Anthropological suspicion, public interest and NAGPRA

Abstract

This article asks why suspicion regarding the aims of anthropology has been heightened in an era when anthropologists are perhaps engaged in more advocacy work than ever. While it may seem contradictory or even 'unfair' that anthropology continues to get a 'bad rap', this perception (of and about all parties involved) is itself an important focus for anthropological reflection. In this article, I examine an event that has contributed to this issue in important ways -the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) in 1990 -to illustrate why suspicions about anthropologists have taken on new dimensions, and to suggest what kind of approach anthropologists might take in responding to these issues.

Authenticity, Invention, Articulation: Theorizing Contemporary Hawaiian Traditions from the Outside

“…is considerably more cacophonous and shrill (Johnson 2007;cf. Friesen 2001, 157-165;Fine-Dare 2005). In several ongoing disputes, more than ten competing Hawaiian groups have been at loggerheads, several claiming authentic Hawaiianness and the authority this confers as their exclusive domain.…”