Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
org
by RICHARD G. FOX on 03/18/08. For personal use only.
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
An Excess of Description:
Ethnography, Race, and
Visual Technologies
Deborah Poole
Department of Anthropology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21218;
email: dpoole@jhu.edu
Key Words
photography, visual anthropology, temporality, archive,
ethnography
Abstract
This essay provides an overview of recent anthropological work on
the relationship between racial thought and the visual technologies
of photography and lm. I argue that anthropologists have moved
away from a concern with representation per se in favor of the more
complex discursive and political landscapes opened up by the concepts of media and the archive. My review of this work focuses on the
affective register of suspicion that has surrounded both visual methods and the idea of race in anthropology. Whereas this suspicion
has led some to dismiss visual technologies as inherently racializing or objectifying, I argue that it is possible to reclaim suspicion
as a productive site for rethinking the particular forms of presence,
uncertainty, and contingency that characterize both ethnographic
and visual accounts of the world. I begin by discussing recent work
on the photographic archive, early eldwork photography, and the
subsequent move in the 1960s and 1970s from still photography to
lm and video within the emergent subeld of visual anthropology.
Finally, I consider how more recent work on the problem of race in
favor of descriptive accounts of mediascapes.
159
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Contents
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THE ARCHIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EXCESS AND CONTEXT . . . . . . . .
Contingency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE FIELD .
Culture at a Distance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
NOTICING DIFFERENCE . . . . . . .
160
161
163
164
165
168
171
INTRODUCTION
Anthropological work on race and vision has
proliferated in conversation in recent years
with a yet broader visual turn in the elds
of critical theory and philosophy (Brennan &
Jay 1996; Crary 1990; Debord 1987; Foucault
1973, 1977; Jay 1994; Mitchell 1980, 1986;
Rorty 1979). Theories of language, discourse,
and representation developed in these sister disciplines led many scholars to question traditional anthropological distinctions
between culture and race insofar as both
of these languages for theorizing social difference have led to talk about essentialized
or biologized identities and boundaries (e.g.,
Michaels 1995; Said 1978, 1993). Yet others
from within the discipline itself leveled the
more inclusive charge that the visualism inherent to ethnographic modes of description
and writing led to the reication, racialization,
and temporal distancing of the people whom
anthropologists study (Clifford & Marcus
1986, Fabian 1983). This charge was fueled
by the parallel histories, as well as the presumed homology, between racialism and anthropology as interpretive projects grounded
in Enlightenment ideals of description and
discovery. Thus, it was reasoned, if race is
about nding classicatory order and meaning underneath (or within) the visible surface of the world, then similarly ethnography
was about the discovery of cultural and moral
worlds through the observation of embodied
behaviors and beliefs. In both cases, the observed surface of the worldwhether com160
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Rather than dwelling on the ordering effects of visual representations, then, in this
review I look more closely at the productive
possibilities that visual technologies offer for
reclaiming the uncertainty and contingency
that characterize anthropological accounts of
the world. This potential is unleashed precisely because of the ambiguous role played
by visual images in the disciplinary struggle
rst to identify, and then later to avoid, the
idea of race as that which can be seen and described. I make no attempt to review all the
work that has been done on either race or visuality in recent years. In particular, I have not
considered the numerous studies that address
visual images of others exclusively in terms
of their content as representations, stereotypes, or misrepresentations. Rather, my particular interest is to understand how the forms
of suspicion that surround visual representations and race have shaped anthropological
understandings of evidence, experience, the
limits of ethnographic inquiry, and, as a consequence, our own ongoing engagement with
ethnographic method and description.
I rst consider how anthropologists who
both collected and made photographs in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries reconciled disciplinary norms of evidence and
evolutionary models of race with the peculiar
temporality of the photograph. The experience of these anthropologists is particularly
revealing in that it coincides with a period
in which anthropology moved from the enthusiastic pursuit of racial order to an almost equally fervent rejection of the very idea
of race. The suspicion with which photography was greeted by anthropologists thus ran
the gamut from an empiricist concern with
deception (i.e., a concern for the accuracy
with which photographs represented a racial
fact) to worries about the inability of photography to capture the intangibles of culture
and social organization. I then explore work
that falls self-consciously within the subeld
of visual anthropology that emerged in the
1960s and 1970s in reaction to this concern
with the distinctive dangersand promises
THE ARCHIVE
Much like their nineteenth-century predecessors, anthropologists who have returned to
the photographic archive have been largely
concerned with nding some sort of order, or logic, within the sometimes enormous and richly diverse collections they encounter. Institutional collections such as those
held by the Smithsonian (Scherer 1973),
the Royal Anthropological Institute (Pinney
1992, Poignant 1992), The American Museum of Natural History (Jacknis 1992), or
Harvards Peabody Museum (Banta & Hinsley
1986) have been examined in an attempt to
uncover the theoretical (and political) interests of the anthropologists who collected
them. Other much less studied collections
for example, the George Eastman House in
Rochester, New York, the Royal Geographic
Society in London, or the magnicent holdings at Frances National Librarywere put
together over longer periods of time, with
less academically coherent agendas, and with
personnel and budgets that were often very
much on the margins of the anthropological academy. Although less revealing of the
specic ways in which early anthropologists
looked at photography, these collections offer
insight into the importance of photography
and other visual technologies in the conversations that took place between anthropological, administrative, governmental, and
www.annualreviews.org An Excess of Description
161
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
AR254-AN34-10
162
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
RAI: Royal
Anthropological
Institute
163
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
AR254-AN34-10
164
Poole
Contingency
An arguably even more important slippage
between the classicatory or stabilizing ambitions of photography and its political effects can be located in the unique temporality of the photograph. Both the evidentiary
power and the allure of the photograph are
due to our knowledge that it captures (or
freezes) a particular moment in time. This
temporal dimension of the photograph introduced a whole other layer of distracting detail
into the anthropological science of race. Convinced of both the inevitability and desireability of evolutionary progress, nineteenthcentury anthropologists (like many of their
twentieth-century descendants) were convinced that the primitives they studied were
on the verge of disappearing. Ethnological
encounters acquired a corresponding urgency
as anthropologists scrambled to collect what
they imagined to be the last vestiges of evidence available on earlier forms of human
life.
For at least some of those who held the
camera in their hands, however, the photograph carried a latent threat for anthropology. The Dutch ethnologist Im Thurm, for
example, famously cautioned anthropologists
against the dangers of erasing the human, aesthetic, and individualizing excess of photographic portraiture in favor of a too rigorous
preference for types (Thurm 1893, Tayler
1992). Anthropometry, he added, was probably better practiced on dead bodies than on
the human beings he sought to capture in his
portrait photography from Guyana. At the
same time, however, Thurm (1893) himself
often blocked out the distracting backgrounds
and contexts surrounding his photographic
subjects. His focus was on the human, but
his anthropological perception of photography excluded, as did the racial photography
he opposed, the visual excess of context and
the off -frame. Thurms cautious embrace of
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
photography speaks clearly to its suspect status at a time when all eldwork was if not directly animated by a concern for nding racial
types, then at the very least carried out under
the shadow of the idea of race.
In other cases, photographersmost famously, Edward Curtismade skillful use of
aesthetic conventions such as soft focus and
vignette to transform the inevitability of extinction into the tragic romance of nostalgia. On one level, Curtiss photographs can
be said to have harnessed the aesthetic of portrait photography as part of a broader, political
framing of Native Americans as the sad, inevitable, and unresisting victims of a divinely
manifest destiny. On another level, however,
Curtiss photographs are also of interest for
what they reveal about the distinctive temporality of the racializing gaze. Although
Curtiss photographs have been criticized as
inauthentic for their use of costume and tribal
attribution (Gidley 2003, Lyman 1982), their
power and massive popular appeal had much
to do with the ways in which he was able to distill contemporary fascination for a technology
that allows one to gaze forever on that which
is about to disappear.
Within anthropology, however, this temporality of the moment served only to increase anxieties about the utility of the photographic image as an instrument of scientic
research. For one thing, the sheer number of
photographs that became available to the anthropologist seemed to belie the notion that
primitive people were somehow disappearing,
as evolutionary theory had led them to believe.
