Download as pdf
Download as pdf
You are on page 1of 11
danas yo sanoy gp ung suaqqosd ‘Mogssuisies) PLY 16 140d4 966A NaS Hew Pe 7 youlZ (cuoued) saLvids01NvOS © ASaND3Y ABSSAGO saves pavun 09 wooy veey KresaIUL sa10N Bos duierg :089169 sioo 001 as0aKeR, ‘veu9 wep /TaP ‘UoReD01 1-9 2661 098M L9H #1 1A poneoou, 2102/0724 HOMY PERUEMLION ‘KQ POON Wid 00.607 etoziertE equiny eS praieH eevoMN uoMNY eroRY 1 aeineosp 2oust2s 2008 w Sono jue sonsed 2 e008 ota Bunun Zan rewunor 60619P1 :# eouesopou ‘oned sobsstoz :ss80014 u xnod'or 41189"Ina nv 009'aaN'aUa'NSO. 3HMSNA “Bung Bupuey ‘STH Homouog ANON ©99¥=2 8 Pee “DIM ILaNKIDOG / 991DT / 99910 ‘ueo7] Aswsqypaiuy ofeary> 30 Lysi9atu 9, Sholte, Bob. 1957. “The Literary Tum in Contemporary Anthropology.” ‘Cote Anthology 73 oe 1, Ce. Te Popa Due ol Neer: Hab Potodem Adventure” Dacre QSummeris7-7. ‘yer, Stephen, 1567. Séll RAVTING: Response to Scholte” Critique of aus “hmrply 7052-51 eee Textual Form and Social Formation in Evans-Pritchard and Lévi-Strauss Michael Herefeld Discursve Form and Textual Event | propose here to conflate two diferent dimensions of anthropelogcal Inguiny—the properties of the ethnographic text and the eventike {qualities of expresive performance—by addressing the form that events {ake in major anthropological texts. EE Evans Pritchard's The Nuer and (Claude Lévi-Strauss’ TstesTropigus both claim o addres the unetly= ing form that structures events—The Nuar in the politcal model of segmentation, Tristes Tropiqus, more indirectly, though the suggestive analogy between the experience of travel and the ite of passage Fler, 1 shall suggest that their own textual form strctures out peexption of how those events actually work. For both these works stnacturally embody what they purport only to describe The Nuer is sequentially organized in such a way as to express the segmentary view of cultural relations that underlies Evans Pritchard's view of how the world should be governed (see also Galaty 198; Karp tnd Maynard 1983; Dresch 1988). Tries Tropes does not s0 muck describe as brome a rite of passage, moving readers though well ‘marked stages in which they constantly meet themselves coming bck in the opposite direction. What is more, Triste, Trpipes adopts the Segmentary worldview of The Nuer=if not, perhaps, ofthe Nuer-and ‘extends it beyond the intude of “ibe” or “nation” to encompass the entire gamut of living creatures, real and imaginable Segmentation is constantly emergent in social practices, whether these be cultural encounters with the exotic or marauding sid aginst an armed enemy. ‘The two books that we shall be examining here ae inscribed ina larger ieeaeeeeseeeeeeeneaansmmmmnnnmemmmmmmmmmmmmmnnsiainMemaciemmemmeetiee soon ticscctcdiat/aaceade o Michael Hertld set of segmentary practices, and hes formal structures are means of racing or atullng the sense of caltral ratty ha, ostensBy, isthelr goal to describe rane Pvthars study of Nue sociology acknowledges he poliial spect of Neri the absence of bureaucrat overent Tis Was an undoubted improvement on the eater incomprehensi that had the discovery that certain peoples lacked the organizational $rsctures hat most educated Europeans regarded a dein feature of politcal fe One ofthe efits is peapecv, however was fo fener the Nuer almost schemata” dependent on the exigences of Their system. Hs dlecusson of authoty figure in Noe plc sn npr, strdn he ater e aeah a {ppareny, Manis own ethnographic data warranted sce Grevel 1971 evens 109) Hs tr study of CyrenaanBedoun sey (98 ie Shatemptte show tatauthony Gres whoemergein cal sepmenary Steed so eto he rn ft he tertal eat of Sgments and thet sebiviions and tates the al etallzation fpower in such situations tothe appearance ofan external power of guaran this tine rigly stat, roporons-—the Foci government oi InBins chads cue thn, spent aoe sito the lanes level of smplementny poston: tt nd segment. ‘The model sented seth tee. Ii important erate hat the strucural-fanctonal approach, with teow unmedated dua, fendered inv, The model of segmentation stand, ike an ei Cteerration tower outside and above the socetes twas developed 0 dcr. and therefore fet ender own most comprehensive ttobodinem expe “An account that Evane Prichard once gave of colonial wasfre is trates tis vied entament In ana (930 recep made famous {Grnetorioun by Geert 885 Evane Prichard 173; se aso Herald {9a0y, he desarbes the omardly behavior of the Anu ieages who fought under Haan conrl against the "etsh Anak,” His own men wrens brave kl and detertned This not only shows how sgmen: Sion sles moral ealgories(ravery, et) fr more immediate 10 socal experience than sch generalized eis asthe hl fretactons or Kwoth the Divine spat Evane-rchard (1956118), se Kingsbury {ioe fora very sini trestment of "lent in adtion,s demon” States tat even the lee obvious appurtenances of segmentation — Glen Eneages of the colonial power, inthis case—dopay the sane featiiy and organization as the Nuer syste, relraced” a Evans Trchard himself might have said g, 1950), tough the essen ‘ereotypes of it natonal prejudice. EvensPrihard apparently Teal Form an ScelFrmation | (aed o note the tony of Hs ow shrnization of the Han ieadeship'e bt ore aandy: treo eh ns eat Cacpeea han he sh The oppton Between segmentation and Esropean “pyramidal sptens teens upon avo taro sefntien sere a fan raonaiam Sopnds nan Orv pues ae chee ae "ome Europeans ano Euepeen sane Giese simor thin nguetay deinen ope aia a Seas aimears fsdeing hers deny or erat ‘hie subaru, asooonasti noi ease ithited roms concen twoneseage are een 1 stneton vat mca ihe hen nee oar Crpeston tween Euopean here a fe ie

You might also like