet rarely subject to rigorous scrutiny and discussion. The first "Shortcut" engages with the question "Why read the classics?" and offers six varied responses by scholars who deal with how the anthropological canon is produced and what is at stake in preserving it, going back to it, or getting away from it.

    AB - Debates on the epistemological, ethical, and historical constitution of the anthropological corpus are one of the reasons why anthropology has always thrived. Whether in terms of the complex relation between the production of anthropological knowledge and the political systems in which it takes place, or the proliferation of the language of "mutual constitution" as a way to bypass questions of causality, the question of the "suffering" vs. the "good," the attribution of "colonial" or "white male privilege" to ethnographic classics, or the hackneyed debates on the precariousness of academic life, contemporary anthropology is traversed by critical shortcuts, worn paths we often take, without reflecting on them. This first installment of a new journal section titled "Shortcuts" aims to investigate and question the analytical, historical, and interpretive arguments that have become common knowledge in anthropology, intuitively true and agreeable, yet rarely subject to rigorous scrutiny and discussion. The first "Shortcut" engages with the question "Why read the classics?" and offers six varied responses by scholars who deal with how the anthropological canon is produced and what is at stake in preserving it, going back to it, or getting away from it.

    KW - Anthropology

    KW - Canon

    KW - Classics

    KW - Colonialism

    KW - Culture

    KW - Curriculum

    KW - Education

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041728181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041728181&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.14318/hau7.3.002

    DO - 10.14318/hau7.3.002

    M3 - Review article

    VL - 7

    SP - 1

    EP - 7

    JO - HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory

    JF - HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory

    SN - 2575-1433

    IS - 3

    ER -