ANTRO UNAIR mengucapkan Minal Aidzin Wal Faidzin mohon maaf lahir dan batin bagi seluruh KARABAT Antropologi dan teman-teman semua.
Semoga bulan baik ini menjadikan kita kembali menjadi PUTIH. AMIN
Dari februs_waterpoloindonesia@yahoo.co.id
salam buat buat seluruh kerabat se indonesia
ikatan kekerabatan antropologi UNAND mengundang kepada seluruh kerabat
antropologi indonesia untuk menghadiri acara inisiasi 2006
yang akan dilaksanakan pada tanggal 17-19 novenber di padang
kami panitia inisiasi 06 mengucapkan terima kasih bisa bergabung dalam
jaringan kekerabatan antropologi indonesia ini merupakan tempat kita
berbagi informasi tentang perkembangan antroplogi indonesia.
semoga kita dapat berjaya dengan ilmu antropologi ini
IKA UNAND ikatan kekerabatan antropologi universitas andalas
Salam buat para dosen, alumni, dan mahasiswa
antropologi Unair
Mohon maaf, sebenarnya saya sudah nulis newsletter
panjang lebar, yang dikumpulkan sejak tahun lalu,
tapi ini tadi saya cari kok nggak ketemu, mungkin
terhapus atau ketlisut. Karenaa komputer ada masalah.
Coba nanti kucari lagi. Tapi untuk sementara ini, saya
ingin mengabarkan berita dari museum etnografi dan
visual milik antropologi Unair. Untuk memperingati
ulang tahun pertama museum ini, Kepala Museum akan
mengadakan pameran fotografi, hasil karya mahasiswa,
alumni dan dosen. Demikian syarat-syaratnya:
-Foto ukuran 10 R
-Foto original (misalnya, bukan hasil scan), hasil
karya sendiri
-bisa berwarna maupun B&W
-Foto dipasang pada kertas warna hitam atau frame
kertas warna hitam (ukuran sekitar 15 R)
-Tema: “Dunia Manusia” (bisa dari segi budaya termasuk
kegiatan sehari-hari, dari berbagai budaya di
indonesia maupun di luar indonesia, dari masa kini
maupun peninggalan masa lampau, dan dari segi biologis
manusia, termasuk tengkorak)
-Mencantumkan nama fotografer, angkatan (untuk alumni
dan mahasiswa), judul foto (optional), dan lokasi
pengambilan
-Foto maksimal diterima di Jurusan Antropologi tanggal
30 Oktober 2006, di Mbak Ebrina (administrator Jurusan
Antropologi, di FISIP R. 280)
-Pameran akan diadakan tgl 1-3 Nov. 2006 (mungkin
diperpanjang, masih tentatif)
-Foto bisa diambil kembali oleh pemilik, setelah
selesai pameran. Kalau mau disumbangkan pada museum
juga boleh.
-Pertanyaan dan informasi bisa dialamatkan pada Pak
Yusuf Ernawan (R. 280 FISIP, 081332085142), atau bisa
juga tanya aku ke email myrtati@yahoo.co id, atau
mitasamsi@telkom.net, atau 031 702 97 646
Itu saja dulu beritanya. Akan ada berita susulan,
termasuk merespon beberapa email yang pernah masuk
dari para alumni. Bener-bener mohon maaf bahwa
responnya sangat terlambat. Tapi semua masukan masih
ditampung, dan akan dijawab sebisa mungkin. Karena
memang ada beberapa yang responnya mengharukan, dan
benar-benar membawa spirit sebagai antropolog sejati.
Sekali lagi terima kasih atas perhatian rekan-rekan
alumni semua.
Berikut saya lampirkan nama-nama alumni yang kami
ketahui alamat/telpon maupun email. Apabila
rekan-rekan ada yang bisa menambahkan atau meralat,
tolong dilakukan, agar kami bisa memperbaikinya.
Sampai email berikut.
Myrtati (mita ‘85)
antrounair mengucapkan selamat menjalankan ibadah puasa bagi seluruh KERABAT Antropologi dan teman-teman semuanya.
Antro Unair mengucapkan selamat datang kepada KERABAT baru 2006. Kalian adalah orang-orang pilihan yang akan terus membuat Antropologi menjadi lebih kreatif dan dinamis.
