颠覆性的古代主义:纠缠的传统主义者与国家遗产政治

IF 0.8 3区 社会学 Q3 ANTHROPOLOGY
Antonio Sorge
{"title":"颠覆性的古代主义:纠缠的传统主义者与国家遗产政治","authors":"Antonio Sorge","doi":"10.1353/anq.2022.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"S Archaism interrogates the assumptions that underpin modernist models of social order presided over by technocratic elites. Its protagonists are marginalized people who refuse to grant primacy to the modern state’s vision of national heritage, which leave little space to alternative forms of community. However, against difficult odds they persist, and mobilize their own definitions of tradition to carve out a niche within the formal polity that encapsulates them. In a nutshell, this is an account of the apparent triumph of the nation-state form and of the varieties of social aggregation that cannot be permitted to exist within it. Herzfeld’s “subversive archaists” are recalcitrant traditionalists, often radically conservative. Theirs is not a revolutionary impulse as much as it is a reformist one. However, while they do react to the strictures imposed by modern forms of sociopolitical organization, their subversivism is not a form of “primitive rebellion” (Hobsbawm 1959) as much as it is a desire for recognition of unsanctioned models of tradition that are fully loyal to the nations of which they are part. Despite this, they are targets of state suspicion and bourgeois disdain because they do not fit within the master plan of the sanitized order that projects onto the global plane an image of the nation-state as sober, serious, and respectable, and, importantly, Western-inflected. They are the lower classes who eagerly play the game of national heritage, but not according to the rules devised by technocratic elites at the helm of the national bureaucracy. As conceptual holdouts against a modernizing order that seeks to displace their folk model of the society, they provoke within the nation-state bureaucracy an “anxiety of","PeriodicalId":51536,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Quarterly","volume":"95 1","pages":"193 - 202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Subversive Archaism: Troubling Traditionalists and the Politics of National Heritage by Michael Herzfeld (review)\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Sorge\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/anq.2022.0006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"S Archaism interrogates the assumptions that underpin modernist models of social order presided over by technocratic elites. Its protagonists are marginalized people who refuse to grant primacy to the modern state’s vision of national heritage, which leave little space to alternative forms of community. However, against difficult odds they persist, and mobilize their own definitions of tradition to carve out a niche within the formal polity that encapsulates them. In a nutshell, this is an account of the apparent triumph of the nation-state form and of the varieties of social aggregation that cannot be permitted to exist within it. Herzfeld’s “subversive archaists” are recalcitrant traditionalists, often radically conservative. Theirs is not a revolutionary impulse as much as it is a reformist one. However, while they do react to the strictures imposed by modern forms of sociopolitical organization, their subversivism is not a form of “primitive rebellion” (Hobsbawm 1959) as much as it is a desire for recognition of unsanctioned models of tradition that are fully loyal to the nations of which they are part. Despite this, they are targets of state suspicion and bourgeois disdain because they do not fit within the master plan of the sanitized order that projects onto the global plane an image of the nation-state as sober, serious, and respectable, and, importantly, Western-inflected. They are the lower classes who eagerly play the game of national heritage, but not according to the rules devised by technocratic elites at the helm of the national bureaucracy. As conceptual holdouts against a modernizing order that seeks to displace their folk model of the society, they provoke within the nation-state bureaucracy an “anxiety of\",\"PeriodicalId\":51536,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropological Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"193 - 202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropological Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2022.0006\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropological Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/anq.2022.0006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

古语质疑那些支撑现代主义社会秩序模式的假设,这些模式是由技术官僚精英主导的。它的主角是被边缘化的人,他们拒绝把现代国家对民族遗产的看法放在首位,这给其他形式的社区留下了很少的空间。然而,尽管困难重重,他们坚持了下来,并动员他们自己对传统的定义,在封装他们的正式政体中开辟了一个利基。简而言之,这是对民族国家形式的明显胜利,以及不允许存在于其中的各种社会聚合的解释。赫茨菲尔德的“颠覆性古物学家”是顽固的传统主义者,通常是激进的保守主义者。与其说他们是一种革命的冲动,不如说是一种改良主义的冲动。然而,尽管他们确实对现代形式的社会政治组织所施加的限制做出了反应,但他们的颠覆主义并不是一种“原始叛乱”(Hobsbawm 1959),而是一种渴望承认未经批准的传统模式,这些模式完全忠于他们所属的国家。尽管如此,它们仍然是国家怀疑和资产阶级蔑视的目标,因为它们不符合在全球范围内投射出一个清醒、严肃、受人尊敬的民族国家形象的净化秩序的总体规划,而且重要的是,受西方影响。他们是渴望玩国家遗产游戏的下层阶级,但却不按照掌握国家官僚机构的技术官僚精英制定的规则行事。作为对试图取代其民间社会模式的现代化秩序的概念上的坚持,他们在民族国家官僚机构内部引发了一种“焦虑”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Subversive Archaism: Troubling Traditionalists and the Politics of National Heritage by Michael Herzfeld (review)
S Archaism interrogates the assumptions that underpin modernist models of social order presided over by technocratic elites. Its protagonists are marginalized people who refuse to grant primacy to the modern state’s vision of national heritage, which leave little space to alternative forms of community. However, against difficult odds they persist, and mobilize their own definitions of tradition to carve out a niche within the formal polity that encapsulates them. In a nutshell, this is an account of the apparent triumph of the nation-state form and of the varieties of social aggregation that cannot be permitted to exist within it. Herzfeld’s “subversive archaists” are recalcitrant traditionalists, often radically conservative. Theirs is not a revolutionary impulse as much as it is a reformist one. However, while they do react to the strictures imposed by modern forms of sociopolitical organization, their subversivism is not a form of “primitive rebellion” (Hobsbawm 1959) as much as it is a desire for recognition of unsanctioned models of tradition that are fully loyal to the nations of which they are part. Despite this, they are targets of state suspicion and bourgeois disdain because they do not fit within the master plan of the sanitized order that projects onto the global plane an image of the nation-state as sober, serious, and respectable, and, importantly, Western-inflected. They are the lower classes who eagerly play the game of national heritage, but not according to the rules devised by technocratic elites at the helm of the national bureaucracy. As conceptual holdouts against a modernizing order that seeks to displace their folk model of the society, they provoke within the nation-state bureaucracy an “anxiety of
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Since 1921, Anthropological Quarterly has published scholarly articles, review articles, book reviews, and lists of recently published books in all areas of sociocultural anthropology. Its goal is the rapid dissemination of articles that blend precision with humanism, and scrupulous analysis with meticulous description.
×
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