{"title":"一个泰国农民领袖的发展和生活故事","authors":"Henry D. Delcore","doi":"10.2307/3773854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the anthropology of development, the contributions of poststructuralist theory have been marred by tendencies toward discursive determinism and an inadequate theorizing of agency. The life history approach is a strategy for probing the cultural politics of development in a way that better addresses the reality of development actors. Development does not just determine what counts as knowledge or truth, but also opens opportunities for individual cultural experiments. Richard Fox's concept of the \"cultured life\" is here used to explore the various cultural and political entanglements in the life of a northern Thai farmer who has helped pioneer a new form of agricultural development in Thailand. (Development, life history, NGOs, agency, Thailand) ********** In the 1990s, the anthropology of development saw a move toward poststructuralism and an approach to \"development as discourse\" (Apffel-Marglin and Marglin 1990; Escobar 1995; Ferguson 1994; Sachs 1992). Yet criticisms of the poststructuralist approach to development noted its overemphasis on the uniformity of development discourse (Grillo 1997; Gupta 1998), a tendency toward \"discursive determinism\" (Moore 1999), and an inadequate theorization of agency (Moore 1999; Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal 1998). This article attempts to demonstrate the merits of the life history approach as an avenue of analysis in the anthropology of development that can address some of these problems. It does so by presenting the \"cultured life\" (Fox 1991) of a northern Thai farmer leader, Berm, who in the 1980s and 1990s became entangled with the politics of development in Thailand and with struggles over development intervention in his home village and district. Berm was confronted with various challenges, including changing livelihood options and the opportunity to become involved in nongovernmental organization (NGO) development efforts. He creatively engaged the challenges and opportunities in ways consistent with his cultural background, gender, class position, place in local politics, and personal inclinations. Far from a benighted victim of the discursive straitjacket of development, Berm emerged as an influential local figure who appropriated Thai development for personal and political projects that engaged yet also transcended the discourse and material process of development identified by poststructuralist analysts. THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF DEVELOPMENT The poststructuralist direction in the anthropology of development drew particularly on the work of Foucault. This showed that the analysis of development as a discourse could highlight the processes of knowledge and subject production wrought by institutions and actors in the global economy. In his account of the development \"apparatus\" in Lesotho in the 1980s, Ferguson (1994) argues that although development interventions most often fail to achieve their stated objectives, they nonetheless have important, if unintended, consequences. In Lesotho, development primarily provided for the expansion of state power under the cover of a technical, depoliticized struggle against poverty (Ferguson 1994:256). Ferguson likens the consequences of development intervention to Foucault's instrument-effects, \"effects that are atone and the same time instruments of what 'turns out' to be an exercise of power\" (Ferguson 1994:255). Escobar (1995:5), also drawing on Foucault, sees discourse analysis as a concern for \"how certain representations become dominant and shape indelibly the ways in which reality is imagined and acted upon.\" Thus, development as discourse permits some modes of thinking and being while discouraging others. In the process, particular kinds of knowledge about the Third World and their subjects are produced and accepted, reinforcing the First World's material and symbolic domination over the Third. Discourse analysis has helped question both liberal views of development as a tool in the right against poverty and Marxist arguments that development is merely an extension of the \"logic of Capital. …","PeriodicalId":81209,"journal":{"name":"Ethnology","volume":"43 1","pages":"33-50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/3773854","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development and the Life Story of a Thai Farmer Leader\",\"authors\":\"Henry D. Delcore\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/3773854\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the anthropology of development, the contributions of poststructuralist theory have been marred by tendencies toward discursive determinism and an inadequate theorizing of agency. The life history approach is a strategy for probing the cultural politics