Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
21:19-42
Copyright © by AnnUflI Reviews 1nc. All rights reserved
ANNUAL
REVIEWS Further
Quick links to online content
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
Michel-Rolph Trouillot
KEYWORDS: culture theory, complex societies, history, native voice, units of analysis
The encounter between anthropological theory and any region of the globe
says as much about anthropology as it does about that region. Caribbean
anthropology is a case in point. This region where boundaries are notoriously
fuzzy has long been the open frontier of cultural anthropology: neither center
nor periphery, but a sort of no man's land where pioneers get lost, where some
stop overnight on their way to greater opportunities, and where yet others
manage to create their own "new" world amidst First-World indifference.
Accordingly, the object of this essay is dual: I write here about the Caribbean
as viewed by anthropologists, but also about anthropology as viewed from the
Caribbean. The review dwells on the coincidence between some zones of
weakness in anthropological theory and areas of concern for Caribbeanists. I
claim neither exhaustiveness nor statistical representativeness in dealing with
the literature, and my boundaries are both arbitrary and fuzzy. I emphasize a
present that encompasses most of the last 20 years, but my framework-not to
mention the absence of any Caribbean focus in previous issues of this series
justifies forays into more distant pasts. I concentrate on works available in
English, which happens to be the predominant language of Caribbean ethnol
ogy; but this emphasis here is no less arbitrary. More importantly, since I am
addressing outsiders and insiders alike, I flatten some rough edges and over-
19
0084-6570/92/1015-0019$02.00
20 TROUILLOT
AN UNDISCIPLINED REGION
metropolis's foreign trade. These were hardly places to look for primitives.
Their very existence questioned the West/non-West dichotomy and the cate
gory of the native, upon both of which anthropology was premised.
The entire corpus of Caribbean cultural anthropology from the early dec
ades of this century up to the present can be read against the background of
this basic incongruity between the traditional object of the discipline and the
inescapable history of the region. In that light, many riddles of the encounter
fall ihto place, including North American anthropology's relative avoidance of
the Caribbean ( l12). Up to the fourth decade of this century, native scholars
from Haiti, Cuba, or Puerto Rico were more willing than foreigners to apply
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
the tools of anthropological analysis to the study of their own folk. Later on, as
Caribbean anthropology developed its specific interests, some of the weakest
zones of anthropological theory came to overlap with concerns that Caribbean
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
ists could not fully escape. Even the increased interest in Afro-American
anthropology in the early 1970s (83, 198) failed to accord full legitimacy to the
Caribbean within the guild. Today, as anthropology continues to nurture a
legacy of tropes and concepts honed through the observation of societies once
deemed "simple" (if not "primitive"), outsiders continue to confront the fact
that Caribbean societies have long been awkwardly, yet definitely, "complex"
(if not "modem").
Three related features of this complexity sustain the lines of tension between
anthropological discourse and Caribbean ethnology. First, Caribbean societies
are inescapably heterogeneous. If savages elsewhere once looked the same to
most anthropologists, the Caribbean has long been an area where some people
live next to others who are remarkably distinct. The region-and indeed par
ticular territories within it-has long been multiracial, multilingual, stratified
and, some would say, multicultural (49, 50, 122, 150, 158, 161, 193). Second,
this heterogeneity is known to be, at least in part, the result of history. Carib
bean societies are inescapably historical, in the sense that some of their distant
past is not only known, but known to be different from their present, and yet
relevant to both the observers' and the natives' understanding of that present
(6, 28, 102, 139). There is no general agreement on the extent of this rele
vance, but some of the earliest attacks on "the fallacy of the ethnographic
present" (157:76--77) were launched from the Caribbean.
To be sure, the Caribbean is not the only area where heterogeneity and
historicity have haunted the practitioners of a discipline that once made socio
historical depth the exclusive attribute of Western societies. Elsewhere, how
ever, anthropologists often blocked the full investigation of that complexity by
posting "gatekeeping concepts": hierarchy in India, honor-and-shame in the
Mediterranean, etc ( l 0), a maneuver that, in my view, reflected as well the
West's ranking of certain Others. Anthropological gatekeeping notwithstand
ing, "Sinology" was-and is-more likely to be taken as a separate field, and
22 TROUILLOT
"native" traits mythified by theory in ways that bound the object of study.
They act as theoretical simplifiers to restore the ethnographic present and
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
enclaves and open frontiers where the very "unit of empirical existence"
(171:2), let alone that of analysis, is a matter of open controversy.
HETEROGENEITY
one cultural section is the essential precondition for the maintenance of the
total society in its current form," writes Smith (160: 183), quoting himself 24
years later. For Smith, Caribbean societies are "plural": They exhibit antago
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
nistic strata with different cultures. They stand as essentially political shells,
filled with juxtaposed-and incompatible-value-systems, different sets of
institutions being held together solely by the vertical power of the state (158,
161).
The debate over Smith's use of the "plural society" concept has been
long-much too long, some would say (14, 18, 49, 50, 145, 146, 159, 160,
162). Caribbeanists of various persuasions fail to see the insurmountable wall
that Smith erects between his corporate groups. Moreover, the distinction
between plural and nonplural societies never seemed convincing to the rest of
the guild, and few scholars (51, 130) embraced Smith's framework. Yet, his
inflexibility notwithstanding, Smith does raise eloquently the issue of the
relation between heterogeneity and power, an issue that remains to be taken
more seriously by anthropologists, in the Caribbean and elsewhere. For Smith
is right in suggesting that in the Caribbean case, at least, one cannot presume
"culture," if by this we mean a principle of homogeneity, detennined by fiat,
that would somehow find its parallel in an equally bounded entity referred to
as "society."
the discursive field dominated by the logic of academe? Is its value referential,
indexical, phatic, or poetic? The problem is compounded in the Caribbean by
colonial domination whose duration and intellectual reach defy most under
standings of nativeness. At least some resident intellectuals have long been
interlocutors in European debates about the region (64, 90, 142, 146). No
discursive field is fully "ours," or "theirs." Diane Austin's suggestion that
Caribbean anthropology is marked by an analytical antinomy between, on the
one hand, conflict-resistance and, on the other, integration-domination is tell
ing (13), for similar dualities obtain in Caribbean intellectual discourse (90).
