Antropología periférica

Los márgenes académicos como un espacio epistemológico

Autores/as

DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/rmu.449291
Palabras clave: Antropología europea, Antropología periférica, producción de conocimiento, márgenes disciplinarios, infraestructuras para la invesitagción

Resumen

Desde Estonia, un país situado en la periferia de Europa (y donde la Antropología tiene una tradición limitada), el artículo analiza lo que significa ser ‘periférico’ dentro de la antropología europea: ¿Hablamos de relevancia, capacitación, tipo de colaboraciones, restricciones disciplinarias, relación de dependencia, mecanismos de in/visibilidad, reputación científica o de financiación? El artículo concluye con una nota positiva, indicando que los márgenes globales del conocimiento también se pueden convertir en centros de producción teórica a su manera, sea como plataforma de experimentación o como hub regional. También indica que hay una forma distinta de reflexividad en las periferias, más vernácula y experimental.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Abu-Lughod, L. (1991). Writing against culture. En R. Fox (coord.) Recapturing Anthropology, 137-162. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.

Blagojević, M. (2009). Knowledge Production at the Semi-Periphery: A Gender Perspective, Beograd: SZR Zuhra Simić.

Biagioli, M. (2009). Postdisciplinary Liaisons: Science Studies and the Humanities. Critical Inquiry, 35, 4, 816-833.

Bošković, A. (coord.) (2008). Other People’s Anthropologies: Ethnographic Practice on the Margins. Oxford, Berghahn.

Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo Academicus. London: Polity.

Bradatan, C. (2015) In defense of margins. Los Angeles Review of Books, 9th May.

Brković, Č. (2018) Epistemological eclecticism: Difference and the ‘Other’ in the Balkans and beyond. Anthropological Theory, 18, 1, 106-128.

Buchowski, M. (2004). Hierarchies of knowledge in Central-Eastern European Anthropology. Anthropology of East Europe Review, 22, 2, 5-14.

Buchowski, M. (2005). Correspondence: Reply to Chris Hann. Anthropology of East Europe Review, 23, 1, 198-200.

Buden, B. (2009). Zone des Übergangs: vom Ende der Postkommunismus. Frankfut am Main: Suhrkamp.

Červinkova, H. (2005). Anthropology and the Politics of Learning. En P. Skalnik (coord.) Anthropology of Europe: Teaching and Research. 27-36. Prague: Set Out.

Červinková, H. (2012). Postcolonialism, Postsocialism and the Anthropology of East-Central Europe. Journal of Postcolonial Writing, 48, 2, 155-163.

Collier, S. J. (2013). Fieldwork as technique for generating what kind of surprise? Thoughts on Post-Soviet Social in light of “Fieldwork/Research”. Talk at the University of California, Irvine.

Comaroff, J. (2010). The End of Anthropology, Again: On the Future of an In/discipline. American Anthropologist, 112, 4, 524-538.

Comaroff, J. & Comaroff, J. (2012). Theory from the south: Or, how Euro-America is evolving toward Africa. Anthropological Forum, 22, 2, 113-131.

Di Puppo, L. (2016). Reflecting on knowledge production in contemporary academia, Rethinking Euro-anthropology: part three. Social Anthropology, 24, 3, 366-67.

DiGiacomo, Susan M. (1997) The new internal colonialism. Critique of Anthropology, 17, 1, 91-97.

Estalella, A. & Sánchez Criado, T. (coord.) (2018). Experimental Collaborations: Ethnography through Fieldwork Devices. Oxford: Berghahn.

Estalella, A. & Sánchez Criado, T. (2019). DIY anthropology: Disciplinary knowledge in crisis. En F. Martínez (coord.), Changing Margins and Relations within European Anthropology. ANUAC. Journal of the Italian Association of Cultural Anthropology, 8, 2, 143-165.

Ferguson, J. (2012). Novelty and Method: Reflections on Global Fieldwork. En S. Coleman & P. von Hellermann (coord.), Multi-Sited Ethnography, 194-207. New York: Routledge.

Gullestad, M. (2010). Scholarly authority: Reflections based on anthropological. Studies in Norway. Current Anthropology, 47, 6, 915-931.

Gupta, A. & Ferguson, J. (1998). Discipline and practice: ‘The field’ as site, method, and location in anthropology. En A. Gupta & M. Ferguson (coords.) Anthropological Locations, 1-46. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review, 48, 6, 781-95.

Hann, Chris (2005). Correspondence: Reply to Michał Buchowski. Anthropology of East Europe Review 23, 1, 194-197.

Hann, C. (2012). Faltering dialogue? For a doubly rooted cosmopolitan anthropology. Focaal, 63, 39-50.

Holmes, D. R. & Marcus, G. E. (2005). Cultures of Expertise and the Management of Globalization: Toward the Re-functioning of Ethnography. En S. Collier & A. Ong (coords.), Global Assemblages, 235-251. London: Routledge.

