Refine
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Anthropologie (2) (remove)
In their study on "The modern anthropology of Southeast Asia", Victor King and William Wilder raise the question in how far the region can be taken as a field of anthropological enquiry. After their initial discussion of cultural and social trends as well as anthropological studies, they conclude that the common issue of the region is its diversity. They come to the rather pragmatic solution that "South-East Asia constitutes a convenient unit of study, ... but ... we should not think of it in terms of a bounded, unified and homogenous socio-cultural area" (King/Wilder 2003: 24). We doubt that there are homogenous socio-cultural areas anywhere else. These are usually constructed through the invention of traditions and ideological simulations. The interesting case with regards to Southeast Asia is, why no such homogeneity has been constructed, not even by anthropologists or sociologists. ...
'[C]ulture as text' initially proved to be a pivotal bridging metaphor between cultural anthropology and literary studies. Following an admittedly ambivalent career path, the concept of 'culture as text' has nevertheless continued to rise and has become an over-determined general principle, an emphatic key metaphor, even an overall "programmatic motto for the study of culture" […]. At first, this concept was still closely connected to ethnographic research and to the semiotic framework of interpretive cultural anthropology. However, since the end of the 1990s it has been utilised to encompass a much broader interdisciplinary horizon for the study of culture. 'Culture as text' advanced from being a conceptual metaphor for the condensation of cultural meanings to a rather free-floating formula frequently referred to in analyses within disciplines involved in the study of culture. Surprisingly, 'culture as text' has remained a consistent key phrase throughout the discourses concerned with the study of culture—even after the culture debate had long since turned away from the holistic understanding of culture implied by the formula.