But such dualities stand correct only if we do not try to push every single
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
that question turns on one's idea of what Caribbean societies are about and,
equally important, on one's theory of culture and society. This is also what I
mean by saying that the inescapable fact of Caribbean heterogeneity poses
fundamental questions for anthropological theory that most anthropologists
have chosen to ignore. Raymond T. Smith, one of M.G. Smith's earliest
intellectual opponents, said as much long ago, though in more muted terms
and in a different context.
In a 1963 review of family and kinship studies in the Caribbean, then the
dominant field of Caribbean ethnology, R. T. Smith states: ''The major prob
lem is what it has always been; to relate patterns of familial and mating
behaviour to other factors in the contemporary social systems and to the
cultural traditions of the people concerned. Here progress is less impressive
because we are still unclear about the nature of these societies" (165:472).
Smith's concern should not be read only as the reflection of a functional
ist's search for structuring principles. The assumption that fieldwork will
somehow reveal the nature of the entity under study, however persuasive it
may look in cases of apparent homogeneity, breaks down completely on the
frontier. Smith's statement shows how the inescapable manifestations of com
plexity tum the anthropologist's eye toward a larger horizon. It suggests why
the glut of kinship studies did not lead in tum to enduring gatekeeping con
cepts in Caribbean anthropology: the heterogeneity of the ensemble precluded
the domestic unit, the matrifocal family, or the allocation of gender roles to
generate theoretical simplifiers, in spite of a flow of pUblications recycling a
restricted number of themes.
I cannot do justice to this abundant corpus (more than 200 titles between
1970 and 1990), which has sparked, in tum, a number of anthologies, bibliog
raphies, and reassessments (e.g. 92, 136, 143, 147, 177). The streams are
multiple, though they tend to crisscross around the role-or the plight-of
women as mothers, as child-bearers and rearers, and as mates. In their own
26 TROUILLOT
way, Caribbean kinship studies have always been gender studies, and they
have always insisted that gender is a two-way street. This had to do, ironically,
with an early concern for policy on the part of officials who saw Afro-Carib
bean families as "deviant" simply because they did not fit the nuclear folk
model of Western consciousness (147, 148, 168, 170). Just as in the United
States, these bureaucrats' views were echoed by social scientists who wanted
to explain---or explain away-such "abnormalities" as "missing fathers."
Two early studies continue to influence the tone of the research: Edith
Clarke's My Mother Who Fathered Me and R.T. Smith's The Negro Family In
British Guiana (42, 163). Smith's legacy may well be, to his despair, the often
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
misused notion of matrifocality. Smith insists that he coined the word not to
mean female-headed or even consanguineal families, as others would believe,
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
but to underline the role of women as mothers (166, 167). Clarke's legacy goes
more in the direction of a social pathology. More recently, Peter Wilson's
construct of "reputation and respectability," which neatly ties gender roles to
the wider society, came close to becoming the master trope of Caribbean
anthropology, precisely because it did not treat the domestic as a closed
domain. Criticizing the fact that "social organization" was a code word for
limited studies of the purely "domestic," Wilson postulates a pan-Caribbean
opposition between an internal value system ("reputation"), emphasizing
equality, virility, and lower-class norms, and an external one emphasizing
ranking, womanhood, and elitist respectability (201, 202). The scheme is more
ingenious than most of the dualities that plague Caribbean studies; hence its
continuous impact on the literature (e.g. 1, 148). But it is too neat for comfort;
hence the reluctance of most Caribbeanists to use it as an overall simplifier.
Wilson's polarity requires strong qualifications when the observer tackles the
historical and social particulars of specific territories and especially the rela
tions among gender, the dual value system, and colonialism (132).
New paradigms have yet to emerge in spite of an abundance of refreshing
positions on gender and the family. I can note only a few: the call to incorpo
rate an emic approach to kinship into ethnographies of "social organization"
(95, 136, 141); the call for yet more careful distinctions between household
and family (147), or for a reconceptualization of the consanguineal household
(66); the call for a more systematic study of the wide realm of female responsi
bility (56) or for the delineation of gender-specific estates, spheres, or domains
against the background of economic roles (26). The last two strategies do not
always point to a simplistic division that would consign women to the home
and leave the world to men. Neither among the relatively isolated Maroons of
Suriname nor in Barbados, arguably one of the most Westernized islands, do
the cultural ideals and the practice of gender roles duplicate fully dominant
Western patterns (48, 141, 179). Further, the case for female-centered do
mains, material or symbolic, is usually made on more sophisticated grounds
than a base/superstructure model where gender would duplicate the division of
labor (16, 178, 202). Furthermore, the division of labor itself does not always
THE CARillBEAN 27
Smith's views of that totality and of the ways to deal with it reflect changes
in emphasis and a capacity to incorporate multiple influences. One detects a
distinct shift from structure and stratification ( 163, 164) to culture, and at
times, a less clear-cut move from culture to culture-history. The second mode
pervades Smith's recent essay on race, class, and gender in the Americas, one
of his most powerful to date (172). In the first and more familiar mode, Smith
distinguishes culture as an analytically distinct system of symbols and mean
ings, but he replaces David Schneider's "conglomerate" cultural level with a
plane of "ideas in action," the "norms which mediate" (rather than govern)
behavior. Smith then tends to locate on an intermediary level the two messy
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
The intermediate level has served as the emergency exit of social science since
at least Talcott Parsons. If Smith, to his credit, tries not to treat it as residual, it
took younger scholars to make the very heterogeneity that this level embodies
the stuff of anthropological inquiry. Lee Drummond draws on fieldwork in
Guyana to question the homogeneity of culture and on Creole linguistics to
propose a "creole metaphor" that posits a set of intersystems with no uniform
rules, no invariant properties, and no invariant relationships between catego
ries (55). The proposal is refreshing in light of the dominance of Western
folk-models of cultural homogeneity in anthropological theory but, as Brack
ette Williams notes, Drummond's continuum is unidimensional and overlooks
hierarchy. For Williams, who also did fieldwork in Guyana, the construction
of mixed hierarchies is a chief concern, and multidimensional complexity a
theoretical litmus test. Multidimensionality is what makes the hitherto inter
mediate level-where putative purities evaporate, where neither thought nor
action constitutes an unruffled web, let alone an harmonious system-both
pivotal and amenable to study. Williams's research strategy on ethnicity
(partly colored through Gramscian lenses) emphasizes the process of homog
enization of national cultures ( 199, 200).
Williams seems unaware of Andres Serbin's work on ethnicity and politics
in Guyana, published in Venezuela in 1981. This unawareness would confirm
that various anthropologists now tackling the relationship between heterogene
ity and power in the Caribbean consider Gramsci a stimulating interlocutor,
since Serbin's treatment of Guyana is explicitly Gramscian. Yet if both Serbin
and Williams agree on the limits of hegemony (in the Gramscian sense) in
Guyana, Serbin insists on the state-wide mechanisms that foster both dominant
and counter "ethnic ideologies," while Williams documents the cultural strug
gle in a back-and-forth movement from the "community" to the national scene.
Race, class, and power-and Gramsci-are also present in the work of
Austin-Broos. Austin's theoretical reformulations include a distinction be
tween culture (values and their embodiments) and ideology (the interpretation
of that culture in a contested field); a rejection of the old oppositions between
THE CARIBBEAN 29
the state is part of the stakes and yet, at times, is an actor competing for the
very stakes that it helps to define (192). The requisite gap between state and
nation creates a field where both homogeneity and heterogeneity are simulta
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
HISTORICITY
The Puerto Rico project did not introduce historicity in debates about Carib
bean cultures, even though two of its participants, Sidney W. Mintz and Eric
Wolf, have become well-known proponents of a historically oriented anthro
pology (112, 120, 203). Dutch scholar Rudy Van Lier, a pioneer of 20th-cen
tury Caribbean studies, also leaned toward history in his dealings with Carib
bean heterogeneity, as would his compatriot H. Hoetink, later in the century
(79, 80, 194). In the 1920s and 1930s, many Caribbean-born writers, such as
Price-Mars in Haiti and Pedreira in Puerto Rico, saw the study of culture as
inevitably tied to history (135, 142). In 1940, anteceding some of Mintz's
work, Cuban writer Fernando Ortiz (133) saw in the history of export crops the
framework within which to look at sociocultural patterns in Cuba.
30 TROUILLOT
In the United States, by the mid-1930s, Melville Jean Herskovits had also
concluded that Caribbean heterogeneity made the use of historical data "al
most mandatory" (78:329). Herskovits saw the Afro-Americas and especially
Caribbean territories as ideal laboratories for anthropologists suspicious of the
theoretical assumptions underpinning analyses of "simple" societies. Within
the framework of acculturation studies, anthropologists could map out the
differential evolution of European and African traits in the Americas and,
ultimately, discover the nature of culture, understood as a continuous process
of retention and renewal.
This research program paralleled a political agenda marked by the US
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
work, often in collaboration with Sally Price, greatly advances our knowledge
of the Afro-Caribbean past (137-140).
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
against a system imposed from the outside and dominated by the capitalist
plantation (108, 115, 116, 121).
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
social life outside the family. But, as Robert Manners long insisted, even
community studies in the Caribbean must take cognizance of the past and use
archival materials (97).
faced the issue of the boundaries of observation and analysis (42, 176), but this
concern increased lately with the greater awareness of history. I disagree with
Rubenstein's statement that Caribbean ethnography has been marked by too
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
much theory running after too little descriptive data (148:3-4). Caribbean
ethnographers are no worse than others. Rather, the complexity of the frontier
makes the application of many models inherited from the guild simplistic-a
realization often deterred in other regions of the world by gatekeeping and the
adoption of unproblematized units. To Radcliffe-Brown's search for a "con
venient locality of suitable size," Baber replies (18:95) that "social boundaries
can never be a matter of convenience" and that their setting is crucial in
analyses of multicultural situations. Elsewhere, Baber warns us that Turner's
notion of social drama may be misleading without proper attention to the
context within which this drama is played out (17).