Kepada seluruh KERABAT Antropologi Unair, terima kasih atas segala support dan dedikasinya yang teramat besar kepada lingkaran kecil kita. Dan terima kasih juga untuk KERABAT UGM yang telah menjadi satu-satunya tamu pada Inisiasi Unair.
Sekali lagi terima kasih untuk semua KERABAT…..
Rabu, 28 Desember 2005
RESENSI - Buku
Sisi Gelap Kolonialisme Pengetahuan
Judul Buku: Dekolonisasi Metodologi
Oleh: Achmad Maulani
WAJAH sebuah bangsa bisa dilihat dari sejarahnya, demikian
kata sebuah pepatah. Sejarah juga merupakan cermin sekaligus ‘mesin’ pembentuk
karakter sebuah bangsa. Ketika sejarah hanya dicatat berdasarkan sepenggal
peristiwa dan menganalisisnya dengan asumsi, penyok sudah wajah sebuah bangsa.
Dengan semangat seperti itulah, peneliti Maori terkemuka
dari Selandia Baru Linda Tuhiwai Smith dalam buku Decolonizing Methodologies,
Research and Indigenous Peoples ini berusaha membongkar kembali pandangan Barat
terhadap Timur.
Dengan pengalaman sebagai peneliti yang banyak melakukan
penelitian pada bangsa Maori, Smith sampai pada keyakinan bahwa bila sejarah
sebuah bangsa dirangkai oleh bangsa lain, terutama melalui penelitian dengan
mengendarai roda kolonialisme sebagai instrumennya, sebuah bangsa akan sekadar
menjadi pecundang.
Pada ranah inilah, menurut Smith, mata pisau imperialisme
akan dijalankan melalui infiltrasi pengetahuan, mengklasifikasikan dan
merepresentasikan bangsa terjajah dengan cara Barat, untuk kemudian lewat
kacamata Barat pula pengetahuan itu dikembalikan kepada bangsa terjajah (hlm
3-4).
Dekolonisasi metodologi yang digagas Smith dalam buku ini
merupakan sebuah upaya untuk memerdekakan cara berpikir dan bekerja. Merdeka
dari segala bentuk penjajahan pengetahuan.
Karena tanpa kesadaran kritis, yang terjadi adalah
‘penundukan’ intelektual dan ilmu pengetahuan- -meminjam istilah Vandana Shiva
(2001)–bangsa Barat atas bangsa Timur.
Bagi Smith, persoalannya bukan soal ingin mendikotomikan
Barat dan Timur dan menghadapkannya secara vis a vis. Tapi sekadar mengingatkan
bahwa sering suara nyaring yang kerap didengungkan Barat atas perlindungan
pengetahuan ternyata menyimpan ideologi besar berupa penundukan, kolonisasi,
yang kemudian berujung pada ‘penjarahan’ atas pengetahuan.
Ada
ilustrasi sederhana yang bisa menggambarkan dalam hal ini. Dalam sejarah
masyarakat
India
terdapat berbagai pengetahuan lokal tentang pengobatan dan pertanian yang
berkembang secara alamiah serta melalui kebijaksanaan lokal yang dimiliki
bersama. Namun, kapitalisme melalui aparaturnya, yakni saintisasi, telah
merampoknya dari masyarakat
India
dengan dalih perlindungan.
Dewasa ini, menurut Smith, kolonisasi metodologi telah
berjalan melalui kelembagaan pendidikan. Ia berjalan dalam sistem pendidikan
yang bertujuan memelihara sistem sosial ekonomi maupun kekuasaan. Sistem
pendidikan yang tak pernah bebas dari kepentingan politik dan hanya
mereproduksi struktur sosial yang tidak adil.
Yang menarik dari buku setebal 346 halaman ini, Smith
menyajikan dengan semangat membongkar positional superiority–sebagaimana
dikemukakan Edward Said (1978) dalam buku klasiknya Orientalism. Dengan
semangat itu, Smith memulai sebuah penulisan dengan menempatkan cara pandang
rakyat terjajah sebagai sesuatu yang dominan dan istimewa. Pengetahuan dipilih
dalam hal ini karena merupakan sesuatu yang tak terpisahkan dari dinamika
kolonialisme.
