Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Debates

Vol. 31 No. 1 (2025): Reciprocal Vulnerability: Privilege, Violence, and Solidarity from Fieldwork to Academia

Anthropoesy

Submitted
October 22, 2024
Published
2025-11-13

Abstract

What might the transformation in transformative anthropology entail? While several responses might be generated, one element that is generally kept to the background is transformation from within. This “inner enquiry” is not necessarily of the self-reflexivity school, nor of decolonizing initiatives, but one that asks for a deep decoloniality of the propertied self along with a deep ethnography with those designated as Other, objects or subjects of the anthropological endeavour. If we do not transform from within, we will continue to retain propertied notions of the self’s relationship to the world, Weltbeziehungen, with their objectified identities, differences and hierarchies both between human, and in relation to non-human lifeforms—which is how the chain-reaction of violences began culminating in the multiple planetary and societal crises of today. In critical response, I propose an anthropoesy—a co-creative conjunction with lifekind.

References

  1. ACTRACT. The Ascona Transformation Charter: Towards a Vision and Charter for a Transformative Anthropology. https://www.seg-interface.org/ascona-charter.
  2. Bejarano, Carolina Alonso, Lucia López Juárez, Mirian A. Mijangos García, and Daniel M.Goldstein. 2019. Decolonizing Ethnography. Undocumented Immigrants and New Directions in Social Science. Durham: Duke University Press.
  3. Clifford, James, and George E. Marcus, eds. 2023. Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  4. Fijn, Natasha, and Muhammad A. Kavesh. 2021. “A sensory approach for multispecies anthropology.” The Australian Journal of Anthropology 32 (S1): 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/taja.12379.
  5. Hollstein, Bettina, Hartmut Rosa, and Jorg Rüpke. eds. 2023. “Weltbeziehung”: The study of our relationship to the world. Frankfurt, New York: Campus Verlag.
  6. Locke, Piers, and Ursula Munster. 2015. Multispecies ethnography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Low, Setha M., and Sally Engle Merry. 2010. “Engaged anthropology: diversity and dilemmas: an introduction to supplement 2.” Current Anthropology 51 (S2): S203–S226. https://doi.org/10.1086/653837.
  8. Kaur, Raminder, and Saif Eqbal. 2018. Adventure comics and youth cultures in India. New Delhi: Routledge.
  9. Kaur, Raminder, and Mariagiulia Grassilli. 2019. “Towards a fifth cinema.” Third Text 33 (1): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09528822.2018.1546452.
  10. Kaur, Raminder, and Victoria Louisa Klinkert. 2021. “Decolonizing ethnographies.” HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 11 (1): 246–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/713966.
  11. Kirksey, S. Eben, and Stefan Helmreich. 2010. “The emergence of multispecies ethnography.” Cultural Anthropology 25 (4): 545–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01069.x.
  12. Mandair, Arvind-pal Singh. 2014. “Sikh philosophy.” In The Oxford Handbook of Sikh Studies, edited by Pashaura Singh, Louis E. Fenech, 298–311. New York: Oxford University Press.
  13. Nolen-Hoeksema, Susan, Blair E. Wisco, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2008. “Rethinking Rumination.” Perspectives on psychological science 3 (5): 400–24. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00088.x.
  14. Roekel, Eva van. 2023. “Deep ethnography: Violence and words in Argentina.” American Ethnologist 50 (2): 223–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.13141.