13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism

Engaging with the world

Eriksen's site

search

Confessionsofausefulidiot,
Or,Whycultureshouldbebroughtbackin
ThomasHyllandEriksen
LBCNewsletter(UppsalaUniversity),October2002

Home

Books

Articles

Journalism

PDFs

Overheating

About

Print

Itisabouttimewefaceuptoit,whetherwelikeitornot:Therelativismuniversalism
tensioninanthropologicalcomparisonissimplynotgoingtogoaway.Duringthepastcentury
ithasbeenrephrased,temporarilytranscended,noisilyneglectedandevenrituallyexorcised
byrecoursetotheprimacyofthelocal,orthementalunityofhumanity,ortheUniversal
DeclarationofHumanRights,oranyotherpretextonemightthinkof.Butnosoonerthanit
evaporatesfromacademia,itreemergeselsewhere,oftenwithavengeance.Inrecentyears
forcertain,theagendaofthedebatehasbeensetnotfromwithinacademia,butinthemass
mediaandinvariouspoliticalarenas.

Considerthesituationtwentyyearsago.Withafewexceptions,anthropologistswerethen
basicallyculturalrelativists.Amainacademicdebateconcernedthepossibilitiesof
reconciliationbetweenrelativismandMarxistevolutionism.ThenonMarxistsdidnotshare
thisanxiety,andcouldhappily(andoftenarrogantly)criticisedevelopmentaidprogrammes
fornottakingculturalspecificitiesintoaccount,spendtheirlunchhourdiscussingfemale
circumcisionintheHornofAfrica(thosewhohadcompletedtheirpassageintoanthropology
werenaturallyinfavourofit)and,intheirsparetime,defendtherighttoselfdetermination
ofculturalgroupseverywhere.Whatwesaiddidnotreallymatter.Onthefewoccasionswhen
theitinerariesofanthropologistsandothersintersected,weweretolerated,butwerenot
takenseriously.

Thisseemsalongtimeagonow.Goneistheintellectualinsularityofthediscipline,andgone
isthesplendidisolationofsocialanthropologyaswell,asasmallsubjectprofessingaccessto
arcaneformsofsecretknowledge.

AsIwrite,itoccurstomethatIbeganmyundergraduatestudiesinsocialanthropology
exactlytwentyyearsago.Theensuingtwodecadeshaveseenthediversificationandgrowthof
thedisciplinephenomenalinsomeplacesanditsincreasingengagementwiththeoutside
worldinatleasttwosignificantways.First,anthropologistsnowroutinelyworkincomplex
modernsocieties,andarethusdirectlyconfronted,asprofessionals,withthevaluesystems

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

1/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism
andpredicamentscharacterisingtheirownsociety.Secondly,manyanthropologistsnowhave
policyrelatedjobs,withstateadministrations,NGOsandsoon.Asaresult,itisnow
impossibleforthediscipline(butperfectlypossible,andevenoftendefensible,formanyof
itspractitioners)nottobeengagedinquestionsconcerningculturalrightsandthe
relationshipbetweenuniversalvaluesandculturalspecificitymoregenerally.

Ironically,weseemtobeworseequippedfortakingonthistaskthanever.AsMikaelKurkiala
(2002)showedinapreviousissueoftheLBCNewsletter,thecurrentdominanceofsocial
constructivismandthefearofobjectifyingdifferencesseemstohavecreatedan
anthropologicaldisciplineperfectlyabletomakesophisticatedstatementsaboutmostissues
except,ofcourse,everythingtodowithculture.Inhiscautiousandambivalentarticle,
Kurkialatracesthedominanceofconstructivismtotheinternaldevelopmentofthe
discipline,towiderintellectualtrendsandtopoliticalrealities.Heiscorrect,Ithink,in
identifyingseveralsourcesforthepresentsituation,althoughthenextquestionoughttobe
whyconstructivismhasbecomethemain(insomeplacestheonlyacceptable)approachnow
andnot,say,inthe1970s.TothisIwillreturninashortwhile.

