r Two/ Our Time, Time, No Time: ld Sos /ALNESSIS ANTHROPOLOGY'S problem with Time to bring that wea into fers, U have pushed thea fo a poim where the next sep would be to form theory of coevalnes This wl Bes ici ask be the problem i not jst "where"; iis continously 2 the teraction of craton i antrop. ia An a projet, a theory of coceaess must xe be concered constant confrontation ih an- a cou ann ci ve al o cif the terms and othe project by ex: ing more cosy “une of Tikes nthe context of Fall “forthe past history of alochonie se it not the only obstacle en the roa toward athe "was asserted about the allachronic, oF schizo- tendencies of emerging anthropology will now be to am analysis of two major serateyie that haveGamien the question of eoevalness threat on © 1° cn SER Res te eto fem i of narot ol ital and C: LevisSrauay) whose call eat ithropology are widely a me Pe ition will be polemical, that is, ee 'n as an historical account of t1 2 apes be mie Hscgtt ean checeararela eer dws ened Bice sicftnan me ac ee inst an adversary. ow tore. In what sese are the ny aa logical tcrms are taken merely at conventet cena er tive orientations, uations toward culture and knowledges Thee, oughly to the Anigio-Ame * analyzed a teats explicit of the “Time nan weory, Ernest Gellncs nd Change, a book which cal th Our Time, Their Time, No Time $9 ‘on the critique of evolutionism. Asa theory, ine Se comiders tute dead i sexe pio i som per can wy ad [hile} ta formal dhought only defended 8 onal pologits ant historians” (190411). NOt “ihe conflict between cyolutionary-genetic (mes fad structural (umeless) theories of explanation Iarout, most dramadcally tn Bribh. socal a he observes ty of “primitive” wibes begun first pe of wiring them a Lindo tie Bs a peep to our own storie as, a Bids evidence sb the ey kein the fs Bu real progrem was schieed when nem was wed wh redou ur But wht ay concer, for reconstruct fos whe eal ping ens ef a aks ad expan eos of Peer and not se suri vom 3 pst sup- five further ek. Catiner 954-181) pac ga cate acncaas ey mes rem per ea ee ee Soest on hacatay toca tet es One arin sie me sae Belcset fenr cael mens ces Bes cere cee oe Feria trees Saga eine at Ns ep Tec Pee ar en Epc BiBen act nad ern cena ee paaee sete ee panes a eras cee A acer Se a ear lor ame ot pao oneSet of relationships, tt (Our-Time, Their Time, No Time 41 metaphorizad se! banka oF ogi ee ec eee ere ee es ee aan ee eee Semen pera ‘made possi scianaigePoby and History teres = ing in this ea bs ‘Freie this respect because some po ge at here not Sut oe sera = ind atria ater tad been tied oral ea ee aoe =e ee Se ee eae Bere Fapicenany sation Bence ce senantenrnce pee pacifentenn trace see yea ame ee eee eee See ee ieee sere ee ee ust apparently be pak for with epsternlogial nateté emer eee eae sons ia tionfttOns strates the effec which 4 fron thought about caltre tad fe NeOur Time, Their Time, No-Time 43 and Radcliffe Brown asserts the esendally socal, dat exb-rlatve nature of categories of though If fo Brough to ke uldmate consequences ths earn thet she na ee orn reso fy new feps because “ial concep and acre are lene pel by the social spscm's fea lok tnponabe sie ikon is already moulded to ht what e wo be ents ‘rive been the deena this Teaves the actors with no language fo a thir society and so changeit. since they ean talk only im" (bloc 1977:281). Paraphrasing tha lst te, lone might continue to east that he anthropoloest much as. he succeeds in entering ancthee ak ie and comprehending it from sno (whch ste ‘iekal of structuralisetaeti i deal of cultural eau), would be incapable of {latins of Time experience Taken estos about the anything brat. Such red ad absent es St {oking British anthropologists and Bi ot bates in. aways been countered by insisting on “universal in tasoniers, Bloch re. ability” But unles one ca come up with cs il Dreak donee A of Wich ulm ‘ Freak dows 1 Seah imal transstabliy, all ak about it jas begging the qu ed recently by Blas own way out ofthe dilemma des not offer a ble salution esr. Hs stems i unsctesul been formulates crtiue tht seeps the