Law as Culture (original) (raw)
2013, Yale Journal of Law the Humanities
ANTHROPOLOGY: WORKING IN THE PRESENT 137 (Richard G. Fox ed., 1991). These authors criticize the implicit hierarchy in ethnography, which articulates "the authority of the anthropologist by telling anthropology's essential(ist) story-that most modem triangle-of the grand encounter between the West and the rest, with the anthropologist as hypotenuse." Richard G. Fox, For a Nearly New Cultural History, in RECAPTURING ANTHROPOLOGY: WORKING IN THE PRESENT, supra, at 93. Renato Rosaldo puts it more pointedly: The Lone Ethnographer's mask of innocence (or, as he put it, his "detached impartiality") barely concealed his ideological role in perpetuating the colonial control of "distant" peoples and places. His writings represented the human objects of the civilizing mission's global enterprise as if they were the ideal recipients of the white man's burden.
Related papers
International Journal of Law in Context, 2016
Focusing on the history of US anthropology between World War II and the high point of the Vietnam War protests in the late 1960s, this paper aims to historicise the assumed epistemological divide between anthropological and legal thinking. It is shown how anthropology as a discipline in the US has restructured some of its basic assumptions and changed its institutional structure in the context of legal interventions in larger struggles, specifically the court-based battles against racial segregation and the legal proceedings related to indigenous land rights before the Indian Claims Commission. Special consideration is given to an analysis of how objectivity is conceptualised in the literature on anthropological expert witnessing: from mechanical objectivity before 1970 to critical objectivity after 1970. The paper concludes with a caveat against exaggerating existing epistemological differences between anthropology and law, and suggests a more pragmatic approach to interdisciplinary communication.
In his book Anthropology and Law: A Critical Introduction, Mark Goodale gives a concise overview on the contemporary anthropology of law. In Goodale’s narrative, the recent history of legal anthropology emerged with the end of the Cold War, “at a historical moment—fleeting as it turned out to be—when the Kantian ‘sweet dream’ of perpetual peace was being grounded in a cosmopolitan legal imaginary to an extraordinary degree” (200). This liminal moment started developments such as “the juridification of politics, identity (such as indigenous rights), and social organization, at the same time in which global inequality was growing steadily” (211). From this time on, anthropologists began to be interested, much more than before, in international legal orders and transnational legal pluralism. Goodale aims at presenting many of the fruits of over 25 years of such investigations.
AJIL Unbound, 2021
How might the connections between anthropology and international law become more dynamic? I reflect upon this question in this essay using ethnographic insights from the documentary cycles of the UN Human Rights Committee, the treaty body monitoring state compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Building on recent anthropological scholarship on international organizations, bureaucracy, and documents, this essay discusses the knowledge practices and legal technicalities that characterize the international community of human rights lawyers. In particular, I reflect on the legal fiction of difference governing UN treaty bodies’ operations and the empirical sameness of participants in different formal categories in the shared community of practice of human rights lawyers. I conclude by suggesting that anthropological insights could significantly enrich our shared understanding of the diverse and subtle effects of human rights monitoring. Simultaneously such insights may offer rejuvenated inspiration for those international lawyers tackling a sense of losing faith in their discipline, both as an influential tool of world improvement and an invigorating intellectual tradition.
Anthropologists Engaged with the Law (and Lawyers)
2016
The official review of research carried out in British universities in 2014 required departments to present case studies documenting the "impact" ("reach and significance") of their research beyond the academy. Despite misgivings, anthropology departments presented detailed studies across a range of sub-fields of the discipline which were judged to have demonstrated "productive engagement with publics, users and policy makers". Some of the studies illustrated a contribution to one field, what Bourdieu called the "judicial field", which has become increasingly significant for anthropologists across Europe and North America, especially where ethnic, cultural and religious minorities are concerned. The paper examines a number of situations of this kind (including interventions in tribunals assessing the claims of asylum seekers) where anthropologists acting as cultural interpreters or mediators have had to interact with the law and with lawyers a...
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.