Kurkialasargumentcanbeoutlinedasfollows.Currentsensibilities(bothpoliticaland
academic)militateagainstanyappealtoobjectivelyexistingentities.Sinceeverythingis
sociallyconstructed,moreover,everythingmighthavebeendifferent(andprobablyoughtto
havebeen).Anybodyclaimingthatprediscursive,prereflexiveaspectsofsociocultural
realitycannotjustbewishedaway(partlybecausepeoplearegenerallyunawareoftheir
existence),isthereforelikelytopromoteathinlydisguisedracist,sexistorethnicsupremacist
argument.This,Kurkialaargues,hasmadeitpoliticallyandintellectuallycontentioustotalk
aboutontologicaldifferencesbetweencategoriesofpeople.Everythingwhichisnotsubject
tochoice(whichatacloserexaminationturnsouttobemereconsumerchoice)isbydefault
politicallysuspectinthisdiscourse.Althoughdiversityiscelebrated(inaBenettonfashion)
differenceisobliteratedandthesearemywordsmoreoftenthannotassociatedwith
religiousfanaticismorexclusivistnationalism.Theconflationofdifferencewithinequality,
moreover,makesthisliberalistargumentpalatabletotheacademicleft,creatinganunholy
alliancebetweenthemarketforcesandacademicchic.
IhaveconsiderablesympathywithKurkialasargument(seeEriksen,2000).Ethnic
nationalismandsexismarepoliticalevils.Culturalessentialismisastraitjacket.Puritanist
traditionalismdoesnothelptheAmazonIndianstodefendtheirrights.Yetthereisa
fundamentalbabyandbathwaterproblemhere.Ifallweareallowedtodoistostudy
peoplesreflexiveconstructionsoftheirculture,thatmeansrelinquishingtheconstitutive
skillsofourcraft:themethodicalawarenessofculturalschemata,internalisedvaluesand
socialarrangementswhicharetakenforgrantedandthereforeunknowntononspecialists,
butwhichitisourtasktounveil.
Theshortanswertotheabovequestionwhynowisneoliberalismasthehegemonicglobal
ideology.Thisideologyoffreetradeandfreechoiceissocommonplaceanduncontested
thesedaysthatitisrarelyrepresentedasanideology(butratherascommonsensekeepin
mindGeertzCommonsenseasaculturalsystem!).Ithaspromotedanupbeatvisionof
societyasbasedonthefreechoicesofconsentingadultssoefficientlythattheuniversities
thesedaysarenotonlyrunasprofitseekingenterprises,butthedominantmodeofthought
intheverysameuniversitiesisperfectlycompatiblewithneoliberalismitself.

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

2/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism

Asoneoftheunwittingaccomplices(orusefulidiots)ofneoliberalismforaboutadecade
(fromaround1985),Ishouldaddthatthereweregoodreasons,andevenbetterarguments,
forasocialconstructivistapproachtoculturalidentityatthetime.Culturalromanticismhad
beenunmaskedasaproductoftheWesternmiddleclasswithspuriousconnectionstothe
actualculturesinquestion.Thosecultureswererapidlychangingandbecomingpartofthe
modernworld.CleverentrepreneurswereexploitingRomanticideasofwholenessand
continuitywiththepastinordertopursuetheirpersonalpoliticaloreconomicinterests.The
horrorsofnationalistexcessesfromethniccleansingtotheinsensitiveexclusionof
minoritiesseemedtoofferachoicebetweenabattlefieldandamarketplace.Besides,our
inheritedethnographicmapoftheworldnolongermatchedtheterritory,characterisedasit
wasbycreolisation,mobility,diversificationandtheappearanceofmoderncultural
production(andaccompanyingreflexivity)inthemostunexpectedplaces.Wewereoverripe
foranewwayofconceptualisingvariationsbetweenlifeworlds,manyofuseagertothrow
offtheshacklesofneoMarxism,Durkheimianism,culturalromanticismorsomeotherholist
orthodoxy.Itwasonlyaftertherevoltagainsttheclassicconceptofculturethatmanyofus
begantosensethatsomethinginalienablehadbeengivenaway,andthattheantiessentialist
discoursehadbeguntomergewithneoliberalism.Kurkialadescribesthedilemma
wonderfullyinhisconclusion,whenhesaysthattheoppositeofdifferenceneednotbe
equalitybutmayequallywellbeindifference.
RebuildingHumptyDumpty?