Hörschelmann, K. & Stenning, A. (2008). Ethnographies of postsocialist change. Progress in Human Geography, 32, 3, 339-61.

Ivancheva, M. (2015). The age of precarity and the new challenges to the academic profession. Studia Universitatis, 40, 1, 39-47.

Jackson, M. (2005). Existential Anthropology. Oxford: Berghahn.

Jiménez Sedano, L. (2016). Trapped in the rat race: slow science as a way of resistance for European Anthropology.

Rethinking Euro-anthropology: part three. Early career scholars forum. Social Anthropology, 24, 3, 362-263.

Klekot, E. (2007). Observations of a Post-East European Member: European Association of Social Anthropologists (EASA), 9th Biennial Conference, Bristol, 18-21 September 2006. Anthropology Today, 23, 2, 26.

Kürti, L. & Skalník, P. (2013). Introduction: Postsocialist Europe and the Anthropological Perspective from Home. En Kürti, L. & Skalník, P. (coord.) Postsocialist Europe and the Anthropological Perspective from Home. London: Berghahn.

Kuus, M. (2004). Europe’s eastern expansion and the reinscription of otherness in East-Central Europe. Progress in Human Geography, 28, 4, 472-489.

Mälksoo, M. (2006). From Existential Politics towards Normal Politics? The Baltic States in the Enlarged Europe. Security Dialogue, 37, 3, 275-97.

Marcus, G., Rabinow, P., Faubion, J. & Rees, T. (2008). Designs for an Anthropology of the Contemporary. Durham: Duke University Press.

Martínez, D. O. (2016). EASA and Euro-Anthropology: An Ethnographic Approach. Rethinking Euro-anthropology: part three. Social Anthropology, 24, 3, 368-369.

Martínez, F. (coord.) (2016). Rethinking Euro-anthropology: part three. Social Anthropology, 24, 3, 353-379.

Martínez, F. (2018). Remains of the Soviet Past in Estonia. London: UCL Press.

Martínez, F. (2019). Introduction: Disciplinary Cartographies and Connectors. En F. Martínez (coord.) Changing Margins and Relations within European Anthropology. ANUAC. Journal of the Italian Association of Cultural Anthropology, 8, 2, 125-142.

Martínez, F. (2019). An expert in peripheries. Working at, with and through the Margins of European anthropology. ANUAC. Journal of the Italian Association of Cultural Anthropology, 8, 2, 167-188.

Martínez, F. (2020). Introduction. On the Usefulness of Boundary Re-work. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures, 29, 2, 1-10.

Martínez, F., Di Puppo, L. & D. Frederiksen, M. D. (coords.) (2021). Peripheral Methodologies: Unlearning, Not-knowing and Ethnographic Limits. London: Routledge.

Okely, J. (1996). Own or Other Culture. London: Routledge.

Pobłocki, K. (2009). Whither anthropology without the nation-state? Interdisciplinarity, world anthropologies and commoditization of knowledge. Critique of Anthropology, 29, 2, 225-252.

Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon.

Sánchez Criado, T. (2020). Conclusion: Repair as repopulating the devastated desert of our political and social imaginations’. En F. Martínez (coord.), Politics of Recuperation, 207-220. London: Bloomsbury.

Sarró, R. & Pedroso de Lima, A. (2006). Já dizia Malinowski: sobre as condições da possibilidade da produção etnográfica. En A. Pedroso de Lima y R. Sarró (coord.), Terrenos Metropolitanos: Ensaios sobre Produção Etnográfica, 17-34. Lisboa: ICS.

Schriewer, K. (2020). Land Reclamations. Boundary Work as Production of Disciplinary Uniqueness. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures, 29, 2, 108-113.

Simmel, G. (1997). Simmel on Culture. London: Sage.

Simone, A. (2010). City Life from Jakarta to Dakar. New York: Routledge.

Strathern, M. (coord.) (2000). Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Tulbure, N. (2009). Introduction to special issue: Global socialisms and postsocialisms. Anthropology of East Europe Review, 27, (2), 1-18.

Turner, V. (1969). The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Chicago: Aldine.

Turner, V. (1973). The center out there: Pilgrims’ goal, History of Religions, 12, 3, 191-230.

Verdery, K. (2007). ‘Franglus’ anthropology and East European ethnography: The prospects for synthesis. En C. M. Hann (coord.), Anthropology’s Multiple Temporalities and its Future in Central and Eastern Europe: A debate. Max Planck Working Papers, 90, 48-51.

Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.

Publicado
29-12-2020
Cómo citar
Martínez, F. (2020). Antropología periférica : Los márgenes académicos como un espacio epistemológico. Revista Murciana de Antropología, (27), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.6018/rmu.449291