Kinship Lectures - Dr Safet Hadzimuhamedovic\'s first year module lecture notes. PDF

Preview

Summary

Dr Safet Hadzimuhamedovic's first year module lecture notes. ...

Description

KI NSHI PLect ur e1-27/ 9/ 2016 Scal art r oubl es:per sonhood,ki nshi pandsoci et y. -Theor et i cal andMet hodol ogi cal Model s -Cr i t i que -Et hnogr aphi cAccount s -Di sci pl i nar yHi st or y

Theor i es-Gener al i seandmakecompar i sons Annot at edbi bl i ogr aphy; •Copyandpast et i t l e •Hi ghl i ghtmai nar gumenti nar t i cl e •di sagr ee/ agr eewi t het c •Summar i seandsave TWO ESSAYS Fi r s tEssay-I ndependentResear chAssi gnment -15002000wor ds -DEADLI NE15t hNovember

Whatar eki nshi puni t sconst i t uent sof ? Fami l yandt he( nat i on)st at e Fami l y=met aphorf orsomet hi ngl ar ger Mayr epki ndofbodypol i t i c Soci et al uni t sar enat ur al i sed,pr esentacer t ai nmodelofsoci et y Ki nshi phasbeenst udi edi nasmal l scal ecommuni t y -of t ent r i bal ,nonwest er n,pr i mi t i v e( t ypi cal l yol der et honogr aphi es) Suchsoci et i es( f ami l i es)ar eor gani sedar oundki nshi pasamodel .t hesedayssoci et i esar ear r angedar ound i ndi vi dual s. Ant hr opol ogi sti magi nedast hosewhoappr oacht hel ocals cal e( t r i beset c) Scal esar ebei ngconst r uct ed,notscal eswi t hi nt hemsel ves.Fi xi t ywhi chcar r i esi t sownval ues. ( Sar i Wast el l -LegalAnt hr opol ogi st( Speaki ngWeek11)Thepr esenceorabsenceofscal ei si mpor t ant becausewhenonet al k saboutgl obal asopposedt ol ocal t hescal ei sal r eadyi npl ace.Not hi ngi spar t i cul ar i se l ocalunl essi ti smeasur edagai nstsomet hi ngbi gger ,l essl ocalt hani t sel f -andher esomanypr ej udi cesflee f r om anal yt i calvi ew,l ocalsoof t enel i di ngnot i onsoft hatwhi chi ssmal l er ,mor epar t i cul ar ,concr et er at hert han abst ar ct ,subst ant i alr at hert hani deat i onal . )Ther egi meofv al uehasal r eadybeenconst r uct ed,t hesefix ed posi t i onst hatcar r yval uewi t hi nt hemsel vescannotonl ybeconst i t uent . Pol i t i calcandi dat esment i onf ami l yuni t sasi tfit si nt ot her egi meofv al uewi t hi nsoci et y . Scal es -Of t enconcei vedass wi t chi ngf r om oneper spect i veonaphenomenont oanot her -Lev elvsScal e( 24hour s=1140mi ns) -Ther ef or emovi ngwi t hi nascal e,e. g.f ami l yt ot r i bei sonl yachangeofl evelnotscal e -Becausei ndi vi dual shavedi ffer entpr act i ces,st at edoesnotencompasst hem,t heyar epar al l el -t husa