But in the Caribbean, context is not uniform and the individual actor, this
basic unit of methodological individualism, not an obvious entity of which the
boundaries are known--even though individualism may be quite evident (51,
121,202,205). Ever since Comitas's influential article (44), Caribbean anthro
pology has tried to dea1 with "occupational multiplicity," the simultaneous or
sequentia1 engagement in a number of economic activities. Of course, there are
obvious reasons why the urban and rural poor, women heads of households,
migrants, and other people eking out a living under social and economic strain
would want to be skeptica1 and bank on multiple adaptive strategies (21, 39,
41). Yet I suspect that what strikes most ethnographers is something more than
risk management. First, the systematicity with which people maintain multi
plicity is prevalent enough for observers to phrase it not in terms of movement
between roles or types but in terms of types or roles that include movement
(44, 60). Second, Caribbean peoples seem to have fewer problems than most in
recognizing the fuzziness and overlap of categories, and multiplicity is not
confined to the economic realm or to the poor. What appears to some as
divided political, economic, or social loyalties has a long history on the fron
tier (33,135,139,142). Middle-class individuals engage in behavior similar to
the economic strategies of the poor-but further research is required because
few anthropologists have enhanced our knowledge of the Caribbean middle
classes (5, 96). Still, what seems to be at stake here is a way to live what the
34 TROUILLOT
is also a healthy sign that Caribbean ethnographers often realize that the story
they were after does not end with their village. How does one package ethnog
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
123).
The concern for a regional multilevel methodology is explicit in the
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
CONCLUSION
comparative across linguistic boundaries (101, 121, 123, 139). Yet as language
gives fieldworkers the impression of being on familiar territory, chances in
crease for them to be off guard and also to ignore works done in other
languages.
Yet Dutch scholars continue to produce a small but steady stream of works
on the Caribbean, only a few of which are available in English (e.g. 79, 80,
82). In the 1970s, PhD theses on the Caribbean outnumbered those dealing
with every other non-Western area in departments of anthropology and sociol
ogy in the Netherlands (19). Works in Dutch and in other languages are
covered in the yearly update on Caribbean Studies of the Boletin de Estudios
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
(4, 8, 9, 22-25,
should be also of interest to English-speaking anthropologists
28, 62, 75, 85, 86, 93). To be sure, while the Dutch tend to match North
Americans in empiricism, works in Spanish and French are rarely based on the
kind of ethnographic fieldwork required by most US universities. On the other
hand, the latter works often partake of an ancient and fundamental debate
about the the nature of Caribbean societies and their relation to the West. A
number of writers (mostly linguists and literary critics writing in French, many
of whom are Caribbean-born) are asking questions about Creolite, or what it
means for Caribbean people to be part of societies and cultures born out of
contact (e.g. 28, 64, 85). The multidisciplinary periodical Etudes Creoles
extends beyond the technical issues of Creole linguistics and ties the Carib
bean to societies and cultures of Africa and the Indian Ocean. In short, the
concerns that I have highlighted here as scattered posts on the frontier are not
the exclusive domain of Caribbean anthropologists nor are they exclusively
expressed in English. A number of academics and intellectuals, writing in at
least four languages, have dealt in different ways with what I here call hetero
geneity, historicity, and articulation. That some think this endeavor possible
without anthropology reveals their intellectual preference and prejudices. Yet
it also suggests some of the limits to anthropological theory, at least as seen
from the frontier .
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank Flor Ruz, Sara M. Springer, and especially Paul Kim for their research
assistance. I am grateful to Suzan Lowes, Sidney W. Mintz, and Drexel G.
Woodson for their comments on an early version of the manuscript. I alone
remain fully responsible for the substance of the argument and the final text.
Literature Cited
the anthropology of the Arab world. Annu. Montreal: Les Presses de I'Universite de
Rev. Anthropol. 18:267-306 Montreal
4. Affergan, F. 1 983. Anthropologie a la 26. Berleant-Schiller, R. 1977. Production and
Martinique. Paris: Anthropos division of labor in a West Indian peasant
5. Alexander, J. 1977. The culture of race in commune. Am. Ethnol. 4(2):253-72
middle-class Kingston, Jamaica. Am. Eth 27. BerJeant-Schiller, R. 1 98 1 . Plantation soci
nol. 4(3):413-36 ety and the Caribbean present ( I ): history,
6. Alexander, J. 1984. Love, race, slavery and anthropology. Plantation Soc. 1 (3):387-
sexuality in Jamaican images of the family. 409
In Kinship, Ideology and Practice in Latin 28. Bernabe, J., Chamoiseau, P., Confiant, R.