terms of hs sek, ies. Not surprinngy this ead him sitgely back [ifr eet eee : Bs copinism ad nave rain ne ened ater on an op teen Hen assompeon of cultural roaiian IT cle io scconmecl and hin correc his argument can be surat os follows: i conceptions al ategorce uf Time ae scaly U determined we mn ak how itt posble es aes, pay We can hte log pase fe ma of al that the problem wih fine ot problem widen fon of Time. Boch then pontes two pes of ie pe sen oc 1 ef ey ‘mousy fr cocepalsaton) There an perceptions ot rigs fh ne cs {nature and others that ae removed rm cultural He He then avers crmiang nt nec earmg Denk, jt practical im's dstncton of profane and sacred realt)) that Tunes Heeling the log. leseto-nature f found in one kind of cultural Knowledge, theory had ihe that which serve inthe oanaton of paca ae the fine of Dusk fspedally, ‘pradcive. scion, Tea44 Our Time, Theie Time, NoTime ature is involved in ts that we find Srl in fact sen gn ie hye ie es we in a a {hat oppor religions or Meoogea} ata Hee aware cat a pla atiaane Sen pls of Tame are ene [3 posit rtegy to make of ape Alcina hem wo heir soca rae ing, APRS 0 bs, unreal human nec hand af Siuctualon-functionaism promotes kind of ant, ime ee len deg ince of fences These have been demonstrated ewe E eas fe could edt 3 meh cae he eel al the ape gis constarly re. fancew a dacrine witch we Kron ie ids even if we continue to cing’ This how E. Bloch summits. ideology ob ime tine re The ve dens of lis rested 8 of hnory is broken up imo or Cure Sola Thea oa ach other as they are without eee (ur Time, Their Time, No Time I ce cpr enone cir eres re errel ee eee et a see rea meer mah aa) ee eens ine Ee ee tete| Seca rere ee eae See ee oe ese ea errs ee eres See ees geen eee te ere ae Ske fal ss cappearmibe rca of ramen be yet io geen th pe eee ee pore crear = et, eer Soe ae, re ee eee Bees cia ancop enter ee eS a oe as Mora aie ata ie ees ae ee seed gee Tine al ctupteal reins oo MANE paca cae eee ee eae ee eee ee ee ee see ists soe Wr back Spe ee SeanaOur-Time; Their Time, No Tinie 47 igh we note the parade! nature ofan enterprise eh eta stdics of as were ‘produce site tat would help to bring the enemy doen a, talicr, coublsh effective contol and assure transto these vas tard the model of te aivopa ‘cit Kuch lance beoveen theoretical ran and fight tutes an # case pened nny ee {ues and programs (or inca a Coleen mie Formal if moths the fins between sa apORRNS gether wah eee tiexpson ‘and functionalist anthropology), nor Was interdscipinary elfors, “4m unprecedented aoe ener of al earl rth: Bate ics we ene cae ks eying of coli japon 28 bona ens had ane ie och i Bar Boca inte ater ss Thing ts Tine, becomes pombe ad ions were so iimately connected inset ry to cleue the estes cence. cltures (0 8 aves of thew researchers, mich of the ee sh logical satus. At that moment the sty ofculttes od now ceded an daar fr esos Set ‘tance cary aie ter of the junction Shape aig antmepologss wn continu wo auc ah ing empirial research rough, participant obser- {2a inline nay and who are y no mess fo may tr int. theoreteal vee, station of pox snd perenne sera" capete nace ta aoe the ; opel to view anor care ni eney. A cul Tolan born which, spite of terminological sin eh ide i con wie empty ignaves i ete rough hse consting ws no cata dance and of concent oben. eee ae adenine eben) ls theetore now at al Surprs bai of nee ecules oe a aa ata ee aa xr Peal nee in is tones he es beeen Anos pea pr reson cl theory and the Spe to ge ac hug of other cures, that fy at ee Era ales an i characters The pi of the times apih exprosed in “Asagrment: Japan the into. fluc chapecr'n Rath Renedets The Chpeadhemam and The Suord “Toughmindeds aceepeee of rac clara iiference is thee opposed to si raiment aba One World and Unter reteriod ce 1007 {i818 Benet fly reales sat pars of natal Menky ay oars bets of culture. tm the United Stare, aaa oe erp ne rane an, on‘Our Time, Their Time, No Time 49 48° Our Time, Their Time, No Time ee vpuganda natement sng be intimately connected with the exercise of power over ae en cera 1 Barataria eon omen etona sont ae eee era pligater Ne oecere ee eee ag mies ‘ned thor ofcaiure Pe oan ‘National character was one of the unifying concepts in sor that may SMES Geo EET eee ce ctame eee entre Soe cee atigeeeiectneeenicg emer ‘The Study of Culture aa Detance (Mead and Metreaux 1953), 0 electra mast clear capieneretapes leeer atte renee: ‘ rr approaches bawed on ctu arp ore fx wach nur na enol ow ask a more pin ach clea, we must i scene and “This Manual in concerned with methods shat have fuctar amalgam of teen developed during te lst decade for aa Jaw does this ad motives responsible for that ity we cal rus toe aac of pamate condiions a ‘ida who are members of vite which are Inaccesbe to direct observation. ‘This accel ity'may be saa! because a state of active warfare fexistsas eas the ase wih Japan and Geran the eaiy 1040s: or may bens is now the case hare ate as =n our om ist Sn net Goma Ce Sd grou and anes {obarire 0 rel apd ress Or the nace nai pt aay Oban, Reading Teo eee ible rot esa ew he Sty may no longer exist (19833) by the ineligerse ane comments cm Inianother Gontribution to the Volume, M: Mead speaks her task, especially! ine of anthr0pO- lie fencountered im the pr her genera: ‘the flies! Spcanaal aur cPeamaeart oe oboe egg ne ot ae roman SP Sie get the et ‘he aporoach deere in dy Manual as een ae oars det a ee cee eras of what oe is aly unity to facltate relationships wih aes, 0 fle resionsipn wit pardsan groups in coun {es under eneny conta, wo asso in eumating enemy strengths and Weakness, and to provide a ‘aionale fr the preparation of dacoments a he International les Ai these ses involve Signing the ela regulars the boro ar ‘the proposed acon~-nhether ih be the dems eta pecgt ened woEa (Our Time, Their Time, No Time 4 pal, The posiges Sara roe wr he mae inporane of se © ae Face by the researchers tana Te ihm be iE, ai of such research Sema tatees Aer bcaviorexbted bya - ken at fag value, such could indeed be the starting fopa theory of cle that would ssi rca ep Jogi signfeance to temporal relations. Bor ley gon reveal that Hall not concerned with pate polbgy He doesnot raise the problem of huowldge ns Sine: nor does he ask hove temporal relations and cond rn ae the tality of anvil fing. si fe inmethodology and leds han to exami clara fe" of Time. The book is replete with examples snd com isons between hows use time and bow By use tine, Halls opening aatement so contains theoreti ae smpeion alot caltare in gener, namely hae shapes regulates betivor through sinconscous mechanism or ies. That implies in turn the methorologal sion that logys major lak two reveal the wnconsclous Frees cting through the layers of deceptive conscious behav In short, the study of Time in cultures valuable Be seit reveals what badd heath the te of spoken ers Tr a come wae ae hte ligne wih ‘Knower, the anthropologist dissimulaton and subs to-unconscous jowersar onthe side ofthe Other No otver thatthe theoretical notion of sn wnconscou cl fure and the methodological prescriptions that go wth iy tr nto schemes to sttlence, control, ae direct ihe anthropology of Tite becomes the polis of ime, As one ree through The Silt Language one realizes that the many pereepive observations and examples tus Arating how they ws Tome carn io so many secipes for how fo us that kwledge so thar tir havior ea be tricked ino serving our goal. Halls frequent crc of American boorishnese and intransigence in dealing wth otter cultures ea eth a th hy ao pe who want to et things done (diplomats, exparae Enanagers and supertcors slemen and ccoomni e tors)!" Nowhere does he awarenes of the fle of Time in uniaton le him to question the pretases of Cl “Aural relaiviam. Because Hall bods an isetumental view of ommuniction, The Se! Language i about temporal sat opie te oni82° Our Time, Their Time, No-Time me Cui TicTan HoTine a8 Serra of the sujet is meters meat seh ngewe ge Te sie atic ae S already expressive “of the inteligentin of one country and, forall dat ol one ci Beet reer ae S"work ave mvlable,® ‘The only excise for ny ow observations to this iterate that no cr Ss ihe uses of