Waiting for accelerations. Speculating on guar seeds in the Indian desert

Puri, Stine Simonsen

doi:10.1080/02757206.2020.1817001

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies of gambling have largely bolstered Goffman and Geertz’s claims; Stine Puri’s body of work on wagering in India is largely indicative of this (Puri, 2016, 2020, 2021). Puri (2016) notes that horse race gambling seems to afford context-specific forms of affection and relationships.…”

Section: All Bets Are Offmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to think about people who don’t want to be studied: Further reflections on studying up

Souleles

2021

Critique of Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now routine for anthropologists to study those who exercise power and control wealth and status in any number of societies. Implicit in anthropology’s long-standing commitment to apprehending societies in their totality, and explicit in the call to study up, paying attention to power is just one of the routine things that anthropologists do in the course of their fieldwork. That said, many theoretical and ethical norms in the discipline are calibrated to allow researchers to both know about and protect those with relatively little power who made up much of anthropology’s original topical area of interests. By contrast, studying people who exercise power entails special ethical and theoretical consideration. This article enumerates some of those considerations, and suggests that anthropologists need to have coherent theories of social action in addition to theories of social meaning. The article also suggests that some canonical disciplinary ethical norms are inappropriate for the study of the powerful for empirical and practical reasons.

show abstract