Poignant suggests that it was in response to
just such a dilemma that anthropologists at
the RAI came to favor studio portraits over
photographs taken in the eld because the
clear visual displacement found in the studio
portrait between the primitive subject and the
world allowed the anthropologist to impose
order on people too numerous to disappear
(1992, p. 54). Pinney suggests that this tension
between actuality and disappearance played
out in the case of India through two photographic idioms. The salvage paradigm was
applied to what was perceived to be a fragile tribal community, whereas the detective
paradigm, premised on a faith in the evidentiary status of the photographic document,
was more commonly manifested when faced
with a more vital caste society. He further associates the detective paradigm with a curatorial imperative of inventory and preservation,
and the salvage paradigm with a language of
urgency and capture (Pinney 1997, p. 45).
Although the particular mapping of the two
idioms on tribal and caste society is, in many
ways, peculiar to Indiaand Pinney even goes
so far as to suggest that uncertainty about visual evidence is somehow peculiar, or at least
peculiarly marked, in Indiathe general tension between ideas of racial extinction, the
temporal actuality of photography, and anxiety about the nature and truthfulness of the
perceptual world was clearly present in other
colonial and postcolonial settings.
When viewed in this way, the understanding of race that emerges from a history of anthropological photography is clearly as much
about the instability of the photograph as ethnological evidence and the unshakeable suspicion that perhaps things are not what they appear to be as it is about xing the native subject
as a particular racial type. Yet, recent critical
interventions have paid far greater attention
to the xing. What would have to be done,
then, if we were to invert the question that
is usually asked about stability and xing and
instead ask how it is that photography simultaneously sediments and fractures the solidity
of race as a visual and conceptual fact. Put
somewhat differently, how can we recapture
the productive forms of suspicion with which
early anthropologists greeted photographys
unique capacity to reveal the particularities of
moments, encounters, and individuals?
165
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
AR254-AN34-10
166
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
167
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
AR254-AN34-10
Culture at a Distance
The subeld of visual anthropology emerged
in the mid-1960s in response to this concern
about the viability of visual technologies for
ethnographic work. Ethnography, of course,
deploys a language of witnessing and visual
observation as a means to defend its account
of the world. Thus, although voice and language are crucial to ethnography, both the
descriptive task and the authorizing method
of ethnography continue to rely in important
ways on the ethnographers physical presence
in a particular site and her (normatively) visual
observations and descriptive accounts of the
people, events, and practices she encounters
there. At the same time, and as recent work
on anthropological photography and lm has
made clear, visual documentation is generally
not considered to be a sufcient source of evidence unless it is accompanied by the contextualizing and/or interpretive testimony of
168
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
imagery, Metraux writes, is an intensely personal and yet a rigorously formal approach to
a culture. Although every cultural analysis
is to a greater or lesser extent built upon work
with imagery, in the study of culture from
a distance, imagery comes to constitute our
most immediate experience of the culture
(Metraux 1953, p. 343; Mead 1956). The image, in this early approach to visual anthropology, was imagined as both an expression of the
perceptual system shared by the members of
a society and as a surrogate for the experience
that would allow one to access, and describe,
that perceptual system or culture. As various authors have subsequently argued (e.g.,
Banks & Morphy 1997, Edwards 1992, Taylor
1994), this approach to the visual is racialized both in the sense of a subject/object
divide and in the idea that there is an inner meaning hidden beneath the surface of
both culture and the image. What is lost in
such an approach is the immediacy of sight
as a sensory experience that could speak to
the ethnographic intangibles of presence and
newness (Edwards 1997). Instead, images
photographs, gestures, lmsare scrutinized
for clues to the cultural conguration they express.
Given what Meads own Balinese work
had done to divorce still photography from
both affect and the spontaneity of the moment, it is perhaps, then, no surprise that the
eld of visual anthropology had, by the late
1970s, come to be dominated by the study
and production of ethnographic lm, whereas
still photographs had more or less disappeared from serious ethnographic texts (de
Heusch 1962). In explicit contrast to photography (MacDougall 1998, pp. 64, 68), lm was
seen as a visual technology that could go beyond observation to include explicit, reexive references to the sorts of intimate relationships and exchanges that bound the lmmaker to his subjects (MacDougall 1985,
Rouch 2003). The affective power of lm,
MacDougall notes, is due to both its immediacy and its nonverbal character in that (for
MacDougall) lmunlike photography and
www.annualreviews.org An Excess of Description
169
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
the forms of visual communication put forward by Meadis not mediated by analysis or
writing (MacDougall 1985, pp. 6162). Film,
in other words, was considered to bear within
it an affective transparency that was denied
to photography as a frozen and hence distanced image. Animated by a profound humanism, this view of lm as universal or transcultural (MacDougall 1998) seemed likely
to transcend the forms of racial objectication
and the objectifying conventions of scientic
reason that many considered inherent to the
stillness of photography.
