Trade in your item
Get a £0.45
Gift Card.
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See all 2 images

Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography (School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series) Paperback – 1 Jul 1992

See all 2 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
"Please retry"
"Please retry"
£20.99 £0.46

There is a newer edition of this item:

Trade In this Item for up to £0.45
Trade in Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography (School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series) for an Amazon Gift Card of up to £0.45, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Learn more

Product details

  • Paperback: 345 pages
  • Publisher: University of California Press; Later Printing edition (1 July 1992)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0520057295
  • ISBN-13: 978-0520057296
  • Product Dimensions: 15.2 x 1.9 x 22.9 cm
  • Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 487,729 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Product Description


"The nine critical essays collected here result from an advanced seminar held in 1984 at The School for American Research in Santa Fe, N.M. . . . The questions raised by these essays examine the parameters and consequences of anthropological (and other) writing to an extent that goes beyond any previous collection. The book is highly recommended to professionals in ethnographic field work and to anyone interested in presenting 'other' cultural contexts."--"Science Books and Films

Inside This Book (Learn More)
First Sentence
Our frontispiece shows Stephen Tyler, one of this volume's contributors, at work in India in 1963. Read the first page
Explore More
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
See the customer review
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
Clifford and Marcus are excellent editors and Clifford's introductory text is a key text for any artists employing ethnographic techniques to research their area of interest. It marks the sea change found within in ethnographic study from considering the observed to wondering what the perspective and agenda of the observer is.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on (beta) 4 reviews
26 of 27 people found the following review helpful
A Must For All Ethnographers 9 Sep 2001
By Michael Spivey, Ph.D. - Published on
Format: Paperback
As the title says, not only do ethnographers objectively research and write "about" cultures, in the process, they are also "writing Culture": that is, we constitute the cultural realities even as we attempt to describe them. Language is not a transparent window through which we describe an already existing reality. language "is the maker of this world" says Fisher. Understanding this, the ethnographer is confronted with writing and its importance in the ethnographic description and analysis of cultural worlds. Self-reflexivity in writing ethnography is central to the text. Who has the authority to write Others into being? How does my position as a gendered, racial, and class subject affect my "writing-up" of culture? These are just some of the questions posed by this text, with the added bonus of some possible answers as well. A must read for anyone on the verge of conducting ethnographic research. Also a great text for qualitative research courses concerned with issues of postmodernity and postcolonialism.
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
A French Reading of A Classic in Cultural Anthropology 7 Mar 2013
By Etienne ROLLAND-PIEGUE - Published on
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
The distinction between science and the humanities has evolved over the course of history. Their perimeter has fluctuated: men of science used to be men of letters. In the nineteenth century, the constitution of a "science of man" robbed literature of its traditional object: moral philosophy, or the painting of man in all his social, cultural and psychological aspects. The relationship between science and literature is the story of a gradual encroachment, expropriation and conquest. Sociology and the other social sciences constituted themselves at the turn of the twentieth century by affirming a radical departure from literature. In a spirit of compromise, a great divide was offered. The qualities eliminated from science were localized in the category of "literature". On the side of literature, scientists conceded the domain of the imagination, the power of eloquence, the spirit of witticism and the pleasures of aestheticism. On the side of science, mirror qualities prevailed: observation, precision, rigor, and expertise.

The division between anthropology (the "science of man") and literature was never so clear-cut, however. In France, ethnographers prided themselves of their literary talent, and often wrote a "second book" in addition to their ethnographic account from fieldwork experience. This "literary supplement" to the voyage of the ethnographer was particularly developed as a genre in the first half of the twentieth century. One needs only to mention L'Afrique fantôme by Michel Leiris (published in 1934), Les Flambeurs d'hommes set by Marcel Griaule on the Ethiopian highlands (1934), Mexique, terre indienne by Jacques Soustelle (1936) and, of course, Tristes Tropiques by Claude Lévi-Strauss, first published by Collection Terre humaine in 1955. [For readers who master the French language: Vincent Debaene, a literary historian, has recently published a book, L'Adieu au voyage, surveying the genre and putting it into context. I am borrowing many ideas in this review from his book].

In the same period, there was a rich dialogue between anthropology and the literary avant-garde. The Surréalistes were enthralled by primitive cultures, and actively supported the establishment of the first exhibitions and museal displays of ethnological artifacts. A generation later, under the guise of structuralism, literary criticism borrowed massively from anthropology. Roland Barthes patrolled the literary field under the influence of Claude Lévi-Strauss, and claimed to abolish the difference between primary and secondary material, between the text and its commentary. Very often these borrowings were based on misreadings and semantic analogies, and Lévi-Strauss himself resented the use of science as a metaphor, a theme Bricmont and Sokal would later exploit by fueling the "science wars". But the important point here is not whether references to anthropology and structuralism were accurate: even misunderstandings and deformations can be productive if they generate new questionings and new modes of writing.

This long history of dialogue, borrowings, and confrontation between literature and anthropology in France may explain why Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography was never translated into French (a quick search shows the book is available in German, in Spanish, in Italian, in Japanese and in Chinese). This volume, edited by James Clifford and Georges Marcus and published in 1986, has achieved iconic status in the English-speaking world. Like the publication of The Interpretation of Cultures by Clifford Geertz a decade earlier, one may speak of ethnographic style before and after Writing Culture. One of the editors even publishes about every decade a follow-up paper pondering the legacy of his own book. For the French (and this may sound preposterous, but so it is), this is déjà vu all over again: we didn't have to wait for Writing Culture in order to witness the "coming of a literary consciousness to ethnography" (Marcus), or to highlight "the constructed, artificial nature of cultural accounts" (Clifford). Pierre Bourdieu, perhaps thinking of Clifford Geertz, derided the whole effort as "textism".

