论规范令人惊讶的酷儿性:坎居朗、福柯和巴特勒的人类学

IF 1.1 2区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
T. Hendriks
{"title":"论规范令人惊讶的酷儿性:坎居朗、福柯和巴特勒的人类学","authors":"T. Hendriks","doi":"10.1177/14634996221117755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Norms” seem like a handy concept in the anthropological toolkit for describing, analyzing, and understanding ethnographic data. But contemporary anthropology rarely investigates the concept of the norm itself. This article critically examines norms as analytical constructs and argues for a more precise vocabulary that differentiates between related terms, such as “normality,” “normativity,” or “normalization,” that circulate loosely in anthropological discourse. To do so, it draws from Georges Canguilhem, Michel Foucault, and Judith Butler to show the affordances and pitfalls of their analytics for anthropologists. It particularly reveals the value of Canguilhemian understandings of normativity to keep us alive to the surprising queerness of norms in action.","PeriodicalId":51554,"journal":{"name":"Anthropological Theory","volume":"23 1","pages":"235 - 254"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the surprising queerness of norms: Anthropology with Canguilhem, Foucault, and Butler\",\"authors\":\"T. Hendriks\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14634996221117755\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"“Norms” seem like a handy concept in the anthropological toolkit for describing, analyzing, and understanding ethnographic data. But contemporary anthropology rarely investigates the concept of the norm itself. This article critically examines norms as analytical constructs and argues for a more precise vocabulary that differentiates between related terms, such as “normality,” “normativity,” or “normalization,” that circulate loosely in anthropological discourse. To do so, it draws from Georges Canguilhem, Michel Foucault, and Judith Butler to show the affordances and pitfalls of their analytics for anthropologists. It particularly reveals the value of Canguilhemian understandings of normativity to keep us alive to the surprising queerness of norms in action.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anthropological Theory\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"235 - 254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anthropological Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14634996221117755\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anthropological Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14634996221117755","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在描述、分析和理解人种学数据的人类学工具包中,“规范”似乎是一个方便的概念。但当代人类学很少调查规范本身的概念。本文批判性地考察了规范作为分析结构,并主张使用更精确的词汇来区分相关术语,如“常态”、“规范性”或“正常化”,这些术语在人类学话语中松散地流传。为此,本书借鉴了乔治·甘圭朗、米歇尔·福柯和朱迪思·巴特勒的观点,向人类学家展示了他们的分析方法的优点和缺陷。它特别揭示了冈吉尔海姆对规范性的理解的价值,它让我们意识到规范在行动中惊人的酷儿性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the surprising queerness of norms: Anthropology with Canguilhem, Foucault, and Butler
“Norms” seem like a handy concept in the anthropological toolkit for describing, analyzing, and understanding ethnographic data. But contemporary anthropology rarely investigates the concept of the norm itself. This article critically examines norms as analytical constructs and argues for a more precise vocabulary that differentiates between related terms, such as “normality,” “normativity,” or “normalization,” that circulate loosely in anthropological discourse. To do so, it draws from Georges Canguilhem, Michel Foucault, and Judith Butler to show the affordances and pitfalls of their analytics for anthropologists. It particularly reveals the value of Canguilhemian understandings of normativity to keep us alive to the surprising queerness of norms in action.
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
Anthropological Theory
Anthropological Theory ANTHROPOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Anthropological Theory is an international peer reviewed journal seeking to strengthen anthropological theorizing in different areas of the world. This is an exciting forum for new insights into theoretical issues in anthropology and more broadly, social theory. Anthropological Theory publishes articles engaging with a variety of theoretical debates in areas including: * marxism * feminism * political philosophy * historical sociology * hermeneutics * critical theory * philosophy of science * biological anthropology * archaeology
×
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