This view of lm provided the grounds
from which visual anthropologists set out to
counter the anticolonial critique of the 1980s.
To the surprise (and, perhaps, dismay) of
many, anthropology has emerged largely unscathed from the charges of objectication,
racialism, and colonialism levied against it in
the 1980s. Few anthropologists today would
be at all surprised by the claim that the anthropological project has had a troubling complicity with the racializing discourses and essentializing dichotomies that characterized New
World slave societies and European colonial
rule. In many cases, the resulting disciplinary
sensitivity to both history and politics has
also helped to establish an activist agenda
in which ethnography has come to be seen
as simultaneously collaborative, critical, and
interventionist. More specically, within the
subeld of visual anthropology, it led to new
paradigms of collaborative media production
(Rouch 2003), an effective handing-over of
the tools of visual documentation to the native subject (Ginsburg 1992, Turner 1992,
Worth & Adair 1997), and a shift in anthropological focus from vision itself to the distributive channels and discursive regimes of
media and the archive (Ginsburg et al. 2002).
As the new disciplinary paradigm for visual anthropology, work on indigenous media has tended to focus on the social relations of image production and consumption
(Ginsburg 1992, Himpele 1996) and the cultural idioms through which indigenous producers and artists appropriate lmic mediums
AR254-AN34-10
170
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
NOTICING DIFFERENCE
In The Lived Experience of the Black,
Fanon (2001) opens by recounting the effects of an utterance, a labelingLook, a
Negroon his struggle to inhabit the world.
What is extraordinary about Fanons recounting of this very ordinary experience is his emphasis on that particular, and very brief, moment when the onlookers gaze has not yet settled on his body. Hope appears to him in that
moment when the liberating gaze, creeping
over my body . . . gives me back a lightness
that I had thought lost and, by removing me
from the world, gives me back to the world.
But over there, right when I was reaching the
other side, I stumble, and though his movements, attitudes and gaze, the other xes me,
just like a dye is used to x a chemical solution (Fanon 2001, p. 184). This brief moment
before the fragments [of the self ] are put together by another constitutes, for Fanon, the
site of betrayal where a chance encounter is so
quickly rendered into the paralyzing xity
the certain meaningsof race. Various scholars have emphasized what this sense of betrayal reveals about Fanons understanding of
the weight of historyand the colonial past in
particularon the present. In addition to this
gesture toward the past, however, Fanon also
underscores the importance of placing history
www.annualreviews.org An Excess of Description
171
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
and the past in the service of an active inection of the now (Bernasconi 2001, p. 178).
This is achieved through both the endless
recreation of himself and a realization that
the universal is the end of struggle, not that
which precedes it (p. 179).
Fanons insistence on the eeting temporality of the gaze as a site of ethical possibility offers several important leads for how
to rethink the place of visual technologies
and visual perception more generallyin the
practice of ethnography. On the one hand,
Fanon insists (in this and other writings)
on the extent to which perceptual and visual technologies (cinema, in particular) create bodily habits of distancing (Alcoff 2001).
This emphasis on distanceand on the physical, chemical qualities through which photographic technologies, like the racial gaze, x
racial subjects in their skinsresonates quite
clearly with the emphasis in so much of visual
anthropology on the classicatory impulses of
racial and anthropological photography. On
the other hand, however, and along with this
emphasis on distance, Fanon also provides important insight into the workings of the gaze.
For Fanon, the gaze is as much about undoing the corporeal frame as it is about xing
(Bernasconi 2001, Weate 2003). As such, his
sense of the gaze is rooted in equal parts in the
embodied, sensory, and future-oriented immediacy of encounter and the rapidity with
which this opening slips into the exclusionary distancing of which he speaks. When addressed in these terms, Fanons insistence on
the visual underpinnings of race offers productive grounds for rethinking the temporality of the ethnographic encounterand the
ways in which photographic technologies may
need to be rethought in conversation with that
particular understanding of encounter.