Dalam pandangan Smith, yang sangat menyakitkan bangsa Timur
adalah sering intelektual Barat mengklaim mengetahui sesuatu tentang Timur
hanya dengan perjumpaan sesaat dengan satu-dua orang dari bangsa Timur. Lalu,
mereka mengklaim mengetahui segala tentang Timur. Tak jarang mereka juga
mengklaim sesuatu yang mereka ketahui untuk kemudian dipatenkan.
Dengan kondisi itu, buku ini menegaskan muncul sebuah bentuk
instrumen baru kolonialisme dan kapitalisme. Kalau dahulu kolonialisme berwujud
dalam bentuk penundukan fisik dan geografis, saat ini telah berwujud dalam
bentuk penundukan intelektual dan pengetahuan.
Buku ini merupakan gugatan keras terhadap cara pandang
kolonialistik dalam cara kerja produksi ilmu pengetahuan. Selain itu, sebuah
ikhtiar menyingkap ideologi dan semangat yang terkandung di balik segala
sesuatu yang kerap mengatasnamakan perlindungan terhadap pengetahuan yang tak
lain adalah kolonisasi, penjarahan, dan ekspansi pasar Barat terhadap Dunia
Ketiga.
Maka hadirnya buku ini diharapkan dapat membuka ulang
pengetahuan yang selama ini melulu didominasi Barat sekaligus membongkar
praktik-praktik manipulatif pengetahuan yang dijalankan Barat. Ia juga
mengingatkan bahwa cara-cara penelitian ilmiah yang dilakukan Barat sering juga
menjadi sisi gelap kolonialisme pengetahuan yang selama ini tak terungkap.
(Achmad Maulani, mahasiswa pascasarjana UGM Yogyakarta)
Sumber: http://www.mediaind o.co.id/resensi/ details.asp?
id=284
Anak HUMAN UNPAD mau ngadain inisiasi. Kita pengen kenal
dengan lo
yang tertarik dengan acara kita. Moga bisa datang. terutama
buat anak
UI yang udah janji mau datang dan buat kerabat yang lain.
acara kita
INISIASI tanggal 22-23 sepetember 2006
tempat kiara payung
buat kerabat yang mau datang bisa langsung ke unpad. kita
ada dikantin
FISIP atau di Perpustakaan antrop. kita harap lo pada
datang. Kata
istilah lama "tiada kesan tanpa kehadiranmu" , so,
buat kerabat semua
ditunggu kehadiranmu.
salam phadli
aku hidup aku manusia
CP:behom:0812142473 3
ridwan:08122154165
Ruby, Jay
1996 Visual Anthropology. In Encyclopedia of Cultural Anthropology, New York : Henry Holt and Company, vol.
David Levinson and Melvin Ember, editors.
4:1345-1351.
VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY
Visual anthropology logically proceeds from the
belief that culture is manifested through visible symbols embedded in gestures,
ceremonies, rituals, and artifacts situated in constructed and natural
environments. Culture is conceived of as manifesting itself in scripts with
plots involving actors and actresses with lines, costumes, props, and settings.
The cultural self is the sum of the scenarios in which one participates. If one
can see culture, then researchers should be able to employ audiovisual
technologies to record it as data amenable to analysis and presentation.
Although the origins of visual anthropology are to be found historically in
positivist assumptions that an objective reality is observable, most
contemporary culture theorists emphasize the socially constructed nature of
cultural reality and the tentative nature of our understanding of any culture.
There is an obvious relationship between the
supposition that culture is objectively observable and the popular belief in
the neutrality, transparency, and objectivity of audiovisual technologies. From
a positivist perspective, reality can be captured on film without the
limitations of human consciousness Pictures provide an unimpeachable witness
and: source of highly reliable data. Given those assumptions, it is logical
that as soon as the technologies were available, anthropologists attempted to
produce wit] the camera the sort of objective research data the could tee
stored in archives and made available for stud by future generations (Edwards
1992).
Contemporary thought is more tentative than
positivist theory about the nature of cultural know edge and about what film
can record. In a postpositive and postmodern world, the camera is constrained
by the culture of the person behind the apparatus; that is, films and
photographs are always concerned with two things-the culture of those filmed
and the culture of those who film. As a result of viewing pictures
representations of an ideology, it has been suggested that anthropologists use
the technology in a reflexive manner, alienating viewers from any false assumptions
about the reliability of the images they see, and that visual ethnographers
seek ways to share their authority with the people they study.