America, ed. R. T. Smith, pp. 147-80. 1989. Eloge de la creolite. Paris: GaUimard
Chapel Hill: Univ. North Carolina Press 29. Besson, J. 1 979. Symbolic aspects of land
7. Allman, J. 1985. Conjugal unions in rural in the Caribbean: the tenure and transmis
and urban Haiti. Soc. Econ. Stud. 34( 1 ):27- sion of land rights among Caribbean peas
57 antries. In Peasants, Plantations and Rural
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
societe. Paris: Karthala 30. Besson, J. 1982. Family land and Carib
10. Appadurai, A. 1986. Theory in anthropol bean society: toward an ethnography of
ogy: center and periphery. Compo Stud. Caribbean peasantries. In Perspectives on
Soc. Hist. 28:356-61 Caribbean Identity, ed. E. M. Thomas
I I . Austin, D. J. 1979. History and symbols in Hope, pp. 57-83. Liverpool: Cent. Latin
ideology: a Jamaican example. Man Am. Stud., Univ. Liverpool
14:447-514 31. Besson, J. 1984. Land tenure in the free
12. Austin, D. J. 1 98 1 . Born again ... and again villages of Trelawny, Jamaica: a case study
and again: communities and social change in the Caribbean peasant response to eman
among Jamaican Pentecostalists. J. Anthro cipation. Slavery Abolition 5 ( 1 ):3-23
pol. Res. 37:226-46 32. Besson, J., Monsen, J., eds. 1987. Land and
13. Austin, D. J. 1983. Culture and ideology in Development in the Caribbean. London:
the English-speaking Caribbean: a view Macmillan
from Jamaica. Am. Ethnol. 1 0(2):223-40 33. B ilby, K. M. 1989. Divided loyalties: local
14. Austin, D. J. 1984. Reply to M. G. Smith. politics and the play of states among the
Am. Ethnol. 1 1( 1 ): 1 85 Aluku. New West Indian Guide 63(3/4):
1 5. Austin, D. J. 1984. Urban Life in Kingston, 143-74
Jamaica: The Culture and Class Ideology 34. Bolland, O. N. 1986. Labour control and
of Two Neighborhoods. New York: Gordon resistance in Belize in the century after
and Breach 1 838. Slavery & Abolition 7(2) : 175-87
16. Austin-Broos, D. J. 1987. Pentecostals and 35. Bolles, A. L. 1983. Kitchens hit by priori
Rastafarians: cultural, political, and gender ties: working class women confront the
relations of two religious movements. Soc. IMP. In Women, Men, and the Interna
£Can. Stud. 36(4): 1-39 tional Division of Labor, ed. 1. Nash, M. P.
1 7 . Baber, W. L. 1985. Political economy and Fernandez-Kelly, pp. 138-60. Albany:
social change: the Bissette Affair and local State Univ. NY Press
level politics in Mome-Vert. Am. Ethnol. 36. Bolles, A. L. 1986. Economic crisis and
12(3):489-504 female-headed households in Jamaica. In
1 8 . Baber, W. L. 1 987. The pluralism contro Women and Change in Latin America, ed.
versy: wider theoretical implications. Car J. Nash, H. Safa, pp. 65-83. South Hadley:
ibbean Q. 33(1/2):81-94 Bergin and Garvey
19. Banck, G. A. 1 988. Anthropological re 37. Brana-Shute, G. 1989. On the Corner:
search on the Caribbean and Latin America. Male Social Life in a Paramaibo Creole
Bol. Estud. Latinoam. Caribe 44:29-38 Neighborhood. Prospect Heights, IL:
20. Barrow, C. 1986. Male images of women Waveland
in Barbados. Soc. £Can. Stud. 35(3):5 1-64 38. Brierley, J. S., Rubenstein, H., eds. 1988.
2 1 . Barrow, C. 1986. Finding the support: a Small Farming and Peasant Resources in
study of strategies for survival. Soc. Econ. the Caribbean. Winnipeg: Dept. Geogr.,
Stud. 35(2): 1 3 1-76 Univ. Manitoba
22. Bastien, R. 1985 [1951]. Le Paysan haUien 39. Carnegie, C. V. 1 982. Strategic flexibility
et sajamille. Paris: ACCT-Karthala in the West Indies: a social psychology of
23. Bebel-Gisler, D. 1 985. Leonora: L'His Caribbean migration. Caribbean Rev.
lOire enfouie de la Guadeloupe. Paris: Edi 2(1 ) : 1 0- 1 3, 54
tions Seghers 40. Carnegie, C. V., ed. 1987. Afro-Caribbean
24. Bebel-Gisler, D. 1989. Le Deft Culturel villages in historical perspective. African
Guadeloupeen. Paris: Editions Caribheen Caribbean Inst. Jamaica Res. Rev. 2. Spec.
nes Issue
25. Benoist, J. 1972. L'Archipel inachevtf: Cul 41. Chibnik, M . 1980. Working out or working
ture et societe aux Antilles francaises. in: the choice between wage labor and cash
38 TROUILLOT
cropping in rural Belize. Am. Ethnol. neither peasant nor proletarian. Soc. Econ.
7 ( 1 ):86-1 05 Stud. 16(3):295-300
42. Clarke, E. 1957. My Mother Who Fathered 61 . Geertz, C. 1 976. From the native' s point
"
Plantations and Rural Communities in the the meaning of tradition. New West Indian
Caribbean. GuilfordlLeiden: Univ. Surrey Guide 57(3/4): 1 43-72
and Roy. Inst. Linguist. Anthropol. 66. Gonzalez, N. L. 1984. Rethinking the con
47. Dance, D. C. 1985. Folklorefrom Contem sanguineal household and matrifocality.
porary Jamaica. Knoxville: Univ. Tennes Ethnology 23: 1 - 1 2
see Press 67. Gonzalez, N . L. 1 988. Sojourners of the
48. Dann, G. 1987. The Barbadian Male: Sex Caribbean: Ethnogenesis and Ethnohis
ual A ttitudes and Practice. Kingston: tory of the Garifuna. Urbana: Univ. Illinois
Macmillan Caribbean Press
49. Deosaran, R. 1 987. The social psychology 68. Griffith, D. C. 1985. Women, remittances,
of cultural pluralism: updating the old. Car and reproduction. Am. Ethnol. 1 2(4):676--
ibbean Q. 33( 1/2) : 1 - 1 9 90
SO. Deosaran, R . 1987. Some issues in mul 69. Gullick, C. J. M. R. 1 985. Myths of a Mi
ticulturalism: the case of Trinidad & To nority: The Changing Traditions ofthe Vin
bago in the Post-Colonial Era. Caribbean centian Caribs. Assen: Van Gorcum, Stud.