As we have seen for much of the twentieth century, anthropologists have worked
around a dichotomy in which photography
like seeingwas relegated to the domain of
the eeting and the contingent, whereas interpretation (and, with it, description) was construed as a process by which the extraneous
AR254-AN34-10
172
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank Veena Das, Sameena Mulla, Naveeda Khan, and Gabriela Zamorano for
their comments and criticisms on an earlier version of this article.
LITERATURE CITED
Abu-Lughod L. 1993. Finding a place for Islam: Egyptian television serials and the national
interest. Public Cult. 5(3):493514
Abu-Lughod L. 2002. Egyptian melodrama. Technology of the modern subject? See Ginsburg
et al. 2002, pp. 11533
Aird M. 2003. Growing up with Aborigines. See Pinney & Peterson 2003, pp. 2339
Alcoff LM. 2001. Towards a phenomenology of racial embodiment. See Bernasconi 2001,
pp. 26783
Alexander L. 1998. Palestinians in lm: representing and being represented in the cinematic
struggle for national identity. Vis. Anthropol. 10:(23):31933
G. 2002. Fotografa Mapuche: Construccion y montaje de un imagiAlvarado M, Baez C, Carreno
173
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Benjamin W. 1968. On some motifs in Baudelaire. Illuminations. Transl. H Zohn, pp. 155200.
New York: Schocken (From German)
Benjamin W. 1999. The Arcades Project, ed. S Buck-Morss. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Bernardin S, Graulich M, MacFarlane L, Tonkovich N. 2003. Trading Gazes: EuroAmerican Women Photographers and Native North Americans, 18801940. New Brunswick,
NJ/London: Rutgers Univ. Press
Bernasconi R, ed. 2001. Race. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell
Biehl J. Vita: Life in a Zone of Social Abandonment. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Blackman MB. 1981. Window on the Past: The Photographic Ethnohistory of the Northern and
Kaigani Haida. Ottawa: Natl. Mus. Can.
Brennan T, Jay M. 1996. Vision in Context: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Sight.
New York/London: Routledge
Buck-Morss S. 1989. Dialectics of Seeing: Walter Benjamin and the Arcades Project. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press
Buckley L. 1999. Self and accessory in Gambian studio photography. Vis. Anthropol. Rev.
13(2):6384
Bush A, Mitchell LC. 1994. The Photograph and the American Indian. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
Univ. Press
Cavell S. 1979. The World Viewed: Reections on the Ontology of Film. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Univ. Press
Clifford J. 1988. The Predicament of Culture: Twentieth Century Ethnography, Literature and Art.
Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Clifford J, Marcus G, eds. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley:
Univ. Calif. Press
Connolly WE. 2002. Neuropolitics: Thinking, Culture, Speed. Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
Corbey R. 1993. Ethnographic showcases 18701930. Cult. Anthropol. 8(3):33869
Crary J. 1990. Techniques of the Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Crary J. 1999. Suspensions of Perception: Attention, Spectacle and Modern Culture. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press
Crawford PI, Turton D, eds. 1992. Film as Ethnography: Manchester, NY: Manchester Univ.
Press
Das V. 1998. Wittgenstein and anthropology. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 27:17195
Das V. 2003. Trauma and testimony: implications for political community. Anthropol. Theory
3(3):293307
Debord G. 1987. Society of the Spectacle. Exeter: Rebel, Aim
De Heusch. 1962. The Cinema and Social Science: A Survey of Ethnographic and Sociological Films.
Paris: UNESCO
Deleuze G. 1985. Cinema 2: The Time-Image. Transl. H Tomlinson, R Galeta, 1989. Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press (From French)
Deleuze G. 1994. Difference and Repetition. Transl. P Patton, 1968. New York: Columbia Univ.