changeofl evel .Scal esofferdi ffer entaper t ur esont hewor l d. Ar eweal li ndi vi dual s? Per s onhood ki nshi pt r adexpr essedi nt er msofi ndi vi dual humanbei ngsi nsocal l edsmal l scal esoci et i es Mar i l y nSt r at her n,1980s;t hest udyofper sonhood Thegenderoft hegi f t .Per sonsar ef r equent l ycons t r uct edast hepl ur alandcomposi t esi t eofr el at i ons Per sonsar ei nher ent l ysoci al .NOTr eposi t or yofauni t ar yorboundedi dent i t ybutr at herar ecomposedof soci alr el at i ons,andi nt hi ssensecanbet houghtofas“ di vi dual ”or“ par t i bl e”ent i t i es Whati tmeanst obeasoci alagent Reconsi der at i onoft hemeani ngofki nshi pandi t snewcr i t i que Agency-capaci t yt oact( ol d) Agency-t heal l owanceofhumansandnonhumans( i nct hi ngs) -Gel lwhosayst hatt hei rpr i mar yandsecondar yagent s -Lat our-net wor kt heor y ,capaci t yt oacti snoti nanyonepl ace,i t si nt henet wor ks .agencyi sbet weenme andt heobj ect ,abst r act . Mar celMauss-1938l ect ur e Thecat egor yof“ per son”hascompl exhi st or i cal ,soci al andi deol ogi cal or i gi ns. Concept soft heper sondi ffersi gni ficant l ywi t hs yst emsofl aw,r el i gi on,cust oms,soci alst r uct ur es,ment al i t y . Ev ol ut i onar ymodel oft hei ndi vi dual .Whoknowswhatpr ogr esst heunder st andi ngwi l l yetmakeont hi smodel . MeyerFor t es-Theconceptoft heper sonPer sonhoodi sagr adualpr ocess, Tal l ensi( NGhana) -f r om namel esschi l dr en( notnamedunt i l ay oungersi bl i ngi sbor n)t oances t r alguar di ans. Rubi eWat son-1986 HongKong-Menchooseadi ffer entnamewhent heygetmar r i ed-womenl oset hei ri ndi vi dual i t ywi t hage ( unnamedont ombst oneandcal l ed“ ol dwoman” ) JanetCar st en’ sCr i t i que; MaussandDumont( l oui s)dr awonl egalhi st or y ,phi l osophyandt heol ogyi nt hei raccount soft he“ West ”butf or “ NonWest er n”cont ext st heydr awoncast eorki nshi p.Thi si spar t l ydonebyMar i l ynSt r at her naswel l . Ar et het wot ypesofevi dence( scal es)i ncommensur abl e( havenocommonst andar dof measur ement ) ? JanetCar st en-Canwefindaspect sofnonboundandl essi ndi vi dual i st i cper sonhoodi nt hewest ?Ar et her e l esshol i st i c,mor ei ndi vi dual i st i cnot i onsoft heper soneveni nsoci et i est hatpl acegr eatemphasi sont he col l ect i vi t y .( Car st en2004) “ nonobeaper s on,beyour sel f ,beadaddy”Mak escl earhowf ort hi ssmal l chi l d( andnodoubt ,mostot her s) , per s onhood,bei ng“ onesel f ”andbei ngaf at her -i not herwor ds,bei ngar el at i on-ar equi t ei nt er t wi ned. Di aneandSt ephenBl ood( Legalbat t l e19972003) St ephendi ed,Di anewant edt ousehi ssper mt oar t i fici al l yi nsemi nat eher sel fwi t hhi ssper mt ohav ehi sbaby . DENI EDBYTHECOURT-“ l egal obst acl es” I ssues;Nowr i t t enconsent Per s onhoodcont i nuedaf t erhedi ed. Onecandi st ur bt hei deaoft hei ndi vi dual( Bosni a) -Ki nshi pcanbet houghtofasext ended-var i ouset hni c gr oupsf or m ki nshi pal l i ances( godmot her / godf at her ) .Bl oodbondst obecomepar tofoneanot her . Al exandr aOur ousoff( 1993)

