A Chto Sluchilos'?团结一致的民族志

Tatiana Chudakova, Cassandra Hartblay, M. Sidorkina
{"title":"A Chto Sluchilos'?团结一致的民族志","authors":"Tatiana Chudakova, Cassandra Hartblay, M. Sidorkina","doi":"10.1111/russ.12583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay by sociocultural anthropologists of Russia working in the North American academy considers rupture in three ways. First, we review rupture as a theoretical concept that ethnographers have both used and contested in making sense of the end of the Soviet Union, to inform our reading of the present moment. Second, we think about what political and social relationships the war has made speakable and for whom, at a time when the possibilities of free expression in Russia carry novel risks. Anthropologists working with indigenous and ethnic minorities in Russia have long insisted on the country’s internal plurality. Drawing on this scholarship, we discuss the ways in which plurality has been freshly repoliticized in the context of the war in Ukraine, while carrying forward some of the legacies of its Soviet orchestration. Third, we observe that the 2022 invasion of Ukraine marks a rupture for ethnographers in the way we do fieldwork in and of Russia. In response, we call for a scholarly praxis of suturing together multiple scales of analysis, digital and geographic locations and incommensurable perspectives.","PeriodicalId":83255,"journal":{"name":"The Russian review","volume":"113 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Chto Sluchilos'?: Ethnographies of Holding It Together\",\"authors\":\"Tatiana Chudakova, Cassandra Hartblay, M. Sidorkina\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/russ.12583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay by sociocultural anthropologists of Russia working in the North American academy considers rupture in three ways. First, we review rupture as a theoretical concept that ethnographers have both used and contested in making sense of the end of the Soviet Union, to inform our reading of the present moment. Second, we think about what political and social relationships the war has made speakable and for whom, at a time when the possibilities of free expression in Russia carry novel risks. Anthropologists working with indigenous and ethnic minorities in Russia have long insisted on the country’s internal plurality. Drawing on this scholarship, we discuss the ways in which plurality has been freshly repoliticized in the context of the war in Ukraine, while carrying forward some of the legacies of its Soviet orchestration. Third, we observe that the 2022 invasion of Ukraine marks a rupture for ethnographers in the way we do fieldwork in and of Russia. In response, we call for a scholarly praxis of suturing together multiple scales of analysis, digital and geographic locations and incommensurable perspectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83255,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Russian review\",\"volume\":\"113 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Russian review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/russ.12583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Russian review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/russ.12583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇由在北美学术界工作的俄罗斯社会文化人类学家撰写的文章从三个方面考察了断裂。首先,我们将“断裂”作为一个理论概念进行回顾,民族志学者在理解苏联解体时既使用了这个概念,也对这个概念提出了质疑,以告知我们对当前时刻的解读。其次,我们要思考的是,在俄罗斯言论自由的可能性面临新的风险之际,战争使哪些政治和社会关系变得可有可无,对哪些人来说又是可有可无的。长期以来,研究俄罗斯土著和少数民族的人类学家一直坚持该国的内部多元性。利用这一学术成果,我们讨论了在乌克兰战争背景下,多元化被重新政治化的方式,同时发扬了苏联管弦乐队的一些遗产。第三,我们注意到,2022年入侵乌克兰标志着我们在俄罗斯进行田野调查的方式与民族志学家的决裂。作为回应,我们呼吁将多个分析尺度、数字和地理位置以及不可通约的视角缝合在一起的学术实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Chto Sluchilos'?: Ethnographies of Holding It Together
This essay by sociocultural anthropologists of Russia working in the North American academy considers rupture in three ways. First, we review rupture as a theoretical concept that ethnographers have both used and contested in making sense of the end of the Soviet Union, to inform our reading of the present moment. Second, we think about what political and social relationships the war has made speakable and for whom, at a time when the possibilities of free expression in Russia carry novel risks. Anthropologists working with indigenous and ethnic minorities in Russia have long insisted on the country’s internal plurality. Drawing on this scholarship, we discuss the ways in which plurality has been freshly repoliticized in the context of the war in Ukraine, while carrying forward some of the legacies of its Soviet orchestration. Third, we observe that the 2022 invasion of Ukraine marks a rupture for ethnographers in the way we do fieldwork in and of Russia. In response, we call for a scholarly praxis of suturing together multiple scales of analysis, digital and geographic locations and incommensurable perspectives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信