A Thrice-Told Tale is one ethnographer's imaginative and powerful response to the methodological issues raised by feminist and postmodernist critics of traditional ethnography. The author, a feminist anthropologist, uses three texts developed out of her research in Taiwan—a piece of fiction, anthropological fieldnotes, and a social science article—to explore some of these criticisms.
Each text takes a different perspective, is written in a different style, and has different "outcomes," yet all three involve the same fascinating set of events. A young mother began to behave in a decidedly abherrant, perhaps suicidal manner, and opinion in her village was sharply divided over the reason. Was she becoming a shaman, posessed by a god? Was she deranged, in need of physical restraint, drugs, and hospitalization? Or was she being cynically manipulated by her ne'er-do-well husband to elicit sympathy and money from her neighbors? In the end, the woman was taken away from the area to her mother's house. For some villagers, this settled the matter; for others the debate over her behavior was probably never truly resolved.
The first text is a short story written shortly after the incident, which occurred almost thrity years ago; the second text is a copy of the fieldnotes collected about the events covered in the short story; the third text is an article published in 1990 in American Ethnologist
that analyzes the incident from the author's current perspective. Following each text is a Commentary in which the author discusses such topics as experimental ethnography, polyvocality, authorial presence and control, reflexivity, and some of the differences between fiction and ethnography.
The three texts are framed by two chapters in which the author discusses the genereal problems posed by feminist and postmodernist critics of ethnography and presents her personal exploration of these issues in an argument that is strongly self-reflexive and theoretically rigorous. She considers some feminist concerns over colonial research methods and takes issues with the insistence of some feminists tha the topics of ethnographic research be set by those who are studied. The book concludes with a plea for ethnographic responsibility based on a less academic and more practical perspective.
0 有用 Roquentin 2017-10-16 07:10:53
Wolf反对后现代、后殖民对于文本的过度强调,认为民族志危机的出路在于更实际的去履行对受众和信息源的责任。可是她又用三种不同文本书写同一事件,以此实践同时反思人类学的后现代性。但用gender theory分析Shamanism那一部分我觉得有点弱。
0 有用 我 2021-02-16 02:02:56
很薄的一本书。Margery用同一个田野事件的三个文本:三十年前写成的小说、田野笔记、与三十年后的一篇学术论文,一方面针对后殖民的批评为自己辩护(一个白人女性研究台湾妇女),同时弥合女权主义和人类学的潜在冲突。另一方面回应了后现代和实验性民族志写作(Writing Culture)对人类学的挑战。Margery肯定了reflexivity对民族志写作的重要性,但也明确了人类学者在写作时判断选择不同... 很薄的一本书。Margery用同一个田野事件的三个文本:三十年前写成的小说、田野笔记、与三十年后的一篇学术论文,一方面针对后殖民的批评为自己辩护(一个白人女性研究台湾妇女),同时弥合女权主义和人类学的潜在冲突。另一方面回应了后现代和实验性民族志写作(Writing Culture)对人类学的挑战。Margery肯定了reflexivity对民族志写作的重要性,但也明确了人类学者在写作时判断选择不同叙述的必要性和责任。 (展开)
0 有用 Giselle715 2024-01-18 03:39:04 英国
一个实验性民族志,作者后现代主义的缺点之一就是,实验性本身比其发现了什么新的视角更加值得重视。一个故事,一个fieldnotes,一个民族志。三个视角让我明白了民族志的写作,以一种惊奇的方式透露了女权主义视角的写作,观点也在不经意中表达出来。
0 有用 Yuna 2024-04-27 20:57:08 英国
现实和学术相交织,验证了上学期预言:“我有强烈预感,我所学的东西和我的生活必定有种联系,只是我还没有找到这种联系。” 我很开心现在找到了这种联系,生活让我理解人类学,人类学也在指导着我的生活。当我第一次读这本书的时候,我只看了故事部分,理论部分太晦涩,太难懂。但我第二次读的时候,我竟发现这本书关于人类学权利差问题的讨论是如此的辩证和全面,只是——人类学家最终是在说自己的故事,这个论断我还是不太能... 现实和学术相交织,验证了上学期预言:“我有强烈预感,我所学的东西和我的生活必定有种联系,只是我还没有找到这种联系。” 我很开心现在找到了这种联系,生活让我理解人类学,人类学也在指导着我的生活。当我第一次读这本书的时候,我只看了故事部分,理论部分太晦涩,太难懂。但我第二次读的时候,我竟发现这本书关于人类学权利差问题的讨论是如此的辩证和全面,只是——人类学家最终是在说自己的故事,这个论断我还是不太能接受。也许是道德的模糊,但谁知道呢?也许我没必要成为一个道德无瑕的人。 (展开)
0 有用 靡夜蔷薇 2021-02-21 11:19:59
很有趣的结构,立意也蛮有意思,试图用三种不同形式探讨民族志的写作。但结尾对后现代与女权主义的批判分析个人还是没有读懂……感觉不如前面短篇小说与田野笔记来的有意思。笔记部分真的没有想象得那么枯燥啦。