Conceptually, visual anthropology ranges over all
aspects of culture that are visible-from nonverbal communication, the built
environment, ritual and ceremonial performance, dance, and art to material
culture. (Excluded from this discussion are the varied research uses of
audiovisual technologies in physical anthropology and archaeology.) Although
some visual anthropologists do work in all of these areas, the field lacks a
tradition of a commonly accepted all encompassing theory-an anthropology of
visual or pictorial communication (Worth 1981). Given the fragmentary nature of
contemporary theorizing, it seems unlikely that such a grand theory will ever
become commonly accepted. The field may be conceptually wide-ranging, but in
practice visual anthropology is dominated primarily by an interest in pictorial
media as a means of communicating anthropological knowledge, that is,
ethnographic films and photographs and, secondarily, the study of pictorial
manifestations of culture.
Visual anthropology has never been completely
incorporated into the mainstream of anthropology. It is trivialized by some
anthropologists as being mainly concerned with audiovisual aids for teaching.
The anthropological establishment has yet to acknowledge the centrality of the
mass media in the formation of cultural identity in the second half of the
twentieth century. Consequently, visual anthropologists sometimes find
themselves involved with the research and thinking of professional image makers
and scholars from other disciplines-visual sociology, cultural studies, film
theory, photo history, dance and performance studies, and architectural theory-rather
than with the work of other cultural anthropologists.
ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDY OF IMAGES
The scholarly study of photography has been
dominated by the art historians’ search for significant works by important
artists and the discovery of the naive products of vernacular practitioners.
During the past decade a social approach to the history of photography has
emerged in which photographs are seen as socially constructed artifacts that
tell us something about the culture depicted as well as the culture of the
picture taker. Such studies concentrate more on the social contexts of making
and using images and less on the photograph as text. Visual anthropologists
have contributed to this movement with their analyses of historical
photographic practice as cultural behavior (Ruby 1988; Edwards 1992) and
ethnographic studies of vernacular practices, such as snapshots (Musello
1980).These studies attempt to provide insight into the conditions of
production and consumption, so that the meaning of the images can be
comprehended as something negotiated rather than fixed. For example, the
photographs of Edward Curtis can be understood as the products of a nineteenth
century romanticized view of Native Americans and criticized as being racist
and ethnocentric (Lyman 1982). At the same time, the Curtis images can be
examined for their value to contemporary Native Americans who wish to use them
in constructing their cultural identity (Lippard 1992).
The anthropological analysis of film, television,
and other forms of mass media began with the 1940s studies of Gregory Bateson,
Margaret Mead, and Rhoda Metraux that focused on culture as a distance in which
the cultural elements of commercial cinema were ascertained through textual
analysis (Bateson and Mead 1942; Mead and Metraux 1953). Since the 1980s, there
has been less interest in studies of the producer and the text and more concern
with the role of film and television audiences in the construction of meaning.
Scholars from a number of disciplines, such as cultural studies and
communication, now employ ethnographic methods to conduct reception studies of
Western viewers. In addition, some ethnographers have studied the reception of
television among native populations (Michaels 1987; Kottak 1990) and the
cultural processes employed in the production of a U.S.television program (Intintoli
1984). Wilton Martinez (1992) has undertaken a distressing study of the
reception of ethnographic films by college students in an introductory
anthropology course. He found that although the purpose of the course and the
films was to cause viewers to gain respect for other peoples’ life-styles, the
films tended to reinforce the ethnocentric attitudes of students.
ETHNOGRAPHIC PHOTOGRAPHY
Ethnographic photography is a practice without a
well-articulated theory or method. Since the 1890s, when outdoor photography
became relatively easy, most anthropological fieldworkers have produced images
of the people they studied. Some ethnographers employ photographs in the field
to induce responses in an interview. The primary function of photographs taken
in the field is as an aide-de-memoire, similar to written field notes, to help
reconstitute events in the mind of the ethnographer. Some images become
illustrations for publications, slides for lectures, or, occasionally, the
basis for an exhibition. Once the fieldwork is written up, the photographs are
deposited either in a museum or in the author’s personal archive along with
written field notes and are usually forgotten.
On a formal level, photographs taken by
anthropologists are indistinguishable from the snapshots or artistically
intended images taken by tourists-that is, there is no discernible
anthropological photographic style. Although ethnographic photography shares
some affinity with the documentary, the aesthetic and political intent of most
documentary images separates them from ethnographic photography. Bateson and
Mead’s Balinese Character (1942) and Gardner and Heider’s Gardens of War (1968)
are among the exceptional attempts at publishing a photographic ethnography.