Tine in sndopology can yore tment whose proponent like wo pot out Hat he) have or Time fo begin wid, 1 donot think that masings about the son of structine are helpful i approaching stactuale “The term simply has ton wide aebrrency in anthropol y especilly the hind of relat discourse we i fn the preceding vexton, Lest Strauss hun aon reat fins to at himself apart frox these approaches on the nd i ty are ly to ah em trust in tht which smmedistey observable. Folio: ‘Burkicim’s and de Saussures leads he dedains search oanections between cultral solates nda reality Ae sence of culture, anthropology is for him the iy of relations beueonculral nan and of the rules Tos gorcrning thse aon In sich a enters lew expect coplanar either fom hoy ating how fgven isolate came about) or from peychology asking what {Bren folate means to members of euture, or how it motivates ther behavior “The Fundamental sumptions of strcturalism are best pdersiood as 2 radcalyfoxonome approach to culture analysis of the temporal aspects of sroetvalit dis- st hereloreragcetaton h poies o Tine fad tixonon'y. Among the many posable point of depar ture in LevrStrauss writings 1 have chosen the foo Femara, which are part of his famnoun attack on Sartes flea of history in The Sage Mind. Nosingitsrates beter the pecolir mixture of lacey and duplicity characteristic of curt a ats Tae om Tn se with his fundamental convictions regarding binary organization of al knowledge, Lési Stas begs by hag 8 "wymmetey” between the preceeupations of the isorith and those ot the anthropologist "Une antsropa bref alm Sn lags he the help of dancing ‘conscious somewhere’ Proomping Ccsadnes: Cultrel Taanomy As Ems Bi ASE Blech observed, cultural tivism. The aniheypol“ ‘Our Time, Their Time, No Time Omit respects history, Our Time, Their Time, No Time 55 ails im. not jus o place, butt pl any and all Tela ina oil gd pou sbne wha falar with, ev Su objec tar he constantly ses his sacral tyr ane the balgroure ofthe spatial di Sot of ¢ananis But the point da he perce his See ical break with hetrkal reconsracuon based mph dunn of cultore tat. Even whe sretlytkes hard dats onthe ecology ofthe honeybee he porcupine, his timate goa einai to show Dt ruratansistis offre and poreupe tales ean establish so! which hora geogapi reser Anos Seg Often ome cannox lp ut fel that he debberatly onfuson nsoeen stactial and eologial and his- Seca arguments because tat conus works iy his favor. Shakes hin a rs, appear to ake ethnographic scounts Mt location of vartnns in space seriously 40 that, ater, a show te irclevance of sah information ta deeper fersanding. All slong. he Knows that the dseibuton ps on which cule hworians and fll locate vr ‘nuh hope of wanting spa relations ino histo Sequences ie jus that~mapy, Maps are devices 0 ca {Ea Like sales anagrams they ate exon ways Bf ordering cltralwoltes with the help of ctegoris of rast an oposn: ce a ee ee ery fr vied sara npn rerio Mati ve hoe of quanti, or whatever ese effusions feo map the wai of cin ADO he ae ae Tomi 2s the oppositions used in suctaral anal, the di ee being fe ether or Hol oe atibutes the location ‘of an le conscious acts and historia events (ch Bsborrowing,igration, aid de) or whether one a feninsfor hin tens ofthe operation of unconsous ule. orlaws. d : ‘Diachrony serves a simlar strategy Inthe context o LéviStraus auacks of Sartre one fled to believe that discirony could mean the same a hiswry. ‘This © mani tele neg tel Ave alt hese acne 2 conciliatory view, emphoai Imetiy, and even eu simply implies the other cnet he Se el ii met STI eo alee that io eprops of fas a oa whe aneesors of anthropological SPE, i al cons conceived a9 Straus" thogehe reat by a logic of ont oe festly not the case. Ever since de Saussure canonized the might coca abi eg eto La rita hecwech synciony and dachrony i served, not ‘world: ites i a mat se itstincuon af temporal Fdatons (as one might expec88 Our Time, Their Time, No-Tis clases of dates le of dies ech fishing ng a9 autonomous sy. me ih dan sy spe tet al a spatial mati But as ne neem acre the cae feeane ol Novel inna ner