Anthropology Seminar: Professor Michael Herzfeld, Harvard University

Professor Michael Herzfeld, Harvard University

“Crypto-Colonies in Europe and Asia: Dignity and Defiance in Political Hotspots”

Professor Michael Herzfeld is Ernest E. Monrad Professor of the Social Sciences in the Department of Anthropology at Harvard University. Before moving to Harvard, he taught at Vassar College (1978-80) and Indiana University (1980-91), where he served as Associate Chair of the Research Center for Language and Semiotic Studies, 1980-85, and as Chair of the Department of Anthropology, 1987-90. He has also taught at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (1995), Paris, at the Università di Padova (1992), the Università di Roma “La Sapienza” (1999-2000), and the University of Melbourne (intermittently since 2004), and has held a visiting research appointments at the Australian National University and the University of Sydney (1985), at the University of Adelaide, and at the Université de Paris-X (Nanterre) (1991).

His major general research interest is currently the comparison of the forms of historical experience among Greek, Italian, Thai and other cultures. He has written extensively on anthropological and semiotic theory, narrative, metaphor and symbolism, the ethnography of southern Europe, local politics, and nationalism.

For more information: http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~anthro/social_faculty_pages/social_pages_herzfeld.html

Where: Deakin University, Geelong Waterfront Campus, Sally Walker Building, Seminar Room ad1.122. A map of the campus can be found here: http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/330364/waterfront.pdf

The session will also be video-linked to the Burwood Campus, room C7.06, via Virtual Meeting Point (VMP) 5223 9354.

When: Thursday, 6 August, 5.00-6.50pm

All welcome. After the seminar, please join us for drinks/dinner at the Max Hotel, Gheringhap Street.

Anthropologist Tanya King comments on the netting ban in Corio Bay

Bellarine Times 2The 87 % of Victorians who do NOT fish recreationally are about to find that they can no longer purchase the local Australian seafood they’ve been enjoying for over 170 years. The closure of netting in Corio Bay will strip Victorian families of their access to fresh, sustainably caught fish. The decision by the Labor government to ‘gift’ the public resource to elite anglers has been made because of political pressure from vocal minorities like the Friends of Corio Bay Action Group (the president of which runs a recreational hire boat company). Most don’t even know that elite anglers want to keep it all for themselves.

There is a couple of points that might surprise readers. There is no scientific data suggesting that fish stocks in Port Phillip Bay are waning. In fact, the opposite is true, with rigorous, peer reviewed research proving that both commercial and recreational fishing is sustainable for both fish stocks and local habitats, including our all important seagrasses. This is despite recreational catches of key species like snapper and flathead being many times that of the commercial take (see pictorial representation, attached). Greens Victoria, Greenpeace, the Department of Environment and Primary Industries, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and the Australian Conservation Foundation all verify the health of the Bay and the sustainability of commercial netting.

One of the figures often thrown around by angling groups is the economic benefit of recreational fishing in Victoria, which is estimated at around 2.3 billion dollars a year, versus the commercial production input of around 4 million. However, the issue is about more than just profit for individuals, but is about value for the public; at the moment, 42 licence holders supply nearly 6 million Victorians with the PPB fish that we all own in common. By spending 20 million dollars on a plan to boost recreational fishing in PPB to 1 million, the government is spending big bucks only to strip 5 million of us of our access to the public resource we’ve been enjoying for over a century. The government is responsible for managing our commonly held resources – such as fish stocks – for the benefit of all Victorians, not just those wealthy enough to afford a boat and a range-rover to pull it.

Tanya King is a maritime anthropologist who has been working on Australian commercial fisheries for over 15 years. She says the banning of netting in Corio Bay is the most blatantly political decision she has ever witnessed, and one that will cost the vast majority of ordinary Victorians the chance to access fresh, local sustainably caught seafood.

Deakin Anthro Seminar Series, June 4, 2015 – Tess Lea

 

A/Prof. Tess Lea, Department of Gender and Cultural Studies, University of Sydney

Can there be good policy in regional and remote Australia? Wait, is that even a question?