Press (From French)
Derrida J. 2002. The archive market: truth, testimony, evidence. Transl. J Bajorek, 1996, in
Echographies of Television, ed. J Derrida, B Steigler, pp. 8299. Cambridge, UK: Polity
(From French)
Dowmunt T. 1993. Channels of Resistance: Global Television and Local Empowerment. London:
BFI and Channel Four Television
Edwards E. 1990. Photographic types: in pursuit of method. Visual Anthropol. 4(23):23558
AR254-AN34-10
174
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Edwards E. 1992. Anthropology and Photography 18601920. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
Edwards E. 1997. Beyond the boundary: a consideration of the expressive in photography and
anthropology. See Banks & Morphy 1997, pp. 5380
Edwards E. 2001. Raw Histories: Photographs, Anthropology and Museums. Oxford, NY: Berg
Fabian J. 1983. Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object. New York: Columbia
Univ. Press
Fanon F. 2001. The lived experience of the black. Transl. V Moulard. See Bernasconi 2001,
pp. 184201 (From French)
Faris J. 1992. Anthropological transparency: lm, representation, politics. See Crawford &
Turton 1992, pp. 17182
Faris J. 1996. Navajo and Photography: A Critical History of the Representations of an American
People. Albuquerque: Univ. N.M. Press
Faris J. 2003. Navajo and photography. In Photographys Other Histories, eds. C Pinney, N
Peterson, pp. 8599. Durham, NC: Duke Univ Press
Ferme M. 2001. The Underneath of Things: Violence, History and the Everyday in Sierra Leone.
Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Ferguson J, Gupta A. 2002. Spatializing states: toward an ethnography of neoliberal governmentality. Am. Ethnol. 29(4):9811002
Firstenberg L. 2003. Autonomy and the archive in America: re-examining the intersection of
photography and stereotype. See Fusco & Wallis 2003, pp. 30334
Foucault M. 1973. The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perception. Transl. AMS
Smith. New York: Vintage (From French)
Foucault M. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Transl. A Sheridan. New York:
Vintage (From French)
Fusco C. 2003. Racial time, racial marks, racial metaphors. See Fusco & Wallis 2003, pp. 1350
Fusco C, Wallis B, eds. 2003. Only Skin Deep: Changing Visions of the American Self. New York:
Int. Cent. Photogr., Abrams
Gidley M. 2003. Edward S. Curtis and the North American Indian Project in the Field. Lincoln:
Univ. Nebr. Press
Ginsburg FD. 1992. Indigenous media: Faustian contract or global village?
Ginsburg FD. 1995. Mediating culture: indigenous media, ethnographic lm and the production of identity. In Fields of Vision: Essays in Film Studies, Visual Anthropology and Photography,
ed. L Devereaux , R Hillman, pp. 25691. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Ginsburg FD. 1996. Institutionalizing the unruly: charting a future for visual anthropology.
Ethnos 63(2):17396
Ginsburg FD, Abu-Lughod L, Larkin B, eds. 2002. Media Worlds: Anthropology on New Terrain.
Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Gordon RJ. 1997. Picturing Bushman. Athens: Ohio Univ. Press
Graham-Brown S. 1988. Images of Women: The Portrayal of Women in Photography of the Middle
East, 18601950. New York: Columbia Univ. Press
Greenhalgh P. 1988. Ephemeral Vistas: The Expositions Universelles, Great Exhibitions and Worlds
Fairs, 18511939. Manchester, NY: Manchester Univ. Press
Grifths A. 2002. Wondrous Difference: Cinema, Anthropology , Turn-of-the-Century Visual Culture.
New York: Columbia Univ. Press
Grimshaw A. 2001. The Ethnographers Eye: Ways of Seeing in Modern Anthropology. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
Hale C. 2002. Does multiculturalism menace? Governance, cultural rights and the politics of
identity in Guatemala. J. Lat. Am. Studies 34(3):485524
www.annualreviews.org An Excess of Description
175
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Haraway D. 1989. Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science. New
York: Routledge
Harvey P. 1996. Hybrids of Modernity: Anthropology, the Nation State and the Universal Exhibition.
London/New York: Routledge
Heider K. 1976. Ethnographic Film. Austin: Univ. Tex. Press
Herve G. 1910. A la recherche dun manuscript: les instructions anthropologiques de Georges
Cuvier. Rev. Ecole Anthropol. Paris 10:289306
Himpele J. 1996. Film distribution as media: mapping difference in the Bolivian cinemascape.
Vis. Anthropol. Rev. 12(1):4766
Hockings P, ed. 1985. Principles of Visual Anthropology. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter
Hockings P. 1992. The yellow bough: Riverss use of photograph in The Todas. See Edwards,
pp. 17986
Hockings P, Omori Y, eds. 1988. Cinematographic Theory and New Dimensions in Ethnographic
Film. Osaka: Natl. Mus. Ethnol.