Ant hr opol ogi cal assumpt i onsaboutWest er nI ndi vi dual i sm ?????? Li ndaSt one Age Bet ween1350and1800t heaver ageageofmar r i agewasar ound25,t houghwomenwer eof t enyoungerand menol der . Love Lov easaf undament al par tofmar r i agei n“ West er nTr adi t i ons” -Noonei squi t esur ewhatl ovei s. -Consensualuni onasopposedt oar r angedmar r i age? -Compani onat emar r i age? -Passi onandr omance,excl usi venessandsexualj eal ousy . SexualSt andar ds Eur oAmer i canki nshi pmodel notuni que-“ doubl esexualst andar ds”( vi r gi ni t y ,honour ) JackGoody-Br i deweat hi nAf r i ca( Doesawaywi t hcl assb/ ct her ei saconst antex change) -Dowr yi nEur asi a( Cl assi sper pet uat ed) Judi t hBut l er I twoul dbewr ongt ot hi nkt hatt hedi scussi onof“ i dent i t y”oughtt opr oceedpr i ort oadi scussi onofgender i dent i t yf ort hesi mpl er easont hat“ per sons”onl ybecomei nt el l i gi bl et hr oughbecomi nggender edi nconf or mi t y wi t hr ecogni sabl est andar dsofgenderi nt el l i gi bi l i t y . -Thecul t ur almat r i xt hr oughwhi chgenderi dent i t yhasbecomei nt el l i gi bl er equi r est hatcer t ai nki ndsof “ i dent i t i es”cannot“ exi st ” . Wemustspeakaboutgenderi nanot herway .I fnotnat ur al ,wehavenocont r oloveri t .Genderi sper f or mat i ve, i t ’ sal wayi ndoi ng-genderbel ongst ocer t ai nsyst ems. Khwaj aSar a-andr ogynouscommuni t yi nI ndi aandPaki st anl eadbyaGur u.Theyhadl ef toneki nshi pgr oup andf or medanot her Q:Whyi si ti mpor t antt ot hi nkaboutt hehi st or i cal ,soci alandi deol ogi calcont ext sofki nshi p? Soci al cont enti mpbecausewegett oseet her i t ual s,howpeopl ear ei nduct edi nt oki nshi p,i nt ot hei r per s onhood,t oseet hesoci al pr ocessbywhi cht heset hi ngsbecomeandar er epeat edandr ecy cl es.Wehav e t opayat t ent i ont onotonl yt heseabst r actar gument s ,butal sopayat t ent i ont oHWATpeopl ear edoi ng.how t heyar eenact i ngt hei rki nshi p,genderet c.I deol ogi cal i nt hatt her ear ecer t ai nr egi mesofv al ue.Wemi ght car r yourownr egi mesofv al uet hr oughespeci al l yl anguaget hathav et obever ycar ef ul l ydeconst r uct edbef or e appr oachi ngot herr egi mes.

-SCALESANDVANTAGEPOI NTS -UNI TSOFMEASUREMENT -REGI MESOFVALUE -EPI STEMOLOGI CALANDONTOLOGI CALOBSTACLESTO COMPARI ONS -HI STORI CALANDSOCI ALCONTEXTS

Bot t om upandt opdownmi ghthav ecompl et el ydi ffer entper spect i vesont hewor l d. I ndependentr esear c hassi gnment Ask edt oconductr esear c hony ourownki nshi p.Aut oet hnogr aphi cexper i ment . Wor ki ngt i t l edue1stNov ember2016

DEADLI NE15t hNovember15002000wor ds EXAMPLES:For cedmi gr at i onandt hepol i t i csofEast er nEur opeast heyr el at et omyf ami l y Anal ysi sofnami ngpr act i cesi nat r adi t i onagr ar i ancommuni t yi nNor way:asoci et yi nt r ansi t i on Far mi ngi nt her ur alar eaofCar mar t henshi r e,Sout hWal es :i st het r adi t i onalpat t er noft hei nher i t anceof f ar ml andpr eval entwi t hi nmyf ami l ycomi ngt oanend Occupat i onal mobi l i t y ,r el i gi onandt hechangesi nWest er nki nshi ps t r uct ur es Thei mpactofdi v or ceonki nshi p Dement i a?