75580 Teresa Lea WS1_2014-11-20Abstract

This talk pulls together the threads of my ethnographic project ‘Can there be good policy? Tracing the paths between policy intent, evidence and practical benefit in regional and remote Australia’ which I have been pursuing in various ways for quite some years. The ethnography draws on case examples from infrastructure projects on Groote Eylandt, schooling efforts in the Victoria River Downs, a film collaboration with the Karrabing Indigenous Corporation from the Anson Bay region in the Top End, and the leadership dilemmas embedded within a community controlled health centre in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands of northern South Australia. The research had two elements—pursuit of that policy question, and pursuit of communication modalities for sharing any findings. This talk pushes into these research aims to explore the confusions that its experiments with modes of fieldwork and of communication inevitably generated. Matching my sense of policy’s inherent fragmentation with disjointed study sites, and the desire to suture the answers into a redemptive project either of critique or resolution, are some of the confounders to be discussed.

 

Bio

Tess Lea is Associate Professor in the Department of Gender and Cultural Studies at the University of Sydney. As an ARC Queen Elizabeth II Fellow, she is currently pursuing ethnographic research across housing, infrastructure, community development and education domains to explore the question “can there be good social policy in regional and remote Australia?” She has previously worked as a senior bureaucrat in the Northern Territory Departments of Health and Education, and operated as a ministerial advisor. Her work focuses on conditions of enduring racial inequality in Australia and the material and affective dimensions of how these conditions are reproduced and inhabited.

 

Where: Deakin University, Geelong Waterfront Campus, John Hay Building, Video Conference Room D3.321 (please note the non-standard room). A map of the campus can be found here: http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/330364/waterfront.pdf. The session will also be video-linked to the Burwood Campus, room C7.06, via Virtual Meeting Point (VMP) 5223 9354.

 

When: Thursday, June 4, 5.00-6.50pm

 

All welcome. After the seminar, please join us for drinks/dinner at the Max Hotel, Gheringhap Street.

Australian Anthropological Society 2015 Conference The University of Melbourne, 1-4 December, 2015

Here is just one of the calls for paper for the 2015 conference. Please go to the AAS website for details of other panels calling for papers.
Call for papers for the panel

“The private/public politics of intimacy”

Australian Anthropological Society 2015 Conference
The University of Melbourne, 1-4 December, 2015

Convenors: Hannah Bulloch (Australian National University) and Lara McKenzie (The University of Western Australia)

The term ‘intimacy’ evokes a sense of private, personal relations. It is sometimes construed as conceptually distinct from supposedly public realms of economics, work, policy and politics; or intimacy is depicted as corrupting or being corrupted by these. Yet, as the feminist slogan articulates, ‘the personal is political’. Intimate relations are enabled and constrained by broader power structures but so too these are reworked through intimate relations. Norms of intimacy constitute fundamental aspects of these supposedly public realms. For example, through relations of reciprocity intimacy is fundamental to economy. Meanwhile, through spreading consumer culture and mass media, ideals of love, romance and companionship are transforming intimacy the world over.

Focusing on various sites of intimacy—families, friendships, romantic or sexual relationships—we invite papers that consider articulations between ‘private’ and ‘public’ aspects of intimacy. The panel considers issues such as:

  • How might we define intimacy in the context of anthropological research? What does the examination of social relations through the lens of intimacy bring to the discipline?
  • How are the public/private boundaries of intimate relationships formulated and challenged in different contexts? How does interrogating the multiple meanings of ‘private’ and ‘public’ further the study of intimacy?
  • How are changing economic norms, new communication technologies and/or transnational media reshaping, and being shaped by, intimate relations?
  • What do the contradictions and complexities in the way intimacy is experienced and understood tell us about broader social change and continuity?
  • Can public policy be improved by a more intimate understanding of intimacy?

