The Year 2013 in Sociocultural Anthropology: Cultures of Circulation and Anthropological Facts

Abstract

In this review essay, I explore the relationship between cultures of circulation and anthropological facts. Research published in 2013 advanced the field by attending to the coproduction of globally circulating things (commodities, race, brands, authenticity, blood) and specific cultural landscapes. Building on the field's renewed interest in materiality, scholars showed how anthropological facts are produced at the intersection of interlocking cultural classification systems and a world that is heterogeneous and dynamic. Moving beyond the notion that shared meanings and categories are attached to or layered on people and things, this approach conceptualized such relations recursively. Scholars suggested that race-as an anthropological fact-becomes biological through social practice and, similarly, that cultural assumptions and political biases become environmental because they are embedded in our infrastructures and built landscapes. This approach permeates many of the articles reviewed and links the clusters into which I have grouped them: "Value and Incommensurability," "Brands and Authenticity," "Race and Blood," and "Infrastructure and Citizenship." I conclude by discussing the challenges and opportunities for a sociocultural anthropology that recognizes the transformative power of global connection while refusing to give up its long-running pursuit of cultural wisdom and more humane social configurations. [circulation, facts, infrastructure, value, sociocultural anthropology, year in review]RESUMEN En este ensayo revisión, exploro la relación entre las culturas de circulación y los hechos antropológicos.Investigaciones publicadas en el 2013 avanzaron el campo de estudio atendiendo a la coproducción de cosas circulando globalmente (mercancías, raza, marcas, autenticidad, sangre) y paisajes culturales específicos. Construyendo sobre el renovado interés del campo de estudio en materialidad, investigadores mostraron cómo hechos antropológicos son producidos en la intersección de sistemas de clasificación cultural entrelazadores, y un mundo que es heterogéneo y dinámico. Yendo más allá de la noción que significados y categorías compartidos están ligados a, o divididos en capas en gente y cosas, esta aproximación conceptualizó tales relaciones recursivamente.Investigadores sugieren que raza-como un hecho antropológico-se hace biológica mediante la practica social, y similarmente, asunciones culturales y sesgos políticos se convierten en ambientales porque están embebidos en nuestras infraestructuras y paisajes construidos. Esta aproximación permea muchos de los artículos revisados y conecta los grupos en que les he reunido: "Valor e inconmensurabilidad", "Marcas y autenticidad", "Raza y sangre" e "Infraestructura y ciudadanía". Concluyo discutiendo los retos y oportunidades para una antropología sociocultural

The anthropology of infrastructure

“…But understanding the connection between infrastructures and circulation emerges out of the same concern for developing a heuristic of relations and relationality. Th e focus on circulation leads to two types of arguments which share intuitions on the contemporary meaning of connectivity, circulation and exchange: about infrastructure as a lens onto contemporary forms of accumulation and about infrastructure as an instrument for constructing a "problem-specifi c group of sites" (Carse 2016;Carse 2014b).…”

Sovereign anxiety in Myanmar: An emotional geopolitics of China's Belt and Road Initiative

“…In Xinjiang, Tynen (2021) reports how Uyghurs describe feelings of being sick, tired and depressed upon encounters with Chinese state authorities. We contribute to this literature by explicitly linking infrastructure and emotion, together with scholars across the social sciences who highlight infrastructure's affective and ontological characteristics (Appel et al, 2015; Carse, 2014; Cowen, 2014; Dalakoglou & Kallianos, 2018; Graham & Marvin, 2002; Harvey & Knox, 2015; Larkin, 2013; Murton, 2017; Reeves, 2017), including in the Myanmar context (Kiik, 2020; Sarma et al, 2022).…”

Storing and sharing: Everyday relationships with digital material

“…Transactions, by contrast, represent a finite closure where something, usually money, is given for a service or good and implies that no further dealings need to be had and both parties are free of any further, reciprocal relationship. The sharing or circulation of commodities and goods, in particular, can become a site of negotiation and contestation for individuals and the social institutions they represent (Carse, 2014: 391). The materiality of items that are shared, and how they are shared, enables us to uncover how use value, including social connections, is embodied by methods of exchange which transform particular objects or things into commodities and, in turn, how these might change over time (Kopytoff, 1986; Money, 2007).…”