Q. 33( 1 12):61-80 Dev. Countries
S I . Despres, L., ed. 1975. Ethnicity and Re 70. Handler, J. S. 1982. Slave revolts and con
source Competition. The Hague: Mou spiracies in Seventeenth-Century Bar
ton bados. New West Indian Guide 56(1/2):
S2. Dirks, R. 1987. The Black Saturnalia: Con 5-42
flict and Its Ritual Expression on British 7 1 . Handler, J. S. 1984. Freedmen and slaves in
West Indian Slave Plantations. Gainesville: the Barbados militia. J. Caribbean Hist.
Univ. of Florida Presses 1 9( 1 ) : 1-25
53. Dobbin, 1. D. 1986. The Jombee Dance of 72. Harrison, F. V. 1987. Gangs, grassroots
Montserrat: A Study ofRitual Trance in the politics, and the crisis of development capi
West lndie.�. Columbus: Ohio State Univ. talism in Jamaica. In Perspectives in U. S.
Press Marxist Anthropology, ed. D. Hakken,
54. Dominguez, V. 1 986. Intended and unin H. Lessinger, pp. 1 86-2 10. Boulder:
tended messages: the scholarly defense of Westview
one's "people". New West Indian Guide 73. Harrison, F. V. 1 988. Women in Jamaica's
60(3/4):208-22 urban informal economy: insights from a
55. Drummond, L. 1 980. The cultural contin Kingston slum. New West Indian Guide
uum: a theory of intersystems. Man. 62(3/4): 1 03-28
1 5:352-74 74. Harrison, F. V. 1 99 1 . Ethnography as poli
56. Durant-GonzaJes, V. 1982. The realm of tics. In Decolollizing Anthropology, ed . F.
female familial responsibility. In Women V. Harrisson, pp. 88-109. Washington, DC:
and Family. Cave Hill: ISER AAA
57. Farmer, P. 1 988. Bad blood, spoiled milk: 75. Heliy, D, 1979, Ideologie et Ethnicite: Les
bodily fluids as moral barometers in rural Chinois Macao de Cuba. Montreal: Les
Haiti. Am. Ethnol. 1 5 ( 1 ):62-83 Presses de l' Universite de Montreal
58. Farmer, P. 1988. Blood, sweat and base 76. Henry, F. 1 983. Religion and ideology in
balls: Haiti in the West Atlantic system. Trinidad: the resurgence of the Shango re
Dialect. Anlhropol. 1 3 :83-99 ligion. Caribbean Q. 29(3/4):63-69
59. Fisher, L. E. 1 985. Colonial Madness: 77. Herskovits, M. J. 1 937. The significance of
Mental Health in the Barbadian Social the study of acculturation for anthropology_
Order. New Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Am. Anthropol. 39:635-43
Press 78. Herskovits, M. J. 1971 [ 1 937]. Life in a
60. Frucht, R. 1967. A Caribbean social type: Haitian Valley. Garden City: Anchor Books
THE CARmBEAN 39
83. Horowitz, M., ed. 1 97 1 . Peoples and Cul bean Q. 28( 1 /2): 1 2- 1 9
tures of the Caribbean: An Anthropologi 1 03. Mintz, S . W. 1953. The folk-urban contin
cal Reader. Garden City: The Natural uum and the rural proletarian community.
History Press Am. J. Sociol. 59: 1 36-43
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.
84. Horowitz, M. 1983. Morne Paysan. New 104. Mintz, S. W. 1 97 1 . The Caribbean as a
York: Irvington socio-cultural area. See Ref. 83
85. Jolivet, M. 1. 1986. La Question creole: 1 05 . Mintz, S. W. 1 97 1 . Introduction. In Voodoo
Essai de sociologie sur la Guyane. Paris: in Haiti, ed. A. Metraux, pp. 1 - 1 5 . New
Orstrom York: Schoken Books
86. Labelle, M. 1978. Ideologie de couleur et 106. Mintz, S. W. 1 9 7 1 . Men, women and trade.
classes sociales en Haiti. Montreal: Univ. Compo Stud. Soc. Hist. 1 3:247-69
Montreal 1 07. Mintz, S. W. 1 97 1 . Toward an Afro-Ameri
87. Laguerre, M. S. 1982. Urban Life in the can history. Cah. Hist. Mond. 1 3:3 1 7-32
Caribbean. Cambridge: Schenkman 1 08. Mintz, S . W. 1973. A note on the definition
88. Lazarus-Black, M. 1 99 1 . Why women take of peasantries. J. Peasant Stud. 1 :9 1 -106
men to Magistrate' s Court: Caribbean kin 1 09. Mintz, S . W. 1974. The Caribbean region.
ship ideology and law. Ethnology In Slavery, Colonialism, and Racism, ed. S .
30(2): 1 1 9-33 W. Mintz, p p . 45-7 1 . New York: Norton
89. Leo-Rhynie, E., Hamilton, M. 1983. Pro 1 10. Mintz, S. W. 1974. The rural proletariat and
fessional Jamaican women--equal or not? the problem of rural proletarian conscious
Caribbean Q. 29(3/4):70-85 ness. J. Peasant Stud. 1 :291-325
90. Lewis, G. K. 1983. Main Currents in Car I I 1 . Mintz, S . W. 1 974 [ 1 960] . Worker in the
ibbean Thought: The Historical Evolution Cane. New York: Norton
of Caribbean Society in Its Ideological As 1 1 2. Mintz, S . W. 1975. History and anthropol
pects, 1492-1900. Baltimore and London: ogy: a brief reprise. In Race and Slavery in
Johns Hopkins Univ. Press the Western Hemisphere: Quantitative
9 1 . Lieber, M. 1 98 1 . Street Scenes: A/ro Studies, ed. S. L. Engerman, E. D.