Aut oet hnogr aphy -aboutsomeaspectoft her esear cher sl i f e -speaki ngt owi dert opi cs -epi st emol ogi cal quest i ons -evi dence,f act ,t r ut h -cr i si sofmoder ni t y -subj ect i vi t y ,emot i on -aut hor i al voi ce -Cl oseness/ di st ance -r el at i onshi pbet weent her esear ches,t her esear c hedant het ext -t heper sonali sal wayspr esent -ext ensi onsandcompar i son( t heor y) -Reflexi vi t y

KI NSHI PLect ur e2-4/ 10/ 2016 WHYDO PEOPLEGETMARRI ED? -Lov e -Economi cGai n -Fami l i al Li nks -Secur i t y -Soci alExpect at i on/ Obl i gat i on Cl audeLévi St r auss ( 19082009) St r uct ur al i sm Thekeyt ypeofappr oacht hati sat t r i but edt oLSi nant hr opol ogy .St at i cvi ew. “ Al l i anceTheor yi sLS’ st heor yofmar r i age” LSResear chi nAmaz oni a; -I nt er est edi nst r uct ur eofsoci et y -“ Si mpl eSoci et i es” ,compl exsy st emsofKi nshi p

-Smal l communi t i es-100,200et c -Of t enscat t er ed -Nocompl excent r al or gani sat i on -Ver yl i mi t edt echnol ogi es - Whyl i mi t edt echnol ogi es ?Somesci ent i st sar guedt hatt heywer el esscogni t i vel yadv anced.LSdi sagr eed. - LSar guest hatal l mi ndsacr osst hewor l dpr ocessknowl edgei nt hesameway .Thesi mpl esoci et i eshave compl exki nshi ps yst ems, -TheEl ement ar ySt r uct ur esofKi nshi p( 1949) St r uct ur al i sm:Humanbei ngshavet heneedt ocl assi f yt hewor l dt ocr eat eor der . Al l soci et i escl assi f y ,butt hewayt hatsoci et i escl assi f yi sdi ffer ent . LS:Uni v er sal mechani smsoft hemi nd Bi nar yOpposi t es:Reconci l i at i on/or der Myt handr i t ual :Oper at er econci l i at i on.Eg.Funer al sanddeat hr i t ual s. Mar r i agei saf or m ofr econci l i at i on.Woman+Man=Het er onor mat i v e LEVISTRAUSSALLI ANCETHEORY -I ncestTaboo -Reci pr oci t y I ncestTaboo-Uni ver salPr act i ce -Ki nshi pi scul t ur al ,notbi ol ogi cal ( l i nkscr eat edt hr oughmar r i age) -I ncesti satt hebasi sofsoci et y -I ncestTabooi sUNI VERSAL -Obj ect sofTabooar eVARI ABLE -I ncestt abooi sar esul tofEXOGAMYnotBI OLOGY Twof or msofmar r i age,openandpr escr i pt i v e Open -Negat i v emar r i ager ul e -Foundi ncompl exsoci et y -Canmar r ybasi cal l yever y one,CANNOTmar r ysomepeopl e Pr escr i pt i v e -Posi t i v emar r i ager ul e -Foundi nsi mpl esoci et y -Cannotmar r yanyoneexceptasetgr oup Gener al Assumpt i ons( ‘ Si mpl eSoci et i es ’ ) -Mendeci de -Womenar eexchanged

WomenEx change Mar celMauss,TheGi f t( 1925) -Gi f tEx change:Obl i gat i ont ogi veandr ecei ve-r eci pr oci t y -Ri ghtt oask,obl i gat i ont ogi ve. -Medi at i onbet weenopposi t es

LS:Mar r i agei st hemostbasi cf or m ofex change -‘ Womenar et hesupr emegi f t ’ -‘ Wi f egi v er s ’/‘ Wi f et aker s ’ I ncestt abooi nsi mpl esoci et i esal l owsr econci l i at i onofbi nar yopposi t es. Womanf r om r edcl ani sgi v ent omanf r om bl uecl anandvi cever sa,t hi si sar est r i ct edexchange. Reci pr oci t y -Mar r i age( Ex ogamy )i st hekeymodeofexchangebet weenmoi et i es. -Mar r i agei st hek eyt ot hest r uct ur i ngofsoci et y ,t ocr eat ecl assi ficat i onbet weenpar t sofsoci et y( moi t i es) / al l i ancet heor y.