To propose a paper go to: http://www.nomadit.co.uk/aas/aas2015/panels.php5?PanelID=3669

Paper proposals must consist of:

  • a paper title
  • the name/s and email address/es of author/s
  • a short abstract of fewer than 300 characters
  • a long abstract of fewer than 250 words

All proposals must be made via the online form. The call for papers is now open and closes at midnight GMT on June 22nd, 2015.

If you have any questions about the panel, please email Lara ([email protected]) and Hannah ([email protected]).

Anthropology Seminar Series – Geoff Boucher: Habermas on (Abrahamic) Religion

Deakin University Anthropology Seminar Series, May 7, 2015

Dr Geoff Boucher, School of Communication and Creative Arts, Deakin University

 

Abstract: According to Habermas, the industrialised democracies have become “post-secular societies,” defined as societies that have been through the experience of secularisation, but which have now, in light of the persistence of faith convictions, abandoned the expectation of the withering away of the Abrahamic religions. Against the background of a worldwide resurgence of political religion, reflected in the academic revival of political theology, the notion of the post-secular has triggered important debates around the constraints on religious mobilisation in multi-faith societies with secular states. In this context, despite his politically liberal insistence on the protection of democratic citizens from coercion based on faith convictions through the limitation of political religion to public debate only, Habermas surprisingly often lines up with neo-conservative positions on the permanence of traditional forms of religion and on civilizational unity. In this paper, I want to outline a sympathetic critique of the three positions that I think lead Habermas to these conclusions, and to examine how some proposed modifications might affect the question of the legitimate role of religious convictions in the public sphere.

 

Bio: Dr. Geoff Boucher is Senior Lecturer in Literary Studies at the School of Communication and Creative Arts, Deakin University. He works across continental philosophy, social theory and literary studies to investigate the constructive role of cultural innovation, especially in literary works, in the public sphere and in the cultural underpinning of democratic politics. His work includes research into psychoanalytic theory, particularly Lacanian psychoanalysis, and critical theories of society developed by the Frankfurt School and its associates. He is also an expert on the work of internationally celebrated philosopher Slavoj Zizek, and has engaged in debate in printed form with Zizek on several occasions.

 

Where: Deakin University, Geelong Waterfront Campus, Sally Walker Building, Seminar Room ad1.122. A map of the campus can be found here: http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/330364/waterfront.pdf

The session will also be video-linked to the Burwood Campus, room C7.06, via Virtual Meeting Point (VMP) 5223 9354.

 

When: Thursday, May 7, 5.00-6.50pm

 

All welcome. After the seminar, please join us for drinks/dinner at the Max Hotel, Gheringhap Street.

Sustainability MOOC – Reclaiming Broken Places: Introduction to Civic Ecology

From April 10th 2015

Deakin Students interested in environmental issues and wanting to expand their knowledge and draw on some of the world’s most thoughtful minds – for free! – this MOOC might be of interest. The course is taught by Marianne Krasny and Keith G.Tidball, authors of Civic Ecology – Adaptation and Transformation from the Ground Up.civic_ecology_608x211

 

Reclaiming Broken Places: Introduction to Civic Ecology

Explore why and how people come together to care for nature and cultivate community in places marked by disaster, war, poverty and environmental degradation.

 

Victorian fishermen campaign for the right to continue fishing sustainably

As part of the Melbourne Food and Wine Festival, Victorian fishers attended the Pier to Plate Festival at Seaworks, in Williamstown, to tell – and show – the public what they’ll be missing out on if the State Government goes through with their election promise to ban commercial netting in Port Phillip Bay and other fisheries. Click here to see a four minute video of the day.DSCF0560 DSCF0604 DSCF0630

Anthropology Seminar Series – “Reconfiguring social identities among Febi and Kubo, Papua New Guinea: anticipating the PNG LNG project”

A/Prof. Monica Minnegal, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne and Dr Peter D. Dwyer, Department of Resource Management and Geography, University of Melbourne

Abstract:

Through late 2013 and the first half of 2014, in anticipation of the PNG LNG royalty payments they expected to start flowing from mid-2014, people at Suabi village dramatically ramped up a reconfiguring of social identities they had tentatively begun eight years earlier.  This paper explores how people are responding to what they see as new demands and potential opportunities, by renegotiating relationships within, between and crosscutting previously named groupings and among variously named persons.  To some extent, the negotiations are occurring in an information ‘vacuum’; people do not know the bases on which benefits will be distributed, or the legal requirements and processes for incorporating land groups (ILGs) which they know will have a part to play in the receipt of royalty payments.  There is thus considerable variation in how identities are being mobilised and redefined.  But prior understandings of relational personhood continue to shape the ways that people are responding to those uncertainties.  And politics of allegiance beyond those entailed in securing access to royalty payments are crucial in shaping the configurations that are emerging.  The consequence of these processes has been a cascade of decisions that will have effects far beyond those that the people making them envisage. This paper describes that cascade and explores some of its implications.

Bio:

Monica Minnegal is Associate Professor at the University of Melbourne. Her research focuses on the processes that shape change in the ways that people understand relationships to each other and the land. Monica has spent many years working in Papua New Guinea studying the impacts of modernity on their understandings and practices.  Her latest research explores how anticipating the arrival of a major resource-extraction project – the PNG LNG pipeline – is affecting local social practices and cultural understandings.

Peter Dwyer is an honorary Senior Fellow in the School of Geography, Faculty of Science, The University of Melbourne. After many years researching and teaching as a zoologist – bats, rats, rock wallabies, bowerbirds, ants – he diverted to anthropological concerns after taking a sabbatical in Papua New Guinea. He has undertaken research, for the past 28 years with Monica Minnegal, among Siane, Etolo, Kubo, Bedamuni and Febi people in PNG and among commercial fishermen in Victoria. An early emphasis was on ethno classification but social and ecological concerns now predominate and questions of social change – particularly of process – are always focal.

Where: Deakin University, Geelong Waterfront Campus, Sally Walker Building, Seminar Room ad1.122. A map of the campus can be found here: http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/330364/waterfront.pdf

When: Thursday, Mar 5, 5.00-6.50pm

All welcome. For enquiries, contact Gillian G. Tan, [email protected]. After the seminar, please join us for drinks/dinner at the Max Hotel, Gheringhap Street, Geelong.

 

Interdisciplinary Human Ecology Reading Group

Friday 13th March – Interdisciplinary Human Ecology Reading Group (invite only – please contact Tanya King for more information)Prince Alfred Hotel, 191 Grattan St, Carlton. 2pm – 3:15pm.

Sherren et al 2010, p.1060

Sherren et al 2010, p.1060

Under consideration:

Kate Sherren, Joern Fischer, Richard Price, 2010, ‘Using photography to elicit grazier values and management practices relating to tree survival and recruitment’, Land Use Policy 27:1056–1067.

Emma Kowal Book Launch – 23rd April

Thursday 23rd April – Book Launch – Emma Kowal – ‘Trapped in the Gap: Doing Good in Indigenous Australia’ (Berghahn, 2015), plus, Academy of Social Sciences of Australia Paul Bourke lecture. 4-7pm, Deakin Melbourne City Centre, Level 3, 550 Bourke Street, Melbourne.

In Australia, a ‘tribe’ of white, middle-class, progressive professionals is actively working to improve the lives of Indigenous people. This book explores what Trapped in the Gaphappens when well-meaning people, supported by the state, attempt to help without harming. ‘White anti-racists’ find themselves trapped by endless ambiguities, contradictions, and double binds — a microcosm of the broader dilemmas of postcolonial societies. These dilemmas are fuelled by tension between the twin desires of equality and difference: to make Indigenous people statistically the same as non-Indigenous people (to ‘close the gap’) while simultaneously maintaining their ‘cultural’ distinctiveness. This tension lies at the heart of failed development efforts in Indigenous communities, ethnic minority populations and the global South. This book explains why doing good is so hard, and how it could be done differently.

Continue reading