American Culture in Urban Trinidad. Genovese, pp. 477-94. New Jersey: Prince
Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing ton Univ. Prcss
Co. 1 1 3 . Mintz, S. W. 1 977. North American anthro
92. Lorona, L. V. 1983-1987. Bibliography of pological contributions to Caribbean stud
Latin American and Caribbean Bibliog ies. Bol. Estud. Latinoam. 22:68-82
raphies. Madison: U. W. SALALM 1 14. Mintz, S . W. 1977. The so-called world
93. LouiIIot, G., Crusol-BaiIIard, G. 1987. system: local initiative and local response.
Femmes Martiniquaises: mythes et Dialect. Anthropol. 2(4):253-70
realites. Fort-de-France: Editions 1 1 5 . Mintz, S. W. 1 978. Was the plantation slave
Caribeennes a proletarian? Review 2 ( 1 ):8 1-98
94. Lowenthal, D. 1972. West Indian Societies. 1 1 6. Mintz, S. W. 1979. Slavery and the rise of
London: Oxford Univ. Press peasantries. Hist. Reflect. 6( 1 ) : 1 35-242
95. Lowenthal, 1. P. 1987. Ma rriage is 20, chil 1 1 7. Mintz, S. W. 1982. Culture: an anthropo
dren are 21: the cultural construction of logical view. Yale Rev. 7 1 :499-5 1 2
conjugality and the family in rural Haiti. 1 1 8. Mintz, S . W. 1 984. American anthropology
PhD thesis, Johns Hopkins Univ. and the Marxist tradition. In On Marxian
96. Lowes, S. 1987. Time and motion in the Perspectives in Anthropology, ed. 1. Mac
formation of the middle class in Antigua, quet, N. Danicls, pp. 1 1-34. Malibu: UCLA
1 834-1 940. Paper presented at the Annu. 1 19. Mintz, S. W., ed. 1985. History, Evolution
Meet. AAA, Chicago and the Concept of Culture: Selected Pa
97. Manners, R. 1 957. Methods of community pers by Alexander Lesser. New York: Cam
analysis in the Caribbean. In Caribbean bridge Univ. Press
Studies: A Symposium, ed. V. Rubin, pp. 1 20. Mintz, S. W. 1985. Sweetness and Power:
80-92. Seattle: Univ. Washington Press The Place of SUf!.ar in Modern History.
98. Manning, F. E . 1973. Black Clubs in Ber- New York: Viking
40 TROUILLOT
1 2 1 . Mintz, S. W. 1 990 [ 1 974]. Caribbean 140. Price, R, Price, S., eds. 1988. Narrative of
Transformations. New York: Columbia a Five Year Expedition against the Re
Univ. Press volted Negroes of Suriname in Guiana on
1 22. Mintz, S. w., Price, R. 1992 [ 1 976]. The the Wild Coast of South America from the
Birth of African-American Culture: A n year 1 772 to the year 1 777 by John Gabriel
Anthropological Perspective. Boston: Bea Stedman. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ.
con 1 4 1 . Price, S . 1984. Co-Wives and Calabashes.
123. Mintz, S. w., Price, S., eds. 1992. Carib Ann Arbor: Univ. Michigan Press
bean Contours. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins 142. Price-Mars, J. 1983 [ 1 928]. So Spoke the
Univ. Press Uncle. Washington, DC: Three Continents
1 24. Moreno Fraginals, M. R., ed. 1984. Africa Press
in Latin America, . trans!. L. Blum. New 143. Rawlins, J. M. 1987. The Family in the
York!London: Holmes & Meier Caribbean, 1973-1986: A n Annotated Bib
1 25. Moreno Fraginals, M. R. et a!. 1987. Apun liography. Cave Hill, Barbados: ISER
tes para una historia economico-social de la 144. RevistaiReview Interamericana. 1978.
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
sejo Estatal del Azucar. Santo Domingo, too? Soc. £Con. Stud. 34(2): 1 1 1-5 1
Republica Dominicana: Fondo Para el 147. Rubenstein, H. 1983. Caribbean family and
Avance de las Ciencias Sociales, Inc. household organization: some conceptual
1 27. Murphy, M. 1 99 1 . Dominican Sugar Plan clarifications. J. Compo Fam. Stud.
tations: Production and Foreign Labor In 14(3):283-98
tegration. New York: Praeger 148. Rubenstein, H. 1987. Coping with Poverty:
1 28. Murray, G., Alvarez, M. 1975. Haitian Adaptive Strategies in a Caribbean Vi/
beans circuits: cropping and trading maneu lage. Boulder: Westview
vers among a cash-oriented peasantry. In 149. Safa, H. I. 1986. Economic autonomy and
Working Papers in Haitian Society and sexual equality in Caribbean society. Soc.