of development in a way that better addresses the reality of development actors. Development does not just determine what counts as knowledge or truth, but also opens opportunities for individual cultural experiments. Richard Fox's concept of the \\\"cultured life\\\" is here used to explore the various cultural and political entanglements in the life of a northern Thai farmer who has helped pioneer a new form of agricultural development in Thailand. (Development, life history, NGOs, agency, Thailand) ********** In the 1990s, the anthropology of development saw a move toward poststructuralism and an approach to \\\"development as discourse\\\" (Apffel-Marglin and Marglin 1990; Escobar 1995; Ferguson 1994; Sachs 1992). Yet criticisms of the poststructuralist approach to development noted its overemphasis on the uniformity of development discourse (Grillo 1997; Gupta 1998), a tendency toward \\\"discursive determinism\\\" (Moore 1999), and an inadequate theorization of agency (Moore 1999; Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal 1998). This article attempts to demonstrate the merits of the life history approach as an avenue of analysis in the anthropology of development that can address some of these problems. It does so by presenting the \\\"cultured life\\\" (Fox 1991) of a northern Thai farmer leader, Berm, who in the 1980s and 1990s became entangled with the politics of development in Thailand and with struggles over development intervention in his home village and district. Berm was confronted with various challenges, including changing livelihood options and the opportunity to become involved in nongovernmental organization (NGO) development efforts. He creatively engaged the challenges and opportunities in ways consistent with his cultural background, gender, class position, place in local politics, and personal inclinations. Far from a benighted victim of the discursive straitjacket of development, Berm emerged as an influential local figure who appropriated Thai development for personal and political projects that engaged yet also transcended the discourse and material process of development identified by poststructuralist analysts. THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF DEVELOPMENT The poststructuralist direction in the anthropology of development drew particularly on the work of Foucault. This showed that the analysis of development as a discourse could highlight the processes of knowledge and subject production wrought by institutions and actors in the global economy. In his account of the development \\\"apparatus\\\" in Lesotho in the 1980s, Ferguson (1994) argues that although development interventions most often fail to achieve their stated objectives, they nonetheless have important, if unintended, consequences. In Lesotho, development primarily provided for the expansion of state power under the cover of a technical, depoliticized struggle against poverty (Ferguson 1994:256). Ferguson likens the consequences of development intervention to Foucault's instrument-effects, \\\"effects that are atone and the same time instruments of what 'turns out' to be an exercise of power\\\" (Ferguson 1994:255). Escobar (1995:5), also drawing on Foucault, sees discourse analysis as a concern for \\\"how certain representations become dominant and shape indelibly the ways in which reality is imagined and acted upon.\\\" Thus, development as discourse permits some modes of thinking and being while discouraging others. In the process, particular kinds of knowledge about the Third World and their subjects are produced and accepted, reinforcing the First World's material and symbolic domination over the Third. Discourse analysis has helped question both liberal views of development as a tool in the right against poverty and Marxist arguments that development is merely an extension of the \\\"logic of Capital. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":81209,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethnology\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"33-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/3773854\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethnology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/3773854\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3773854","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
摘要