Modernityisassociatedwithfragmentation,individuation,Gesellschaftandfastmoving
changes.Ifmodernityiseverywhere,itthusseems,thentherecanbenohopeforcultural
communitiesbasedonasenseofsharingandcontinuity.Yetwehaveneverbeenmodern.
Thereisbynowmassiveevidencetotheeffectthatinspiteoftheubiquityofmodernity,
systematicculturaldifferencescontinuetoexist.Collectiveidentitiesbasedonassumptions
ofculturalsimilarityalsoexist.Moreover,thereisacomplicatedrelationshipbetweenthe
two:sometimesthereisaconvincingfitbetweencultureandgroupfrsich,butsometimes
groupsareneatlyboundedwhiletheculturestheyprofesstorepresentarenot.

Anthropologistsshouldreactagainstfraudulentattemptstodelineateauthenticculturesand
facileevolutionistrhetoricwherebyotherculturesmerelybecomepoorimitationsofones
own(cf.thecurrentimmigrantdebatesinWesternEurope).Atthesametime,weshould
pointoutthatculturesdoexistandnotjustpersonsexertingchoice,andthattheyaremorally
equaluntilprovenotherwise.Ifweareengagedinculturalimperialism,weshouldsayso.
Humanrightswork,supportfortheSalmanRushdiesoftheworldandtheprotectionof
oppressedMuslimwomeninWesternsocietiesareobviouslyformsofculturalimperialism,
andshouldbedescribedassuch.However,theonlydefensibleformofculturalimperialismis
theenlightenedone,whichacknowledgestheexistenceofdeepdifferences.

Aftermorethanadecadeofvaryingapplicationsofcultureconceptsfromthequestionable
(SamuelHuntington)tothehorrible(Bosnia)wecannotrelinquishit,butwemustbe
carefulindistinguishingbetweenculturaldifferencesandthepoliticalexploitationof
assumedculturaldifferences.ThelateAlgerianauthorRachidMimouniphrasedtheproblem
accuratelywhen,inatrenchantcriticismofpoliticalIslam,hearguedthattheproblemof
politicisedreligionwasthatittookthereligiosityoutofreligion.ManypracticingHindus

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

3/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism
arguealongthesamelinesagainsthindutva,thedoctrineofpoliticalHinduism.In20th
centuryEuropeanhistory,theexpropriationofGermanculturalhistorybytheNazis,andon
asmallerscale,theexpropriationofVikingsymbolismbytheNorwegianQuislingregime,
madeitdifficultsubsequentlytousethesameuniversesofmeaningforotherpurposes.They
hadbeencontaminated.

Bringingculturebackin

Politicalresponsibilityweighsheavilyonourshouldersthesedaysouracademicorsemi
academicstatementsaboutnations,ethnicgroupsorculturesmayimmediatelybepickedup,
orassimilatedmoreorlesssubconsciously,byideologistsandpoliticianswishingtobuild
theirreputationonnationalchauvinism,ethnicantagonism,enemyimages.Theliberal
academicestablishmentthuswagsawarningfingeratthosewhodaretotalkofcultureasthe
causeofconflicts,shakingtheirheadssadlyoverthoselostsoulswhohavenotyetheededthe
wordsofSaintBarthandSaintGellner,whodonotrealisethatcultureischimericaland
fleeting,andthatreifiedcultureisadangeroustoolinthehandsofnonspecialists.Itis,as
Kurkialapointsout,notonlyintellectuallycorrect,butalsopoliticallycorrecttorejectall
formsofessentialism.