ey, seo a tr where each ine represents cate i of spatalizaton (in the form of distancing) 30 ty ba ef ae i Ue nave bccn that when sexing up 3 pte out daly sn il forthe purpoc ofa female dee this pe log histone ‘only By din of Tallon nara cin Saas On cant ep ic matrix of uan culture one does no temporaze ny rate, succulent. my knowledge, does nok pro ts with rte to choene Ieen 2 deception that continuity om the daeontinuous ahd one that cus up otinuous in discontinuous olstes. Worse, by vie Sissel assurance silat that, wth town advent sch in are no longer nceded, sructuralsm Has n elect ne rer and hereby peeve ery ioral temmporazing etiology In sh ethnology fer here LéviStrae mites the building block for is fuental ediices Behind dhe structural ramparts of his ie perues ae digests enormans amounts of raphy widow shoving Ogos of bemg diturbed by tity that moe of might be corrupted tothe core ‘Pervemporatsing tologtea interes for whieh he has ouch contempt. Wh she so impatient wt Sartre sehen eon a of al ne ere et Bore sca an es ee Birr ln’ te lundersiood. The same gies continuity: Where isthe would dave to think con {ainly Lé¥ Stra ea i gues in this contene But fetus fora Iwrter [W. J. Perry] whose work i generally denounced as fan extiavagant abuse of thiv hitorkal method (1000:122 1, He is, hI said sale and does not need a true critique of hourgeous historia because “luckily. sructural_ analysis ‘makes up for the dubiousness of historical reconstructions {960-16 In the end, one comes io suspect that LéviStrauss flail ing stack on story might teal be isigated by is it ties wits another problem. He i woubied by the role of Subjectivity in the production of both culture and knowl fedge about culture. In The Sexage Mind, from which I have been quoting, this shows up repeatedly. Sartre, the existe flit obviously ives iin more than Sartre, the Marxist, Lévi-Strauss’ postion om history and subjectivity, 1 bebive, fan be read in two ways ether as a rejection of Rstory qua Hleologial prop lor a'misconceived sujctivty of a a Fe: jection of Subjectivity for fear that history=and with ik mtinity? Cer. ‘Sorte, against whom the ‘expo eae {he Ge in ch of a Seer chisel has msOur'Time, Their Time, NoTime — 61 60 Our Time, Their Time, No Time Time— might pierce the armor of sientife anthro} primitive mind.” This old evolutionist strategy of ar- Be that as it may, itis important for our larger ase, from ontogeny to phylogeny (and back) is of course that sructualism’s problem with Time is inteareee ne fr te or methologeal™ acy time: linked up with a reluctance wo admit conseous nertoney and therefore subjective actviy a a sence oF kneeteaha the or sndrapsogeal Fethap on neste tes ie on tthe nc Rare a eaten eo al Sar tren atl rie i rt Be ao ss ai Sermmeece arguments Which would Make pri sicpetecen more infane than ut ow: “Etery er ae See dye rotate ees gp a bes ot reas te ea Serer fiat alt Sa Pet aged a ii cin I am ere oar eon tt sc eevee g ohare le = opracnine ete epee a out Hat eiuque of Teriporal dancing by fei engin sate on erring tie agi eo crs dea ganda Sea eonetunedion cami Bic eins haa aa fore, hil rationale for Beldwork which nox only assets ee a the raat i eee ec recite the urgency with with oo Sey haa ing the international conte "ubropology tat recon of sabe ae eet fontempt for chnographic “obs aon es ee Stra favorite tern for feldwork The snout dno pie opal. ec spor arn the cong ema ea Search and allochronedsrur ay more has th ae ‘alan relia prederenors and tempers Having utined ways in which tetera con wuts tthe Tine datancing Conventons tes local hers at wing, ne mutt no rc anc iciaruggie with heather Born ofthe Sheree Se eral demands om personal prt eee Ca ‘ain, Leva es wo contac use ney sais ate faton on eldwork ss hen he denies the hope ofthe cihnogrepher nthe Walinossns fades eiRepr tal eu he nate and ea inane trough a aba dalogue with hse soe (19672) But he never dcr eteograohe se he a anthropologdal knowledge, nether exphicy as we wl ea ea eae ori eae ees eee iia rn eer een [re For tnvicl a wal a catearr ga Pe yar Se i ups eer fo react