Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology
Identifieur interne : 001047 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001046; suivant : 001048Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology
Auteurs : Charlie GalibertSource :
- International Social Science Journal [ 0020-8701 ] ; 2004-09.
Abstract
The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment? The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”. The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FELe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title><author><name sortKey="Galibert, Charlie" sort="Galibert, Charlie" uniqKey="Galibert C" first="Charlie" last="Galibert">Charlie Galibert</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE</idno><date when="2004" year="2004">2004</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001047</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001047</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title><author><name sortKey="Galibert, Charlie" sort="Galibert, Charlie" uniqKey="Galibert C" first="Charlie" last="Galibert">Charlie Galibert</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">International Social Science Journal</title><idno type="ISSN">0020-8701</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2451</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-09">2004-09</date><biblScope unit="volume">56</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">181</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="455">455</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="466">466</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0020-8701</idno></series><idno type="istex">640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">ISSJ506</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0020-8701</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment? The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”. The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Charlie Galibert</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>ISSJ506</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment? The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”. The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.592</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>485 x 697 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1342</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>6864</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>43686</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>12</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>216</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>56</volume><publisherId><json:string>ISSJ</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>12</total><last>466</last><first>455</first></pages><issn><json:string>0020-8701</json:string></issn><issue>181</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1468-2451</json:string></eissn><title>International Social Science Journal</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2451</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2004</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2004</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</json:string></doi><id>640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE</id><score>0.08951735</score><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>WILEY</p></availability><date>2004</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title><author><persName><forename type="first">Charlie</forename><surname>Galibert</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">International Social Science Journal</title><idno type="pISSN">0020-8701</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2451</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2451</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-09"></date><biblScope unit="volume">56</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">181</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="455">455</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="466">466</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">ISSJ506</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2004</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment? The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”. The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2004-09">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2451</doi><issn type="print">0020-8701</issn><issn type="electronic">1468-2451</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="ISSJ"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE JOURNAL">International Social Science Journal</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="09181"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/issj.2004.56.issue-181</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="56">56</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="181">181</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2004-09">September 2004</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="10" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="ISSJ506"></id><id type="supplier" value="506"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="12"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Open Forum</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2004-09-27"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2004-09-27"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2010-03-05"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-29"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-24"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="455">455</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="466">466</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:ISSJ.ISSJ506.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="46"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="8783"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="59"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title><title type="shortAuthors">Charlie Galibert</title><title type="short">Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Charlie</givenNames><familyName>Galibert</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="FR"><unparsedAffiliation>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment?</p><p>The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”.</p><p>The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta><noteGroup><note xml:id="fn5" numbered="no"><p>Charlie Galibert has PhDs in anthropology and philosophy. He is an associate researcher at the Laboratoire d'Anthropologie: Mémoire, identité et Cognition sociale (LAMIC) of the University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France. His research focuses on insularity, Corsica, social and cognitive anthropology, and the epistemology of anthropology. He is the author of <i>La Corse, une île et le monde</i> (Paris: PUF, 2004) and <i>Guide non touristique d'un village corse. Sarrola Carcopino, approche anthropologique</i> (Ajaccio: Albiana, 2004).
Email: <email normalForm="charlie.galibert@ac-nice.fr">charlie.galibert@ac‐nice.fr</email></p></note></noteGroup></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Charlie</namePart><namePart type="family">Galibert</namePart><affiliation>University of Nice‐Sophia Antipolis, France</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2004-09</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2004</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="references">46</extent><extent unit="words">8783</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">The epistemic continuum of anthropology extends “ideally” from the position of a detached observer to that of an implicated actor. Yet this sketch raises questions. From the side of detached observation, do not structures and forms takes the place of the actor, who becomes, so to speak, the observer verifying his own models? Is not participant observation self‐limiting when it posits the ideal of fusion of consciousness, which forbids it from asking the question of otherness? Finally, when the actor assumes the status of observer, is there not the risk of seeing what one already believes, of failing to achieve detachment? The extreme position of objective observer comes up against the specific otherness (the identity) of a subjectivity that is out of reach, and the extreme position of subjective actor comes up against the impossibility of objectivation. An ideally theoretical ethnography is blocked by the actor's irreducible quiddity and an ideally naïve ethnography by the exoticism of theory. In one case, the approach comes down to “anthropology in the absence of Man”; in the other to “Man in the absence of anthropology”. The purpose of the article is to show that an anthropology that conjoins actor and observer is possible in an approach that combines a “state of the issue” and an essay in anthropological epistemology.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>International Social Science Journal</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0020-8701</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1468-2451</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2451</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">ISSJ</identifier><part><date>2004</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>56</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>181</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>455</start><end>466</end><total>12</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.0020-8701.2004.00506.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">ISSJ506</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/EpistemeV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001047 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001047 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= EpistemeV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:640D0BBFA2B80D328395025330BEB7095CEE73FE
|texte= Some preliminary notes on actor–observer anthropology
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |