Contact Us
linkedin
twitter
  • ABOUT SSL
    • History
    • Contributors
  • DISCIPLINES
    • Anthropology
    • Economics
    • History
    • Philosophy
    • Political Science
    • Social Psychology
    • Sociology
  • SPECIAL COLLECTIONS
    • Evolving Values for a Capitalist World
    • Frontier Issues in Economic Thought
    • Galbraith Series
    • Global History
  • NEWSLETTER

The Third Eye: Towards a Critique of ‘Nativist Anthropology’

  1. Home
  2. >>
  3. Anthropology
  4. >>
  5. Methods and Approaches
  6. >>
  7. Post-Colonialism and Subaltern Views
  8. >>
  9. The Third Eye: Towards...
The Third Eye: Towards a Critique of ‘Nativist Anthropology’
Author(s)Wang, Mingming
AbstractChina is a vast country. Ethnic minority nationalities (shaoshu minzu) located in different parts of the Chinese nation could have provided possibilities for the majority Han Chinese anthropologists to imagine ‘internal others.’ Even among the Han, social life does not follow a uniform pattern: it includes great regional cultural diversities that could have allowed fieldworking anthropologists to develop their own arguments about cultural difference. However, throughout the 20th century, such internal differences have not been treated as a reflexive and contrasting mirror of the national Han Self. On the contrary, anthropological interpretations have been institutionally determined to favor official political projects of national revitalization (minzu zhenxing). Are the perspectives of characteristically ‘native’ – in this case Chinese – anthropology not creating some intellectual pitfalls that anthropologists in many parts of the world have attributed chiefly to the ‘West’ and its orientalism? This article sets out to develop an answer, by way of a broad overview of the history of 20th century Chinese anthropology. It questions the nativistic characteristics of Chinese anthropology and raises issues about the development of a ‘natives’ own scholarship.’ By so doing, it also implies a reflection on postcolonialist critiques of anthropological disciplines as well as a hope for a liberal anthropological critique which the author defines in terms of ‘the third eye.’
IssueNo2
Pages149-174
ArticleAccess to Article
SourceCritique of Anthropology
VolumeNo22
PubDateJune 2002
ISBN_ISSN0308-275X
Browse Path(s)Anthropology
—-Methods and Approaches
——–Post-Colonialism and Subaltern Views

Methods and Approaches

  • Cognitive Approaches
  • Cultural Materialism
  • Cultural Particularism, Universalism, and Relativism
  • Ecological Approaches
  • Ethnological Approaches and Participant Observation
  • Eurocentrism, Nationalism, and Other Issues of Place
  • Evolutionary Approaches
  • Gender Orientation
  • Hermeneutics
  • Idealism
  • Marxian and Neo-Marxian Approaches
  • Other
  • Post-Colonialism and Subaltern Views
  • Post-Modernism
  • Realist Narratives
  • Structuralism and Post-Structuralism
  • Theoretic Issues


Boston University | ECI | Contact Us

Copyright Notification: The Social Science Library (SSL) is for distribution in a defined set of countries. The complete list may be found here. Free distribution within these countries is encouraged, but copyright law forbids distribution outside of these countries.