Anthropology 424/536 Classics in Ethnography |
|
|
Reading Notes and resources for E. E. Evans-Pritchard, The Nuer (1940) You will surely find The Nuer a striking contrast to Argonauts. You may indeed agree with the received opinion about the book as so sparse, so clean-lined, so clear-cut—so, well, Radcliffe-Brownian! Indeed, Fortes, in his paper on "Radcliffe-Brown's Contributions to the Study of Social Organisation," argues that the significance of The Nuer has been "not only in what it accomplishes but in what it leaves out. It is an example of applying strict rules of relevance in the selection and presentation of field data in accordance with a clearly defined frame of analysis" (1955:58). It owes its cohesiveness not to a presumed network of social institutions, but to an imposed theoretical structure. "It is an ethnography based on a theoretical discipline, the discipline of structural analysis first given shape by Radcliffe-Brown" (29). [Both of these passages are quoted in Urry 1993:58.] But what are we to make of this book, even at first glance (that is, what is a photograph of harpoon fishing doing on the cover of a book about cattle pastoralists)? Perhaps it is not its simplicity but its complexity and its ambiguities that have brought subsequent generations of anthropologists back to this work. General issues 1. One strategy for trying to grasp the broad intentions of an ethnographer is to identify a "problem" and "solution" in the work. In the case of Evans-Pritchard, how would you formulate the fundamental problem addressed in The Nuer? Why is this issue to be considered problematic for the Nuer and worthy of Evans-Pritchard's extended attention? Finally, what solution to this problem does Evans-Pritchard offer? 2. A second approach to an ethnography is to consider the way in which it works, apart from what it works toward. That is, how is The Nuer organized in a way that structures and develops an argument? In particular, commentators have paid much attention to an apparent bifurcation of the book into a first half and a second half, mediated by the bridge chapter on "Time and Space." What do you think is meant by this? [Note the book's subtitle, which however is only part of the answer.] 3. Yet a third focus of reading and evaluating is the patterns of reasoning used by the ethnographer. Dan Sperber (in his On Anthropological Knowledge, 1985:14-16) has observed that Evans-Pritchard frequently moves among three levels, offering an anecdote (e.g., an observed or reported event), from which key terms are glossed (given extended translations), and in turn used to form a generalizing abstraction. He gives the following example of this interpretive move from Evans-Pritchard's third Nuer ethnography, Nuer Religion (1956):
One might further observe that this is really a double interpretive move. On the one hand, it is interpretation as translation, which is to say the transposition of action and meaning from one language world to another. At the same time, it is also a move from the specific instance to the general statement. Can you find any analogous examples in The Nuer? What is the reader effect of such a chain of reasoning? That is, how does it persuade and what does it persuade the reader of? For example, what might be the effect of the page order of generalization/anecdote/gloss? Particular questions 1. What is it precisely that creates the potential for conflict and disorder among the Nuer? 2. Cattle "are links in numerous social relationships" and Nuer "tend to define all social processes and relationships in terms of cattle" (19). What are some examples of the pervasiveness of the "bovine idiom"? 3. What is distinctive about Nuer time and space concepts? What do they do for the Nuer? 4. Why does the genealogical tree that is the Nuer tribe never grow? Why, like a bonsai, is it always pruned to a constant depth of 10-12 generations? And why is it pruned in mid-length? 5. What is the difference between and the relationship of tribe and lineage in Evans-Pritchard's model of Nuer social structure? What do tribes consist of? Which constitutes the Nuer political system? Why are political relations expressed in a lineage idiom? 6. David Jacobson (1991:38) has argued that in The Nuer:
7. You will recall that Sherry Ortner, in her essay on "Anthropology Since the Sixties," suggests a distinction between "strain" theory and "interest" theory in the following manner:
8. What does Evans-Pritchard claim for the theoretical significance of his ethnography? [Consider pages 261-266 and compare to his enumeration on pp. 190-191.] 9. Evans-Pritchard uses both a singular and plural first-person pronoun in The Nuer. He uses "I" in the Introductory and "we" in the summary, but is shifting back and forth in between. What are we to make of these first person pronoun shifts from I to we? 10. How and to what end does Evans-Pritchard use visual materials (photographs, drawings, and tables)? How would one compare this with Malinowski's use of visual materials in Argonauts? E-P was often accused of ignoring women's productive activities and wealth (Gulliver notes that millet-growing was known as "women's cattle" among the neighboring Jie), but what are we to make of The Nuer's book cover photo of harpoon fishing? Other readings: Relevant video documentaries [*available in Department video library] Relevant Anthro 500b student project sites
|
|