Culture, ed. S. W. Mintz, pp. 85-1 26. New Econ. Stud. 35(3): 1 -2 1
Haven: Antilles Res. Prog., Yale Univ. 150. Safa, H . I. 1987. Popular culture, national
129. Nettleford, R. 1 972 [ 1 970]. Mirror, Mirror: identity, and race in the Caribbean. New
Identity, Race and Protest in Jamaica. West Indian Guide 6 1 (3/4): 1 15-26
Kingston, Jamaica: W. Collins & Sang 1 5 1 . Senior, O. 1 99 1 . Working Miracles:
ster/william Morrow Women s Lives in the English-Speaking
1 30. Nettleford, R. 1979. Caribbean Cultural Caribbean. Cave HillIBloomington:
Identity: The Case of Jamaica. Los Ange ISERlIndiana
les: UCLA Latin Am. Cent. Pub!. 152. Serbin, A. 1 98 1 . Nacionalismo, etnicidad y
1 3 1 . Olwig, K. F. 1985. CulturalAdaptation and politica en la Republica Cooperativa de
Resistance on St. John: Three Centuries of Guyana. Caracas: Editorial Bruguera Vene
Afro-Caribbean Life. Gainesville: Univ. wlana
Florida Press 153. Serbin, A. 1 985. Procesos etnoculturales y
1 32. Olwig, K. F. 1990. The struggle for respect percepciones mutuas en el desarollo de las
ability: Methodism and Afro-Caribbean relaciones entre el Caribe de Habla Ingles
culture on 1 9th-century Nevis. New West y America Latina. Bol. Estud. Latinoam.
Indian Guide 64(3/4):93-1 1 4 Caribe 38:83-98
F. 1970. Cuban Counterpoint: To
1 3 3 . Ortiz, 154. Silverman, M. 1 979. Dependency, media
bacco and Sugar. New York: Vintage tion, and class formation in rural Guyana.
1 34. Pagden, A. 1982. The Fall ofNatural Man: Am. Ethnol. 6(3):466-90
The American Indian and the Origins of 155. Silverman, M. 1980. Rich People and Rice:
Comparative Ethnography. Cambridge: Factional Politics in Rural Guyana.
Cambridge Univ. Press Leiden: Brill
1 35. Pedreira, A. 1 968 [ 1 934]. lnsularismo. Rio 1 56. Simpson, G. E. 1 9 80. Religious Cults of the
Piedras: EdiI Caribbean: Trinidad, Jamaica and Haiti.
1 36. Price, R 1 97 1 . Studies of Caribbean family Rio Piedras: Ins!. Caribbean Stud., Univ.
organization: problems and prospects. Puerto Rico, Caribbean Monogr. Ser. No.
Dedaldo Rev. Mus. A rbe A rcheo!. Univ. Sao 15
Paulo 4( 14):23-58 1 57. Smith, M . G . 1962. History and social an
1 37. Price, R 1983. First Time: The Historical thropology. J. Roy. Anthropol. Inst. Great
Vision of an Afro-American People. Balti Britain and Ireland 92:73-85
more and London: Johns Hopkins Univ. 158. Smith, M. G. 1 965. The Plural Society in
Press the British West Indies. Berkeley: Univ.
1 38. Price, R. 1990. A labi's World. Baltimore: Calif. Press
Johns Hopkins Univ. Press 159. Smith, M. G. 1983. Robotham's ideology
1 39. Price, R. 1990. Ethnographic History, Car and pluralism. Soc. Econ. Stud. 32: 1 03-39
ibbean Pasts. College Park: Univ. Mary 160. Smith, M. G. 1984. Comment on Austin's
land, Work. Pap. No. 9 "Culture and ideology in the English-
THE CARffiBEAN 41
speaking Caribbean". Am. Ethnol. ger: Religious Cults, Material Forces, and
1 1 ( 1 ): 1 83-85 Collective Fantasies in the World of the
1 6 1 . Smith, M. G. 1 984. Culture, Race and Surinamese Maroons. DordrechtlProvi
Class in the Commonwealth Caribbean. dence, MA: Foris Publications
Mona, Jamaica: Dept. Extramur. Stud., 1 82. Thomas-Hope, E. M . , ed. 1982. Perspec
Univ. West Indies tives on Caribbean Identity. Liverpool:
162. Smith, M. G. 1987. Pluralism: comments Cent. Latin Am. Stud., Univ. Liverpool
on an ideological analysis. Soc. Econ. Stud. 1 83. TrouiIJot, M.-R. 1982. Motion in the sys
36(4): 1 57-9 1 tem: coffee, color, and slavery in 1 8th-cen
1 63. Smith, R. T. 1956. The Negro Family in tury Saint-Domingue. Review 5(3):33 1 -88
British Guiana. London: Routledge and 1 84. Trouillot, M.-R. 1983. The production of
Kegan Paul spatial configurations: a Caribbean case.
164. Smith, R. T. 1970. Social stratification in New West Indian Guide 57(3/4):21 5-29
the Caribbean. In Essays in Comparative 1 85. Trouillot, M.-R. 1984. Labour and emanci
Stratification, ed. L. Plotinov, A. Tuden, pp. pation in Dominica: contribution to a de
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
20 1 . Wilson, P. 1. 1969. Reputation and respect new questions. Am. Anthropol. 92(3):586-
ability: a suggestion for Caribbean ethnol 96
ogy. Man 4:70-84 205. Woodson, D. G. 1 990. Tout Mounn se
202. Wilson, P. J. 1973. Crab Antics: The Social Mounn, Men tout Mounn pa Menm: so
Anthropology of English-Speaking Negro ciocultural aspects of land tenure and mar
Societies of the Caribbean. New Ha keting in a Northern Haitian locality. PhD
ven/London: Yale Univ. Press thesis, Univ. Chicago
203. Wolf, E. 1 982. Europe and the People with 206. Yamagushi, M., Naito, M., eds. 1987. So
out History. Berkeley: Univ. California cial and Festive Space in the Caribbean.
Press Tokyo: Inst. Stud. Lang. Cult. Asia and
204. Wolf, E. 1990. Facing power-old insights, Africa
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1992.21:19-42. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
by Northeastern University on 05/14/13. For personal use only.