Asaresult,wehavetooeasilydismissedthequestionoftheroleofcultureasadetermining
factorinethnicityinoureagernesstomakeethnicgroupsandrelationshipseverywhere
comparable,fittingthesameanalyticmatrix.Thecurrentlydominantframeworkforidentity
studiesislimitedinsofarasitrulesoutthepossibilityofaliteralreadingofthecultural
universesinquestion.
Itiswidelyassumedintheresearchcommunitythatethnicitycanbeunderstoodwithout
recoursetoculturaldifferencesbetweengroups.Now,fewscholarsofethnicitydenythat
suchdifferencesmayexistindeed,Barthhimselfnotes,inhisfamousIntroduction,thatif
thepatternsofbehaviouroneithersideoftheethnicboundarybecomeidentical,the
boundarywillprobablyceasetobeeffective.No,thepointisratherthatculturaldifferences
arenotheldtoaccountforthecreationandmaintenanceofethnicboundaries.Onlythose
differencesthataremaderelevantcontributetodefininganethnicrelationship,andinother
respects,thevariationwithineachgroupmaybegreaterthanthevariationbetweengroups.
Justasnationhoodmaybelegitimisedbyreferringtoacommonreligion,languageor
territory,asthecasemaybe,ethnicmarkersareseentobearbitrarilyselectedfromawide
culturalrepertoire.Clearly,ifonewantstoemphasiseculturaldifference,oneisunlikelyto
pickout,asasymbolofonescollectiveidentity,atraitthatoneshareswithonesneighbours.
Internalvariationisundercommunicated,andconversely,differencesvisvisothersis
overcommunicated.Thisimportantpointhasbeenusedinaccounts,forexample,ofthe
Bosnianwar,whereaSerbvillagercouldbesaidtohavemoreincommon,culturally
speaking,withaMuslimcovillagerthanwithaSerbfromBelgrade.Thiswouldholdtrueof

bothdialectspokenandwayoflifeingeneral.However,sincereligionwassingledoutasthe
centralidentitymarker,theeffectiveboundarywasdrawnnotbetweenvillagersandcity
dwellers,butbetweenreligiousgroups.Theboundarywasthusarbitrary,itwasarguedit
servedtostrengthenideasoffictitiousdifferencesanddrewonethnicstereotypestodoso.
Thepeoplewhorespondedtothiskindofboundarymakinginsodesperatewayswereseen
notasnormativelydirectedhumanrobots,orasculturaldupes,butasthepassivevictimsof
ideology.(Somuch,bytheway,fortheliberationofactorsfromthestricturesof

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

4/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism
authoritariantheory.)

Nothingcomesoutofnothing.Inoneofthemostdetailedaccountsofethnicityinprewar
Bosnia,ToneBringa(1995)showsthatalthoughculturaldifferencesbetweentheethnicor
religiousgroupswereperhapsnegligible,andalthoughrelationsbetweenSerbs,Muslimsand
Croatscouldbecordial,therewereneverthelessimportantsocialboundarymechanisms
betweenthem,notincosmopolitanSarajevoperhaps,butintheruralareas.Intermarriage
wasrestricted,thecloseinformalnetworksoffriendstendedtobemonoethnic,andthe
discretegroupsmaintaineddifferentmythsoforigin.Theintimatesphere,inotherwords,
seemstohavebeenlargelymonoethnicandbythistoken,Bosniawasapluralsocietyinthe
classicsensethepublicarenaswereshared,buttheprivateoneswerediscrete.Wemay
choosenottospeakofsuchfeaturesofsocialrealityandeverydaylifeintermsofculture,
buttheyareneithermorenorlessinvented,orreal,thananythingelse.Peopledonotchoose
theirkin,theycannotchoosetodoawaywiththeirchildhoodandeverythingtheylearntata
tenderage.Theseareaspectsofidentitywhicharenotchosen,whichareincorporatedand
implicit.Ofcourse,werelatetothemasreflexiveagents,butwedosowithinlimitationsthat
arenotchosen.Suchlimitationsformtheobjectivefoundationsofidentification,ontopof
whichsituationalselectionandrelationalidentitiescanbeplayedout.
Aonesidedemphasisonthemanipulationofsymbols,thesituationalselectionofidentity
andthefleetingandindefinitecharacterofcultureseemstosuggestthatnothingreally
endures,thatthesocialworldiscontinuouslyrecreated,andthatconstructivistanalytical
approachesmaytellthewholestoryabouthumanidentification.Thiskindofview,whichis
rarelyfarawayincontemporarystudiesofethnicityandnationalism,orforthatmatterin
currentlyfashionablesocialphilosophy,wouldnotjustbemethodologicallyindividualist,but
also,itseemstome,aratherstrongexpressionofvoluntarism.Suchaviewwould,tothe
socialscientist,implythatheorshewouldhavetounlearneverythingheorshehaslearnt
aboutsocialisation,thetransmissionofknowledgeandskillsfromonegenerationtothenext,
thepowerofnorms,theunconsciousimportanceofreligionandlanguageforidentityanda
senseofcommunity.Forhowaresocietiesintegrated,ifnotthroughculture,whichmustnot
beseenmerelyasasociallyconstructedcommonheritagebutratherasasharedsystemof
communication?