Such ethnographic sociologists as Douglas Harper and others in the
International Visual Sociology Association are extending the tradition of photo
ethnographies. In the 1990s, experiments with multimedia-hypertext technology
opened up the promise of a future with computer-generated pictorial
ethnographies-a new kind of text producing a different type of learning
experience.
ETHNOGRAPHIC FILM
Ethnographic film is the dominant interest and
practice among visual anthropologists. There is no standard agreed-upon
definition of the genre, and the popular assumption is that it is a documentary
about "exotic" people, thereby broadening the term
"ethnographic" to stand for any statement about culture. Some scholars
argue that all film is ethnographic (Heider 1976), whereas others (e.g., Ruby
1975) wish to restrict the term to films produced by or in association with
anthropologists.
The literature about ethnographic film has been
hampered by a lack of a conceptual structure sufficient to the task of allowing
anthropologists to theorize about how film can be used to communicate
knowledge. It is a failure that burdens all discourse about nonfiction film. As
a result, authors have concentrated on making proscriptions and programmatic
admonitions, and telling war stories about how a film was made. Other topics of
discussion have been the assumed dilemmas between science and art; questions of
accuracy, fairness, and objectivity; the appropriateness of the conventions of
documentary realism; the value of film in the teaching of anthropology; the
relationship between a written and a visual anthropology; and collaborations
between filmmakers and anthropologists and the native production of visual
texts. Theoretical explorations are consequently limited to arguing about
whether or not a particular film is objective, accurate, complete, or even
ethnographic. With the erosion of the positivist underpinnings of anthropology
and documentary film comes the possibility of a new examination of the politics
and ideology of filmed ethnography. Like the documentary, the ethnographic film
seems on the verge of some serious theoretical debates. Perhaps as a result of
the criticisms from film theorists such as Bill Nichols and the challenge of
indigenously produced media, visual anthropologists have become increasingly
aware of the need for a more secure conceptual basis.
The earliest ethnographic films-one-reel,
single-take episodes of human behavior were indistinguishable from theatrical
actualities. Anthropologists, like everyone else, were fascinated with the
technology and its promise to provide an unimpeachable witness. Felix-Louis
Regnault, perhaps the first anthropologist to produce researchable footage,
proposed in 1900 that all museums collect "moving artifacts" of human
behavior for study and exhibit. Scholars, explorers, and even colonial
administrators produced footage for research and public display. The crude
technology, the lack of familiarity with the equipment, and the vagueness of
the makers’ intentions greatly limited its use.
Filmmaking conventions eventually developed that
tended to interfere with the assumed scholarly needs for researchable data. The
perceived conflict between the aesthetic conventions of filmmaking and the
scholarly requirements of positivism for researchable data caused film to be
underutilized as an analytic technique. For example, filmmakers tend to
fragment and reconstitute action into synthetic sequences that suggest time
relationships sometimes at variance with the photographed action. Some
anthropologists believe that only footage shot at eye level with a minimum of
camera movement and with real-time coverage of the event are scientifically
usable. Strategies appropriate to fiction were believed to create barriers between
anthropologists and film professionals. These naive assumptions about the
differences between the art of film and the science of anthropology are slowly
being replaced by a conception of film as a culturally bound communication
usable in a variety of discourses. The lack of a method for extracting
researchable data about cultural behavior from film footage continues to
inhibit the use of the camera as a research tool.
In the 1930s Mead and Bateson extended Regnault’s
ideas. The results of their fieldwork were such published films as Bathing
Babies in Three Cultures (1941), which were designed to make their data
available for other scholars. The tradition of group research of filmed
behavior they championed continues with Alan Lomax’s Choreometrics study of
dance as cultural behavior. Whereas Ray Birdwhistell (1970) and Edward Hall
(1959) have proposed the cinematic study of body movement and the use of space
as culturally conditioned communications, and dance ethnologists often employ
video and cine cameras, the microanalysis of filmed behavior has been more
attractive to social psychologists like Paul Ekman than to anthropologists.