In spite of all this, French social scientists should do well to read Writing Culture, if only to reclaim their heritage and confront French thought with its own radicalism. After all, Clifford Geertz and James Clifford made ample borrowings from "French theory", and under the "textual turn" one can easily detect the influences of Paul Ricoeur, Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida or Michel Foucault. As Paul Rabinow notes in his contribution, ideas often circulates with a twenty years' time lag. "The moment when the historical profession is discovering cultural anthropology in the (unrepresentative) person of Clifford Geertz is just the moment when Geertz is being questioned in anthropology. So, too, anthropologists, or some of them in any case, are now discovering and being moved to new creations by the infusion of ideas from deconstructionist literary criticism, now that it has lost its cultural energy in literature departments," writes Rabinow, who could also have added that he wrote his Reflections on Fieldwork in Morocco, a highly self-reflexive and literary text, twenty years after Lévi-Strauss' Tristes Tropiques.

So what should one retain from Writing Culture? First, a willingness to experiment with new writing techniques and non-conventional forms. One of the reasons French anthropologists wrote a literary account of their fieldwork was because they felt constrained by the codes and conventions of academic writing. Likewise, Malinowski vented in his field diaries all the frustration, anger, and subjective feelings that could not make way in his ethnographic writings. As Clifford notes, "Sapir and Benedict had, after all, to hide their poetry from the scientific gaze of Franz Boas" (Clifford Geertz, on the other hand, didn't need to hide his literary musings, and often referred to both classical and contemporary poetry in his texts.) Writing Culture enthusiastically advocated experimental forms of writing, and offered some samples of what a postmodern ethnography could look like. True to form, some essays are not very convincing, and are not that revolutionary in stylistic terms in the first place. But new writing techniques matured, as evidenced by the evolution between Vincent Crapanzino's contribution to this volume, a confused tract with no clear intent except to smear Clifford Geertz's reputation, and his recently published The Harkis: The Wound That Never Heals, a beautifully written and deeply moving book which I shall review on this website.

The second lasting contribution of Writing Culture is the recommendation given to ethnographers to pay attention not only to what they write, but how they write as well. The anthropologist spends more time in his university office, writing papers, than in the field, doing participatory observation--and even there, field notes, diary entries, and communicating through diagrams or lists of words are an important part of fieldwork. "No longer a marginal, or occulted, dimension, writing has emerged as central to what anthropologists do both in the field and thereafter," writes James Clifford. This concern with the "anthropologist as author" was also shared by Clifford Geertz, who is criticized by several contributors to Writing Culture but should really be seen as the father of this whole enterprise. Attention to text and to discourse drove anthropology closer to other disciplines, from literary criticism and cultural studies to postmodern philosophy. The focus on the writing process also led to a renewed interest in the marginalia of ethnographic fieldwork. The published monograph leaves aside many written materials, from field notes to archival documents, that have contributed to its makeup and that could be of interest to the readers. The archives of famous anthropologists were laid open, and the publication of Bronislaw Malinowski's personal diary in 1967 led to a complete reassessment of the teachings of one of the founders of the discipline.

Thirdly, Writing Culture contributed to the rethinking of fieldwork methods and a new emphasis on the political dimension of ethnography that came in the 1970s and 1980s. As Clifford writes, "anthropology no longer speaks with automatic authority for others defined as unable to speak for themselves." Informants and field collaborators were treated as co-authors with a voice of their own. By questioning modes of authority and discursive strategies in ethnography, modern anthropologists emphasized the dialogic dimension of fieldwork and introduced a multiplicity of voices and perspectives in their texts. Clearly, there was a lot of wishful thinking and political correctness in the call to abolish the divide between the discourse of the native and the meta-language of science, between the observer and the observed. Likewise, the denunciation of Clifford Geertz's political aloofness and ironical distance from the ideological causes of the day may have been inspired more by campus politics than by a sincere effort to empower the disenfranchised. But the idea that anthropology can help provide our multicultural societies with a code of ethics or a moral compass seems to me the best justification for the pursuit and advancement of a "science of man".
8 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Scholarship, Culture, Poetics and Politics: shared concerns 20 Mar 2003
By D. Carlton Hawley Jr. - Published on
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
This collection constitutes another solid, suggestive and significant contribution to what is now one of the most dynamic arenas in the humanities and outside: Culture. The essays speak to all manner of representational practices and explore vital questions that no scholar interested in social dynamics of any kind can afford to ignore.
20 of 67 people found the following review helpful
An Anthropological Dead End... 28 Sep 2003
By A Customer - Published on
Format: Paperback
When initially published, these essays provided a salutary textual critique of anthropology. Today they read as essays whose implications are circumscribed to the work of that generation of American cultural anthropologists who developed in the shadows of modernist giants (namely Geertz). This collection represents their mid-life crisis, rather than the field of ethnography. Most of their students (and students' students) have not repeated that generation's unreflexive ethical idealism and political naivete. This progress was not a result of these essays. The exception in this book is Tyler's innovative and actually experimental proposal for "writing culture". Otherwise, be warned. Read these critiques by baby boomer-era anthropologists with a grain of salt.
Were these reviews helpful? Let us know