WhatIamsayingis,ineffect,thatculturehas,paradoxically,beenbracketedfor
methodologicalandpoliticalreasonsincontemporarystudiesofculturalidentification,and
Iwillnowsuggesthowitcanbebroughtbackin.Inaunipolarpost11Septemberworld,we
cannotaffordnotto.
Thatwhichisnotchosen

InhisintroductiontoTheInventionofTradition,EricHobsbawm(1983)distinguishes
betweeninventedtraditionsandnoninventedones,whichhavea"real"continuity.Against
thisdichotomyithasbeenpointedoutthatalltraditionsareinacertainsenseinvented.That
istrue,butinanothersenseitismeaningfultodistinguishbetweenthosetraditionsthathave
beenconsciouslyinventedforpolitical,usuallynationorempirebuilding,purposesand
thosewhichhavearisenunderothercircumstances.Similarly,itmakessensetodistinguish
betweenthoseaspectsofculturewhichareselfconsciouslywornasidentitylabelsthe
tulipsoftheNetherlands,thetribaldancesofKenya,thesteelbandsofTrinidadandthose
aspectswhicharequietlyreproducedwithoutformingpartofselfidentity.Bysinglemindedly

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

5/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism
focusingontheloudandconspicuousexpressionsofcultureininterethniccontexts,
researchershavenotonlybeenabletoconcludethatculturelargelyexistsasapoliticaltool,
butbyimplication,theimplicitandincorporatedtakenforgrantedaspectsofculturebecome
neglected.

Whenwetalkofhistoryinlate1990sacademicdiscourse,itisoftenreferredtointheDavid
LowenthalsenseofhiscelebratedThePastisaForeignCountry(Lowenthal1985)wherehe,
onthebasisofamassofexamplesofthecommercialisationofculturalhistory,showsthat
historyisoftennottheproductofthepast,butofthepresentinotherwords,historyas
myth,aslegitimation,asaparticular,ideologicallychargedreconstructionofthepast.
However,aseveryschoolboyknows,historyisnotmerelyhistoriography,butitisalsoa
sedimentedpastwhichworksinfrequentlyunacknowledgedways,shapingmindsandsocial
circumstancesoveralonguedureandtherebycreatingverydifferentconditionsforthought
andactionindifferentsocialenvironments.Itiscertainlyilluminatingtostudyhowhistoryis
beingusedbutitisalsoagreatintellectualchallenge,whichmayshedimportantlightonthe
present,toinvestigatetheeffectsofhistorythatisnotbeingusedforaparticularlegitimating
purpose.Whatiscalledfor,inotherwords,isareorientationbacktothestudyofimplicit,
nonreflexive,doxicfoundationsforthoughtandactionhistoricaldepthandcultural
sensitivity,thatwhichisbeyondstrategyandselfconsciousness.Letmeillustratethispoint
withanexamplefrommyownethnographicworkinMauritius.