In the 1950s the Institut fur den
Wissenschaftlichen Film in Gottingen launched its Encyclopedia Cinematographica project, which included an archive
and center for the study of filmed behavior. A similar organization, Human
Studies Film Archives, is housed at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington,
D.C. Although the idea of generating researchable information about culture with a
camera remains theoretically possible, few anthropologists have actually
conducted a study employing motion-picture footage produced by other people.
Some indigenous people have begun examining film footage of their culture’s
ceremonial life stored in archives in the hope of revitalizing their old
traditions.
Production of ethnographic films for public
edification and amusement began as part of a general educational-film movement
in the 1920s. Prior to that, films of "exotic" peoples were produced
commercially, sometimes with the cooperation of anthropologists and screened in
theaters as selected short subjects. For example, the Pathe brothers sought the
assistance of the Department of Anthropology at Harvard when producing People
and Customs of the World in 1928.
There were a number of early attempts to
represent native life in feature-length theatrical films shot on location.
Edward Curtis’ In the Land of the Head Hunters (1914), a romantic epic
of the Kwakiutl of British Columbia, was a box-office failure but it
established a precedent for Robert Flaherty’s Nanook of the North (1922), a
portrait of the struggles of an Inuit (Eskimo) family of the Hudson Bay region
of Canada against a harsh environment. The international success of Nanook prompted
Paramount Pictures to finance Flaherty’s second film, Moana (l 926), and to
distribute Meriam Cooper and Ernest Scheodsack’s Grass (1926), a study of the
annual migration of the Bakhtari of Iran.
Although the academic world by and large ignored
these films,Hollywood saw the box-office potential for productions that featured exotic locations and
starred native people. Moreover, the procedures that were instituted at the
major studios were essentially incompatible with ethnography. When Cooper and
Schoedsack traveled to Siam (Thailand)
to shoot Chang (1927), they carried a fully approved script, ensuring fidelity
to executive preconceptions and to popular folk models of the lives of people
exotic to the West.
Hollywood was beginning to
develop its own traditions of Asian, African, and South Sea Island adventure drama that were
increasingly at odds with anthropological concerns.
In The Silent Enemy: An Epic of the American
Indian (1930), director H. P. Carver employed an all-native cast to tell the
tale of an Ojibway warrior. The film begins with Chief Yellow Robe, the lead
actor, in a complete Indian costume, confronting the camera directly to inform
audiences, "This is the story of my people…Everything that you will see
here is real… When you look at the picture, therefore, look not upon us as
actors. We are Indians living once more our old life." Never has a film before or after The
Silent Enemy been so authenticated. The advent of sound caused the film
industry to move into the studio stage and abandon the location adventure film
about exotic cultures until the 1970s. For forty years, movie audiences learned
about the "exotic other" through backlot Tarzan films employing
African Americans as natives and in cowboy and Indian movies using Mexican
Americans as Native Americans. Because of the popularity of these films,
anthropological filmmakers are still forced to disabuse audiences about their
expectations of seeing cannibals, headhunters, and other savage clichés when
viewing films about cultures foreign to their experience.
Only a few ethnographic films were produced by or
with anthropologists in the 1920s and 1930s. The rapid disappearance of native
peoples, as well as Western culture’s folk and peasant customs, caused a few
salvage ethnographic-film projects to be undertaken. For example, the Heye
Foundation supported a series of films on Native Americans from 1912 to 1927
that were produced by Owen Cattell with the assistance of Frederick Hodge.
Similar projects were designed to salvage European folk traditions and were
motivated by a sense of nationalistic pride rather than a need for
anthropological study. Prior to World War II, most eastern and central European
countries had a department of folklore that produced hundreds of short films,
most often about peasants dancing in colorful costumes. In colonial countries
such as India,
agencies such as the Anthropological Survey, Films Division, and state
television maintained a continuous if weak tradition of recording native
societies for research, publicity, developmental advocacy, and nation-building
activities. These films were seen in movie houses and at some of the larger
museums. Until the l950s they were seldom shown in university classrooms.