Seer ce eee eee ae eee oe we nik ele tear tg ar SEAS darn ead age Spread tendecy epee in Meee Piles etneen the mind a idees aes a al and waiversal prin ples Living in the Time of the primitives, the elnogra- Te te gph only he oatines he te hc lb a en he may Have shared wth ter ioe my hich he ins athropogy reaper proceads for howesersrupulous Aryded, suc i the way the ‘hen he goes int the el,62 Our Time, Their Time, No Time ‘and objective he may want o be, tis never hime, Boris the other person, wha he encocrn the cad of his investigation By superset himselt on the ethershe ean at moa aa Sec aw oftamcmndence at Lvs expec ts chan tas ws beta sccm tare eens ant kee Stele wot san anaes Frere aucturalan mages wo tra dena of cores, imo pve tooo i atl evan ae a i tm So Ls Sen’ osc Fe Bieta aa ing pralch ctecen Wser ci eae ae eae se a e of the “ar inhip. Drains ype a primis he “which is responsible ise, Western thone parallels in the fist pice). To cr sav 's in the end acquited of the crime of slosh Time distancing which antogenetic-phylosenete i . ice ih at, te emg» pica fhe rn Ca i len ome eae Be tower ells ane curd bi el Bespmcly dane ipo among scale erty yale Gra eng tf ain en ol pas ee bs aa! cm an siberian te en me Si eae ea ip ad hn a at iene ara at ice, rite us a Be heme non NoTime 6% ‘Our Time, Their Time, necro tee sh nae a a ne a Mhow he thinks and acts! a ae nd Pon hi, ns Tac ae cet primi gen in our societies have not yet Male + demonstration of taxonomic four Sar qucsiom that mst be asked. Are we 0 us with om dhat in our own society a a ree oeok ha rea asics primary, Be chy diguacd aude of power and price ee Foam ore Sr ae ate of te prone ts eer See ificatory act, but a powerful a eaformng colonial race i ever) 2S nd me ctrinaion (labor avs and he ranting eal rights? Is apartheid, one might ton Ba ei snot ace I tem he tur uy i bas been pprenton than that of the clike aa aha ae dare nen of me aang han plcng the Now Then of te eset oc pases from The Elmer IS of Koi as ec ara rig Saikano sant megane, a eo im the course oe Nee tt to ce tel ea a Fein omy one of the ore despicable an ape te on con(Our'Time, Their Time, No Time 65 Bee in ina ar tt ere eeaern Geraci big nee 2 ete apie ca ce (ni ee a at La — oo ship. Commenting on Boas’ valuation of fieklwoek he states: how the same scholar who shows suck aa eee Kove of sme tna ir ata Se cl Set ae re pcr tin a ect pte when we dc Ge iri mt ea “again, in affirming feldwork, Lévi-Strauss gets Geka ergata en, ec io gm he oe te vaseesenerteey ne stuclies that in fiekdworker’s personal, concrete et Sa ete The researchers task isto make the otherness of the Studied vale to ha own exper, He {ater he sume up the sougle of anthropology with hie esti ble ok own tere tory in this paradoxical formule th Bion of 2 more feral coe (021) ost por Thelin of eat a ini eee ees Sheen som toned ha en nr sa pe om te pce he er Cte hang farce pe i 2) The knox experi, peal nd the opposite; itis when he thinks that he is not te, is not subjective but objective, mre ‘doing historical research that he operates like « ‘ feeTigern cisco es lack of documents. (1967:16 f) m the basis of concepts which are valid me ae re Za ole that paradox one mus fs realize thatthe “good BeBe coset, These antroplop oes staat spo ea ge ne ee ier ‘one and the same problem: otherness (sce, 1967:17). It isa ial Categories and helps to introduce notions of ‘Sonar mater the forthe hast hot 2 ind tl rn hh iat notes in Teper eee. eral itorig i ital esp foncernad wi cater iin See te epoca el tee anal eer TERS ute bee oe mpi bj the ata pce peso eee at “Ly ue hi ew emit B= soe The anihrpsipar rien ea gn ot tv oni dime clo ea tte inner dcimenat nik are ela eer nad of toniors shed Te scr an come fiGtics he studies. But there is more to fieldwork then ios eee eaiesenn ance of ooocecy experience iho being a subsite for lacking documents. Neri agrees Seat of.a.prabiem because personal experiences nth {9 think of eldwork as pitemeal inducuse, fae ee ers atte sare seine fin eee al existence cannot be apprehended simply from the oon, fof the “general” and "unconscious Like ray‘Our Time, Theis Time, No Time Becher gear on Say ena Cie paa heen ie tobi eh pes apprehension of the general and “nee ee gy is once and forever removed fromthaowt gee i Feat aa cy (a Semanal aura nh Soa ld agra con sce ie th ale ei a ek te se Suh Soe emg moment Fyn EIT Reich ee can eprating de ete el en he fact of personal conve a iM t0 reconsider his aay ‘pitemologial stance. tle mics ne wh tact oh Rae Our Time, Their Time, NoTime 67 bservation that nosons such as conversion and Saco rig myal_ though ely mace not quite Sasi understood.” Tn pointing Be teseminces | have. no ierew in joing the ies wv cai to recognize in tha siemumen Gehich is LesiStraus ene almost every major Tistory (incading gross, the iar coterie pursuits. But there are serious for dvelig on his way of turing apparent mph ie pen ofthe ans-ubjectve, Hand institutional: The researcher's personal en ive ne told the objective working of sence be fein sort of pure cone through ich Ay psses into ehnology sod aropaogy, Closer May ot the many statements Lévi-Strauss makes The nature of ficklwork reveals that he one notion for hi characteriaes ths atity tore than anyother tm He does nor ser to have tuck use for the pricpna, customary attache tothe term, Even oct he conser communicative iteration, aiden riyamich des theories of feldwork, Fr Lev isthe ethnogeapher frst and foremost a Newer (and mp voyeur) Observation coneened as the cence of implies on the side of the ethnographer, a cone tance It ivokes the “netural watching an Tako eal fora native society that woul, ide at east hold il The able sent. Both ages ate my inked up with a visual mot metaphor of ow in this sturturain rejoin the sexhetinng aa Of the ultra relat In bos ovemems the He Or smatanety fa beeen the elements o ptr ts contemplated, or between the visual objet and the ‘ofits contemplation) may Tead to ter dargard fr the dhe proactive nate of eldzork a inevitable i oti hrs stations and real polial contac "Another srteyy of cape from Time and history amon to both movements fis been w declare the uno ous the true object of andhropologieal researc. But no ‘here are these convergences dearer and more diveely si68 Our Time, Theit Time, No Time nificant for the problem of Time-distancing and the deni ‘of coevalness than in the valuation of cultural difference distance, In the Mead-Metreaux volume this remained thy implicit and vague; i is spelled out clearly by LeveSerance Social ant “apprehend? its objects, Le, semiolo ical facts as defined by de Saussure, “exer. in thew mots emote manifestations or from the ange of then mot pent {2a expresion” (1975.10, The point sw could Be sieges fom ether contexts, thatthe wo are inerchangesble Da tance isthe prerequisite fr generality asthe sty of pr itive society's the road toward uncovering the’ uniter structures ofthe human mind 1k instar a socalled primitive scien ae far fsa from or owe that we can pnp thes {hose "tact of general fancsoning® ot whic Mews ‘poke, and whith sand a chance a beng Sean nea acing more realty Tic ob ‘eration which has the petdoge of bcing dans ‘0 doubt imple some diterctces afi ween these iis and our oe, Ao a pl demand hat clei bis be a ney ok ko that the passage of time have» festa ‘yh there! ctberwbe the ah wld ie ued to ex lng belore aaron aay toga, Gots Statements like this eave litle room for speculation Dison sac and ine sn Ea en ie toad the prerequisites nx only for cerain way of dng anaropology but for ts sey eincnce Wal ayo oe oral is fnaly and willy removed to the level aces Bsa presuppoitons: tno longer com he's problem ‘hercse ot anthropology ay a "eience the pein eB tri one Time ad re problem of coevalnes rom anthropologial prac elscourse should of course he evaluated hisoricals i a, Jochronic escape i a response tots own sol al yi content Far from expresing the coming rrest ofa tea, bled elscptine ona sli scenic bass and an unas Jogi, stucualam indicates (by virtue of opposiion) det something might be bascally nrong miih Weners song Our Time, Their Time, No Time — 69) hited Sates inde wth de pero of ecole ee a ee ee es se