Mauritius,apolyethnicislandstateinthesouthwesternIndianOcean,hasbeendescribedas
averitablelaboratoryforsocialstudies,encompassingfourworldreligionsandabewildering
numberoflanguagesonasmallish,isolatedoceanicislandbetweenAfricaandIndia.The
mainethnicgroupsarerecognisedasHindus,TamilsandMuslims,allofthemofIndian
origin,CreolesofAfrican,Malagasyandmixedorigin,FrancoMauritiansofFrenchdescent
andChinese,aswellasanumberofsmallergroupsbasedonfinerdistinctions,whichpopin
andoutofexistencedependingonthecontext.Culturalstereotypesareinvokedlocallyto
justifythecontinuedexistenceofethnicboundaries.Toanybodywhohasdonefieldworkin
Mauritius,itiseasytoargueanditcanbeanalyticallyimportanttoshowthattheactual
culturalvariationsinMauritiusdonotfollowthesamelinesasethnicvariationsdo.Linguistic
variationismuchlessthanonemightexpect,andthevastmajorityofthepopulationspeaks
Kreol,aFrenchlexiconCreole.Dialectsvarynotsomuchalongethniclinesasalongregional
lines,apointwhichhasalsobeenmadewithrespecttodialectsofSerboCroatianinBosnia.
Moreover,religiousdifferencesarealsolessconspiciousthanonewouldexpect.Onthe
villagelevel,religiousnotionsandpracticesaresimilaralthoughvillagersmaybelongto
HinduismandCatholicism,religionswhichareintheoryverydifferent.Andonemightgoon
toshowthatneitherdiet,householdstructure,leisureactivitiesorrepresentationsofpolitics
varysystematicallyalongethniclines.Inmanyrespects,differencespertainingtosocialclass
andtheruralurbandividearemoreprofoundthanethnicdifferences,sothatanurban
middleclassCreolewouldhavemoreincommonwithanurbanmiddleclassHinduthanwith
aruralworkingclassCreole.

YetethnicboundariesremainrelativelysolidinmostoftheMauritianpopulation,although
therehasbeenagrowthintheoccurrenceofintermarriageinrecentyears.Thatinitselfis
significant,butitisnotthepointIwanttomakehere.WhatIwouldliketocallattentionto,is
ratherthestrikingdifferencesinsocialmobilitybetweenthelargestethnicgroups,the
HindusandtheCreoles.Sincethemid1980s,Mauritiushasgonethroughadramaticperiod

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

6/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism
ofeconomicchange,movingfromamonoculturedependentonsugarexportstoadiversified
economywheremanufacturingandtourismhaveattainedgrowingimportance.Newjob
opportunitiesandarapideconomicgrowthratehaveledtoageneralincreaseinthematerial
standardofliving.However,inthisfastprocessofchange,ithasbecomeincreasinglyclear
thattheCreolesarebeingleftcollectivelybehind.Theirunemploymentrateisstillfairlyhigh,
theirlevelofeducationiscomparativelylow,andfewenterprisesareledandrunbyCreoles.
Inmyveryfirstacademicpaper,Creolecultureandsocialchange(Eriksen,1986),Itriedto
explainthisbyreferringtoculturalvaluesandfeaturesofsocialorganisation,andIshall
repeattheargumentbrieflynow.TheHindushaveasocialorganisationbasedonpatrilineal
kinshipand,toalesserextent,caste.Theyformcorporategroups,manystillpractice
arrangedmarriageandareendogamous,andexpectationsofkinshiployaltyarestrong.Their
everydaymoralityrevolvesaroundnotionsoffrugality,prudence,planningand
responsibilityforonesdependents.TheCreoles,onthecontrary,haveasocialorganisation
basedonthefragilenuclearfamily.Theyhavenocorporategroups,nocollectivemarriage
strategies,andshallowgenealogies.AmongCreoles,individualismandacertainjoiedevivre
tendtobestrongvalues.AnindividualCreolewhoisprofessionallysuccessful,israrely
expectedtoaidhisrelativesinfindinggoodcareersindeed,insomecases,upwardlymobile
Creoleschangeethnicmembershipandstartidentifyingthemselvesasgensdecouleur,
Coloureds.InCreolecommunities,thedistrustofformalorganisationandhierarchyare
strong.Thisethicmaybetracedbacktotheeraofslavery,wheretheconjugalbondwasloose
ornonexistent,andwhereindividualfreedommusthavebeenvaluedextremelyhighly.It
couldalsobearguedthatCreolevaluesareindebtedtothoseoftheirancientslavemasters
thevaluesofaristocraticFrance.Whateverthecasemaybe,theCreolesingeneral,quite
contrarytotheHindus,lackculturalvaluesandorganisationalresourcesenablingthemto
takecollectiveadvantageofindustrialisation.