在发展人类学中,后结构主义理论的贡献被话语决定论的倾向和对能动性的不充分的理论化所损害。生活史方法是一种探索发展的文化政治的策略,它能更好地处理发展行动者的现实。发展不仅决定了什么是知识或真理,还为个人文化实验提供了机会。理查德·福克斯的“文化生活”概念在这里被用来探索泰国北部农民生活中的各种文化和政治纠缠,他帮助开创了泰国农业发展的新形式。(发展,生活史,非政府组织,机构,泰国)**********在20世纪90年代,发展人类学走向后结构主义和“发展作为话语”的方法(Apffel-Marglin and Marglin 1990;Escobar 1995;弗格森1994;(goldman Sachs) 1992)。然而,对后结构主义发展方法的批评指出,它过分强调发展话语的统一性(Grillo 1997;Gupta 1998),“话语决定论”的倾向(Moore 1999),以及代理的不充分理论化(Moore 1999;Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal 1998)。本文试图证明生活史方法作为一种分析发展人类学的途径的优点,可以解决其中的一些问题。它通过呈现泰国北部农民领袖Berm的“文化生活”(Fox 1991)来做到这一点,Berm在20世纪80年代和90年代与泰国的发展政治以及他家乡村庄和地区的发展干预斗争纠缠在一起。Berm面临着各种各样的挑战,包括不断变化的生计选择和参与非政府组织(NGO)发展工作的机会。他以与自己的文化背景、性别、阶级地位、在当地政治中的地位和个人倾向相一致的方式创造性地应对挑战和机遇。远不是发展话语束缚的愚昧受害者,Berm成为一个有影响力的当地人物,他将泰国的发展用于个人和政治项目,这些项目涉及但也超越了后结构主义分析师所确定的话语和发展的物质过程。发展人类学的后结构主义方向尤其受到福柯的影响。这表明,将发展作为一种话语进行分析,可以突出全球经济中的机构和行动者所造成的知识和主体生产过程。弗格森(Ferguson, 1994)在他对20世纪80年代莱索托发展“机器”的描述中指出,尽管发展干预通常无法实现其既定目标,但它们仍然具有重要的(如果是意想不到的)后果。在莱索托,发展主要是在一场技术性的、非政治化的反贫困斗争的掩护下扩大国家权力(Ferguson 1994:256)。弗格森将发展干预的后果比作福柯的工具效应,“这些效应是一种补偿,同时也是‘结果’是权力行使的工具”(Ferguson 1994:255)。Escobar(1995:5)也借鉴了福柯的观点,认为话语分析关注的是“某些表征如何成为主导,并不可磨灭地塑造现实被想象和行动的方式。”因此,作为话语的发展允许某些思维模式和存在模式,而不鼓励其他模式。在这个过程中,关于第三世界及其主体的特定知识被产生和接受,从而加强了第一世界对第三世界的物质和象征统治。话语分析有助于质疑自由主义将发展作为反贫困权利的工具的观点,以及马克思主义关于发展仅仅是“资本逻辑”的延伸的论点。…
Development and the Life Story of a Thai Farmer Leader
In the anthropology of development, the contributions of poststructuralist theory have been marred by tendencies toward discursive determinism and an inadequate theorizing of agency. The life history approach is a strategy for probing the cultural politics of development in a way that better addresses the reality of development actors. Development does not just determine what counts as knowledge or truth, but also opens opportunities for individual cultural experiments. Richard Fox's concept of the "cultured life" is here used to explore the various cultural and political entanglements in the life of a northern Thai farmer who has helped pioneer a new form of agricultural development in Thailand. (Development, life history, NGOs, agency, Thailand) ********** In the 1990s, the anthropology of development saw a move toward poststructuralism and an approach to "development as discourse" (Apffel-Marglin and Marglin 1990; Escobar 1995; Ferguson 1994; Sachs 1992). Yet criticisms of the poststructuralist approach to development noted its overemphasis on the uniformity of development discourse (Grillo 1997; Gupta 1998), a tendency toward "discursive determinism" (Moore 1999), and an inadequate theorization of agency (Moore 1999; Sivaramakrishnan and Agrawal 1998). This article attempts to demonstrate the merits of the life history approach as an avenue of analysis in the anthropology of development that can address some of these problems. It does so by presenting the "cultured life" (Fox 1991) of a northern Thai farmer leader, Berm, who in the 1980s and 1990s became entangled with the politics of development in Thailand and with struggles over development intervention in his home village and district. Berm was confronted with various challenges, including changing livelihood options and the opportunity to become involved in nongovernmental organization (NGO) development efforts. He creatively engaged the challenges and opportunities in ways consistent with his cultural background, gender, class position, place in local politics, and personal inclinations. Far from a benighted victim of the discursive straitjacket of development, Berm emerged as an influential local figure who appropriated Thai development for personal and political projects that engaged yet also transcended the discourse and material process of development identified by poststructuralist analysts. THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF DEVELOPMENT The poststructuralist direction in the anthropology of development drew particularly on the work of Foucault. This showed that the analysis of development as a discourse could highlight the processes of knowledge and subject production wrought by institutions and actors in the global economy. In his account of the development "apparatus" in Lesotho in the 1980s, Ferguson (1994) argues that although development interventions most often fail to achieve their stated objectives, they nonetheless have important, if unintended, consequences. In Lesotho, development primarily provided for the expansion of state power under the cover of a technical, depoliticized struggle against poverty (Ferguson 1994:256). Ferguson likens the consequences of development intervention to Foucault's instrument-effects, "effects that are atone and the same time instruments of what 'turns out' to be an exercise of power" (Ferguson 1994:255). Escobar (1995:5), also drawing on Foucault, sees discourse analysis as a concern for "how certain representations become dominant and shape indelibly the ways in which reality is imagined and acted upon." Thus, development as discourse permits some modes of thinking and being while discouraging others. In the process, particular kinds of knowledge about the Third World and their subjects are produced and accepted, reinforcing the First World's material and symbolic domination over the Third. Discourse analysis has helped question both liberal views of development as a tool in the right against poverty and Marxist arguments that development is merely an extension of the "logic of Capital. …