It was not until after World War II that there
was substantial film activity by anthropologists. By 1952 there was sufficient
interest in the field to form the International Committee on Ethnographic and
Sociological Film, which was associated with the United Nations Educational,
Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The Festival dei Popoli in Florence, the Conference on Visual Anthropology in Philadelphia, Cinema du Real in Paris,
the Margaret Mead Film Festival in New York,
and the Royal Anthropological Institute’s Ethnographic Film Festival in Manchester were organized
in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s to encourage the growth of anthropological
cinema. Every year, new conferences, festivals, and seminars appear, attesting
to an increasing interest in visual anthropology. There are three quar-terly
periodicals devoted to the field: Studies in Visual Communication (1974-1985),
Visual Anthropology (1987-), published in conjunction with the International
Commission on Visual Anthropology; and Visual Anthropology Review (1986-), a publication of the Society for Visual Anthropology. Graduate-study programs
currently exist at the University ofSouthern California, New
York University, and Temple University in the United States and at
theUniversity of Manchester in England. Numerous other
institutions offer single courses.
A number of impressive ethnographic films emerged
in the 1950s and 1960s from diverse institutions in the United States that were
directed toward university audiences as well as the larger world of
documentary-film viewers. The Hunters (1958) was the first North American
ethnographic film to gain worldwide attention. The story of some hunters and
gatherers living in the Kalahari desert, it
continued the Nanook theme of humans struggling with a hostile environment in
order to eke out a living. It is part of John Marshall’s thirty-year-long film
study of the San (Bushmen) of southern Africa.
He has produced dozens of African and North American films including N’ai
(1980), a life history of a San woman, which was broadcast on U.S. public
television. Since the late 1980s,
Marshall has combined his role as a filmmaker with that of an activist by assisting the
San in their efforts to create a cultural and economic identity for themselves
while he films the process.
In 1964, Robert Gardner, a former associate of Marshall’s at the Film Study Center at Harvard University, released Dead Birds, a study
of ritualized warfare among the Dani of New Guinea. The film grew out of a
project in which ethnographers, a novelist, and a filmmaker all described the
same culture, permitting audiences to compare the presentations. Gardner later
produced films in East Africa, India, and South America and was instrumental in
establishing the Program in Ethnographic Film, subsequently renamed the Society
for the Anthropology of Visual Communication and now known as the Society for
Visual Anthropology.
Gardner’s
films are a source of constant debate, because his evocative style seems
altogether too implicit for some anthropologists.
Timothy Asch, former director of the University of Southern California’s Center for Visual
Anthropology, worked collaboratively with anthropologist Napoleon Chagnon to
create a series of popular films on the Yanomamo of Venezuela, including The
Feast (1968), Ax Fight (1971), and A Man Called Bee (1972). The films, along
with written ethnographies and study guides, were designed to teach cultural
anthropology to college undergraduates. Asch, working with his wife, Patsy,
pursued his interests in collaborative filming in Indonesia with James Fox, creating The Water of Words (1983), and in Bali with Linda Conner, making Releasing the Spirits (l990).
The pioneering work of anthropologist-filmmaker
Jean Rouch at the Musée de l’Homme brought new impetus to the field in Europe, gaining the attention of both academics and cineastes.
In the early 1960s technical advances made it possible for small crews to
produce synchronous-sound location films. The equipment encouraged some
filmmakers to record actions and events as detached observers, naively assuming
that they were not significantly influencing the actions being followed. Rouch
adopted an opposite approach. He felt that the presence of the camera could
provoke a cine-trance in which subjects revealed their culture. Chronique d’un
été (1961) was produced with sociologist Edgar Morin and was the first cinema
vérité film combining the ideas of Flaherty with those of Soviet film theorist
and practitioner Dziga Vertov. Rouch took cameras into Paris streets for impromptu encounters in
which the filmmaking process was often a part of the film. Filmmakers and
equipment were in evidence in the frame. Those filmed became collaborators,
even to the extent of participating in discussions of the footage, which were
in turn incorporated into the final version of the film. Chronique marks the
advent of portable synchronized-sound 16mm equipment, which made possible
modern participatory and observational documentary styles. The impact of
Rouch’s work was immediately evident in the films of French New Wave directors,
such as Chris Marker and Jean-Luc Godard and later among documentarians and
ethnofilmmakers.
Rouch developed his collaborative approach for
almost forty years in a number of films made with West Africans. Some early
efforts, such as Les Maitres Fous (1955) were criticized as ethnocentric by
some because of an assumed overemphasis on the bizarre, but others celebrated
Les Maitres as a definitive surrealist text. Rouch wanted to produce a shared
anthropology in which those in front of the camera shared the power with the
director. This idea reached an apex with his so-called ethnographic
science-fiction films, such as Jaguar (1965), Petit a petit (1968), and Madame
l’eau (1992). His attempts at collaborative filmmaking are mirrored in the
Native Alaskan Heritage Film Project of Sarah Elder and Leonard Kamerling.