ThismeansthatinordertounderstandwhatislocallyspokenofasthemalaiseCrole,itis
notsufficienttolookatethnicityaspoliticsandastheselfconsciouscommunicationof
culturaldifference.Culturaldifferencesexistandmaybecomerelevantevenwhentheyare
notconsciously"maderelevant".ThevaluesandwayoflifeassociatedwiththeCreolesare
counterproductiveinpoliticalandeconomiccareersyet,theyaredemonstrablysodeeply
embeddedinpersonalexperiencesandlifeworldsthattheycannotbeaccountedformerely
byreferringtostereotypesandreflexiveidentitypolitics.

AsWorsleypointedoutyearsago,onecannotsimplyexchangeonesethnicidentityfor
anotherlifeisnotaselfservicecafeteria(Worsley1984).Inaddition,onecannoteasilytrade
oneschildhoodexperiencesandpersonalnetworkforothersonedoesntchooseones
culturaluniverse.Cultureistosomeextentchosenandconstructed,butitisalsotoagreat
extentimplicit,ithasanelementoffate,ordestiny.Thisisanacutelyrelevantpointtomake
inaworldwherearrangedmarriagesareseenasanevilpatriarchalplot,whereallcultural
significanceistakenawayfromfemalecircumcision,andwheretheUSAdisplaysagrowing
blindnesstoanythingsmackingofnonUSlifeworlds.Anthropologycanandshouldoffera
recipefordisentanglingtheseissues.Ifwearegoingtobeculturalimperialists,andwe
probablyhavenootheroption,thenatleastweshouldbeenlightenedandrespectfulones.To
arrivethere,weneedtounderstandcultureassomethingwhichcanneitherbeexchangedin
themarketplace,norreducedtoitspoliticalface.

References

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

7/8

13/11/2015

Antiantiessentialism

Barth,Fredrik(1969)Introduction,inF.Barth,ed.,EthnicGroupsandBoundaries.Oslo:
ScandinavianUniversityPress.
Bringa,Tone(1995)BeingMuslimtheBosnianWay:IdentityandCommunityinaCentral
BosnianVillage.Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversityPress.Eriksen,ThomasHylland(1986)
CreoleCultureandSocialChange.JournalofMauritianStudies,1(2).
(2000)Ethnicityandculture:Asecondlook,inHermanRoodenburgandReginaBendix,
eds.,ManagingEthnicity.Amsterdam:HetSpinhuis.
Hobsbawm,Eric(1983)Introduction,inEricHobsbawmandTerenceRanger,eds.,The
InventionofTradition.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Kurkiala,Mikael(2002)Businessasusual?Criticalremarksonthetrivializationofdifference
anddiversity.LBCNewsletter,2.
Lowenthal,David(1985)ThePastisaForeignCountry.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
Worsley,Peter(1984)TheThreeWorlds.London:Weidenfeld&Nicolson.

t.h.eriksen@sai.uio.no

http://hyllanderiksen.net/Confessions.html

8/8