Tr i st esTr opi ques-LS Dr avi di anKi nshi p -Soci et i es‘ Si mpl e’ ( posi t i v er ul e)/‘ Compl ex’ ( negat i v er ul e) -Ki nshi pGr oup:Ki n( consangui ni t y)/affines( affini t y) Mypat er naluncl ei smyot herf at her ,hi schi l dr enar emysi bl i ngs.( Par al l el Cousi ns) Mypat er nalaunti smymot heri nl aw,herchi l dr enar emypot ent i al par t ner s .( Cr ossCousi ns) Mymat er nalaunti smyot hermot her ,herchi l dr enar emysi bl i ngs .( Par al l elCousi ns) Mymat er naluncl ei smyf at heri nl aw,hi schi l dr enar emypot ent i al par t ner s.( Cr ossCousi ns) Ev er yonewhoi syourcr osscousi ni sapot ent i alsexualpar t ner . I ndi vi dual sar escar edoft hei rmot her s/ f at her si nl awbecauset heyr i di cul et hem whent heyar ey ounger . Whenout si der scomei nt ot hecommuni t yt heyar eal l ocat edapl acewi t hi nt heki nshi pst ar t i ngwi t honeper son. Thi soneper soni mmedi at el yl i nkst hem t ot hewhol eki nshi ps yst em. Reci pr oci t y .Eg-whenamanwant st omar r yawoman,hemustpr ovi deherf ami l ywi t hmeatasapayment Mor er ecent l y ,i famanget smar r i edt oawomanhewoul dn' tbeabl et ogohunt i ngf ort hei rmot heri nl aw becauset heyar enol ongert aughtt ohunt .Ther ef or er eci pr oci t yi sal sochangi ng.Si st erex changecomesi nt o pl ay . Si st erex change; 1coupl ehappi l ymar r i ed,wantt omar r yeachot her .Thehusband’ ssi st eri st hengi v ent ot hewi f e’ sbr ot her , of t enagai nstherwi l l . Exper i enci ngAffini t y:

KI NSHI PLect ur e3-11/ 10/ 2016

BI RTH,DEATHANDRESURRECTI ON?:ABRI EFHI STORYOFKI NSHI P

Ki nshi pv al uescanbedr awnf r om t heGr eeks,myt hset c. I bnKhal dun–14th Cent ur y .

- Human cooperativeness/solidarity/social cohesion (asabiyah) – biological basis in common descent. Joseph Lafitau – 17th/18th Century - French Jesuit missionary - Searched for common origins of “Indians” and “Europeans” Kinship is for the “Others” Anthropology defines itself by its study of kinship Anthropology has claimed kinship Small scale societies are primarily expressed in Kinship forms. Origins of Anthropology: Victorian Self-Affirmation - Interest in the ‘primitives’ of the Americas and European colonies- imagines as survivals from earlier stages of history. - ‘Maybe they can catch up?’ - Interest in evolution and origins (Darwin, philology, archaeology) - Social Darwinism Henry Louis Morgan (1818-1881) - Father of kinship - In a fraternity that modeled itself on the Iroquis - Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family (1870) and Ancient Society (1877) - Consanguins: Direct Blood relations - Affins: Relatives not directly related by blood - “An understanding of the framework and principles of our own system of relationship is a necessary preparatory step to the consideration of those other nations. It was originally strictly descriptive.” - Kinship System = Terminology of Relations - Classificatory vs. descriptive system - Classificatory – Merges lineal with collateral kin if based on the same sort of tie. Eg the whole- sisters children are my children. Brothers children are my children in law. - Descriptive - all collaterals separate from all lineal kin. ‘natural system’: expresses a ‘scien3fic’ fact - moral vs. uncivilised and immoral classificatory system - Reverend Joshua McIlvane; ‘primitve promiscuity’ - Primitive Promiscuity - Global explanation: evolution from primitive promiscuity to restrictions.

-

From evolutionists to functionalists: - Other lawyers of the same period produced their own theories and reactions to Morgan - Sir Henry Maine: family is at the start of social evolution - it builds up to larger polities like the state. - Malinowski – Family is the fundamental unit of society: “‘To put it clearly, though crudely, I should say that the family is always the domestic institution par excellence. It

dominates the early life of the individual; it controls domestic co-operation; it is the stage of earliest parental cares and education.’ - Radcliffe Brown – balance between different societal institutions - Cultural relativism is the principle of regarding the beliefs, values, and practices of a culture from the viewpoint of that culture itself. Originating in the work of Franz Boas in the early 20th century, cultural relativism has greatly influenced social sciences such as anthropology.

-

Descent Theory vs Alliance Theory Descent Kinship by blood Unilineal kinship (patrilineal/matrilineal/bilateral) Consagunguines separated from affines

-

Alliance Kinship by marriage Marriage Included (affinal relations) – alliance between groups Marriage between groups (indebtness- bridewealth dowry etc): creates social structure Levi-Strauss established positive (simple society) and negative (complex society) marriage rules Focuses on relationship/structure (rather than substance)

Incest Taboo - Lèvi Strauss- Elementary Structures of Kinship: - Early Groups need to communicate exchange (in women) David M Schneider - Severing Kinship from Biology is ‘not natural’ - Rooted in Boasian cultural relativism - Predecessors stuck in a genealogical way of thinking - Western kinship model loosely based on natural sciences - Dismissed kinship as a useful analytical category: conceived by anthropologists - John Beattie (1964): Dismissed kinship as an independent field of study- because it always appears in the context of something else (politics, economics, ritual etc). - “I have put the word ‘kinship’ in quotes, in order to affirm that it is a theoretical notion in the mind of the anthropologist which has no discernable cultural referent in fact.” Feminist turn in anthropology - ‘Western Kinship’ (re)thought - gender, like kinship, has been a cross- culturally inappropriate concept - Its definitional roots in West-based conceptions of biology - Kinship and gender should be studied together (remember Judith Butler’s similar statement about personhood and gender?) Queer Kinship - Families not predicated on blood relationships - Network, connectivities, shared values - Kinship determines social value

New Reproductive Technologies - “Western Kinship” (re)thought: reformulations of kinship stemming from new technologies and assisted reproduction.

KI NSHI PLect ur e4-18/ 10/ 2016 Ki nshi p,genderandt hebody - David M. Schneider dismissed kinship as a useful analytical category, he believed that it was conceived by anthropologists. - Radical shift, severing kinship from biology 1970s and 1980s decline of kinship studies; - Tiresome kinship classifications - Culturalist critique of kinship - Traditionalists vs revisionist Late 80s, significant reformulations. - Revival - Symbolic Anthropology - Feminism - Gender, personhood, reproductive technologies Lamphere- Whatever happened to Kinship studies? - Kinship didn’t rise ‘phoenix-like’ from its own ashes - Feminist interrogations of race, power, class - In the 80s, consider the position of the anthropologist, researcher Sylvia Yanagisako and Jane Collier (1987) - Feminist critique of kinship - Kinship and gender: must be studied together because they are both based on the same indigenous ‘Western’ theories of biological reproduction - Absence of a historical analysis of ‘nature’ - Questioning natural social units - Power dichotomies - A cry out for explanation of male dominance, - What are the social processes that differentiate between men and women - Biological differences imagined as a universal basis for categories of ‘male’ and ‘female’ Separation of sex and gender - Sex- material body - Gender as a social role - Physical differences not the same as cultural meanings attached to them - Anthropologists if the 1980s focused on cultural variations of gender - There is something pre-social

Sex is taken for granted - Sex assumed as a natural difference - Reject pre-cultural, material givens - Reject dichotomy between materiality and meaning (ie. Between sex and gender) Differentiation as a cultural process; - We shouldn’t assume that male and female are two separate categories, defined by their difference - Is this the case in all societies? - What specific social and cultural processes cause men and women to appear different? - (Yanagisako and Collier) New reproductive technologies (NRTs) - Gave new importance to kinship studies - Artificial Insemination by a donor - Sperm Banks - Surrogate Motherhood - IVF Nature Culture - Strathern questions the place of nature in wider knowledge practices in Euro-American ‘Culture’ Anthropology of...