Howell S. 1998. Picturing women, class and community in Arab Detroit: the strange case of
Eva Habib. Vis. Anthropol. 10:20925
Jacknis I. 1984. Franz Boas and photography. Stud. Vis. Commun. 10(1):260
Jacknis I. 1985. Franz Boas and exhibits: on the limitations of the museum method of anthropology. See Stocking, pp. 75109
Jacknis I. 1988. Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson in Bali: their use of photography and
lm. Cult. Anthropol. 3(2):16077
Jacknis I. 1992. In search of the imagemaker: James Mooney as an ethnograpic photographer.
Vis. Anthropol. 3(2):179212
Jackson JL. 2004. An ethnographic lmam: giving gifts, doing research and videotaping the
native subject/object. Am. Anthropol. 106(1):3242
Jay M. 1988. Scopic regimes of modernity. In Force-Fields: Between Intellectual History and
Cultural Critique, pp. 11533. New York/London: Routledge
Jay M. 1994. Downcast Eyes. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Jhala J. 1993. Power and the portrait: the inuence of the ruling elite on the visual text in
Western India. Vis. Anthropol. 6:17198
Karp I, Levine SD, eds. 1990. Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display.
Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst.
Kolko BE, Nakamura L, Rodman GB, eds. 2000. Race in Cyberspace. New York/London: Routledge. 248 pp.
Kravitz C. 2002. The Ones That Are Wanted: Communication and the Politics of Representation in
a Photographic Exhibition. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Kuehnast K. 1992. Visual imperialism and the export of prejudice: an exploration of ethnographic lm. See Crawford & Turton 1992, pp. 18395
Levin DM. 1999. The Philosophers Gaze: Modernity in the Shadows of Enlightenment. Berkeley:
Univ. Calif. Press
Loizos P. 1993. Innovation in Ethnographic Film: From Innocence to Self-Consciousness, 19551985.
Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Lutz C, Collins J. 1993. Reading National Geographic. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Lyman C. 1982. The Vanishing Race and Other Illusions: Photographs of Indians by Edward Curtis.
Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst.
MacDougall D. 1985. Beyond observational cinema. See Hockings 1985, pp. 10924
MacDougall D. 1997. The visual in anthropology. See Banks & Morphy 1997, pp. 25695
MacDougall D. 1998. Transcultural Cinema, ed. L Taylor. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
AR254-AN34-10
176
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
177
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Reed CR. 2000. All the World is Here! The Black Presence at the White City. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana Univ. Press
Rony FT. 1996. The Third Eye: Race, Cinema and Ethnographic Spectacle. Durham, NC: Duke
Univ. Press
Rorty R. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
Rose N. 1999. Powers of Freedom Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Press
Rouch J. 2003. On the vicissitudes of the self: the possessed dancer, the magician, the sorcerer,
the lmmaker, and the ethnographer. Transl. S Feld, in Cine-Ethnography, pp. 87101.
Minneapolis: Minn. Univ. Press (From French)
Rydell RW. 1984. All the Worlds a Fair: Visions of Empire at American International Expositions,
18761916. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Said EW. 1978. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon
Said EW. 1993. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Knopf. 380 pp.
Samain E. 1995. Bronislaw Malinowski et la photographie anthropologique. LEthnographie
91(2):10730
Scherer J. 1973. Indians: The Great Photographs that Reveal North American Indian Life, 1847
1929, from the unique collection of the Smithsonian Institute. New York: Crown Publ.
Sekula A. 1989. The body and the archive. In The Contest of Meaning: Critical Histoires of
Photography, ed. R Bolton, pp. 34389. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Simmel G. 1971. The metropolis and mental life. In On Individuality and Social Forms, pp.
32439. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Singer A. 1992. Anthropology in broadcasting. See Crawford & Turton 1992, pp. 26473
Spencer F. 1992. Some notes on the attempt to apply photography to anthropometry during
the second half of the nineteenth century. See Edwards 1992, pp. 99107
Sprague S. 1978. Yoruba photography: how the Yoruba see themselves. African Arts 12(1);
reprinted in Pinney & Peterson 2003, pp. 24060
Spyer P. 2001. Photographys framings and unframings; a review article. Comp. Stud. Soc. Hist.
43:18192
Stocking GW. 1985. Objects and Others: Essays on Museums and Material Culture. Madison: Univ.
Wisc. Press
Stoller P. 1992. The Cinematic Griot: The Ethnography of Jean Rouch. Chicago: Univ. Chicago
Press
Sullivan G. 1999. Margaret Mead, Gregory Bateson, and Highland Bali: Fieldwork Photographs of
Bayung Gede, 19361939. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Taussig M. 1993. Mimesis and Alterity: A Particular History of the Senses. New York/London:
Routledge
Taylor L. 1994. Visualizing Theory: Selected Essays from Visual Anthropology Review 19901994.
New York/London: Routledge
Thurm I. 1893. Anthropological uses of the camera. J. R. Anthropol. Inst. 22:184203
Turner T. 1991. The social dynamics of video media in an indigenous society: the cultural
meaning and personal politics of video-making in Kayapo communities. Vis. Anthropol.
Rev. 7(2):6872
Turner T. 1992. Deant images: the Kayapo appropriation of video. Anthropol. Today 8(6):516
Turner T. 2002a. Representation, politics and cultural imagination in indigenous video. See
Ginsburg et al. 2002, pp. 7589
Turner T. 2002b. Representation, polyphony and the construction of power in a Kayapo video.
In Indigenous Movements, Self-Representation, and the State in Latin America, ed. KB Warren,
JE Jackson, pp. 22950. Austin: Univ. Tex. Press
AR254-AN34-10
178
Poole
AR254-AN34-10
ARI
25 August 2005
14:45
Tsinhnahjinnie JH. 2003. When is a photograph worth a thousand words? See Pinney &
Peterson, pp. 4052
Wallis B. 2003. Black bodies, white science: Louis Agassizs slave daguerreotypes. See Fusco &
Wallis 2003, pp. 16382
Weate J. 2003. Fanon, Merleau-Ponty and the difference of phenomenology. See Bernasconi
2003, pp. 16983
Weiner JF. 1997. Televisualist anthropology: representation, aesthetics, politics. Curr. Anthropol. 38(2):197235
Wolbert B. 2001. The anthropologist as photographer. The visual construction of ethnographic
authority. Vis. Anthropol. 13:32143
Worth S, Adair J. 1997. Through Navajo Eyes. Albuquerque: Univ. N.M. Press
Wright C. 2003. Supple bodies: the Papua New Guinea photographs of Captain Francis R
Barton, 18991907. See Pinney & Peterson 2003, pp. 14669
Wright T. 1991. The eldwork photographs of Jenness and Malinowski and the beginning of
modern anthropology. J. Anthropol. Soc. Oxf. 22(1):4158
Wright T. 1994. Anthropologist as artist: Malinowskis Trobriand photographs, European
imagery and colonial history in the Pacic. Nijmegen Stud. Develop. Cult. Change 19:116
30
Young L. 1996. Fear of the Dark: Race, Gender and Sexuality in the Cinema. New York/London:
Routledge
Young MW. 1999. Malinowskis Kiriwina: Fieldwork Photography 19151918. Chicago: Univ.
Chicago Press
Young MW. 2001. An Anthropologist in Papua: The Photography of FE Williams 192239. Honolulu: Univ. Hawaii Press
179
Contents
ARI
12 August 2005
20:29
Annual Review of
Anthropology
Contents
Frontispiece
Sally Falk Moore p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xvi
Prefatory Chapter
Comparisons: Possible and Impossible
Sally Falk Moore p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 1
Archaeology
Archaeology, Ecological History, and Conservation
Frances M. Hayashida p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p43
Archaeology of the Body
Rosemary A. Joyce p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 139
Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage: The Inadequate
Response
Neil Brodie and Colin Renfrew p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 343
Through Wary Eyes: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeology
Joe Watkins p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 429
The Archaeology of Black Americans in Recent Times
Mark P. Leone, Cheryl Janifer LaRoche, and Jennifer J. Babiarz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 575
Biological Anthropology
Early Modern Humans
Erik Trinkaus p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 207
Metabolic Adaptation in Indigenous Siberian Populations
William R. Leonard, J. Josh Snodgrass, and Mark V. Sorensen p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 451
The Ecologies of Human Immune Function
Thomas W. McDade p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 495
vii
ARI
12 August 2005
20:29
Contents
viii
Contents
Contents
ARI
12 August 2005
20:29
Contents
ix
ARI
12 August 2005
20:29
Contents
Contents
Contents
ARI
12 August 2005
20:29
Contents
xi