Since the early 1970s, this team has produced more than twenty community films,
such as Drums of Winter (1988) in which the people filmed played an active role
in the film from conception to realization. Given the shift in power and
awareness in a postcolonial and postmodern world, some argue that the only
ethnographic films that should be produced in the twenty-first century are
those that result from an active collaboration and sharing of power between
ethnofilmmakers and the subjects of their films.
Rouch’s desire to allow us to see the world
through the eyes of the natives was shared by Sol Worth and John Adair in the
Navaho Film Project (1966), in which Native Americans were taught the
technology of filmmaking without the usual Western ideology (Worth and Adair
1972). The project of Worth and Adair was part of a more general movement in
the 1960s and 1970s toward the expansion of production to people who were
traditionally the subject of films.
The idea of a reflexive ethnography that actively
seeks the participation of those who are studied and that openly acknowledges
the role of the ethnographer in the construction of the culture’s image
reflects a growing concern voiced by both anthropologists and documentary
filmmakers about the ethics and politics of actuality filmmaking. Through the
efforts of such people as Vincente Carelli in
Brazil (l980s), Eric Michaels in Australia(1987), and Terence Turner in Brazil (1992), indigenous people have started producing their own videotapes, thus
raising anew the possibility of making available new visions of the world.
The varied educational values of ethnographic
film are demonstrated in two large projects. Man: A Course of Study was a
mixed-media curriculum developed by the Educational Development Corporation of Newton, Massachusetts,
under the guidance of Canadian anthropologist Asen Balikci and others. Films on
Netisilik Eskimo life originally designed for use in a grammar-school course
have been repackaged for college-level courses, a commercial television special
(The Eskimo Fight for Life), and a Canadian preschool children’s series.
Although Man is undoubtedly the most ambitious ethnographic educational
project, it was not greeted with enthusiasm by conservative. journalists and politicians
in the United States, who
saw the course as being subversive to the U.S. we’ of life because it taught
cultural relativism. The second project, The Faces of Culture, was designed by
a team of filmmakers, anthropologists, and television producers at Orange Coast College in California as an introductory
cultural-anthropology course to be broadcast on local public-television
stations and offered for credit through local community colleges. Each show in
the series was derived from already existing footage on the Yamonamo, San,
Amara, and others. The programs were designed to complement the readings from a
required textbook.
Whereas most European and North American
ethnographic filmmakers travel to distant places to film exotic peoples, white
Australians have been filming the Aboriginal people of their country since
about 1900. The British-organized Torres Straits Expedition of 1898 is reputed
to have been the first such expedition on which an ethnographer took a motion
picture camera in the field. The Australian Commonwealth Film Unit and later
Film Australia made it
possible for Ian Dunlap to undertake long-term filming projects, such as his
Peoples of the Western Australian Desert series. The Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies employs a staff
ethnographic filmmaker. In that capacity, Roger Sandall produced a number of
films on the ceremonial life of various Aboriginal peoples, including The Mulga
Seed Ceremony (1969). Since the late 1980s, these films are now restricted in
their public showing, owing to the secret quality of some of the portrayed
ceremonial acts. David and Judith Macdougall served as the institute’s resident
filmmakers during the l980s, and they are noted for a film trilogy,
"Turkana Conversations," including Lorang’s Way (l979) and The
Wedding Camels (1981), shot in a distinctive observational style that has
caught the attention of cineastes as well as anthropologists.
Television has
become a significant source of support for ethnographic film activity. In Great
Britain, Granada’s long-running television series Disappearing World
established a fruitful tradition of collaboration between field ethnographers
and filmmakers, resulting in such films as Brian Moser’s Last of the Cuiva
(l971), shot in eastern Colombia. Granada’s interest in ethnographic film
caused them to be a major benefactor for the University of Manchester’s program
in ethnographic film. BBC-TV anthropological projects have included the series
Face Values, produced in cooperation with the Royal Anthropological Institute,
and Worlds Apart, in which series producers Chris Curling and Melissa
Llewlyn-Davies explored the impact of Leni Riefenstal’s photography in The
Southeast Nuba (1983). In the United States aired Odyssey, a series that
covered all aspects of anthropology. In a similar fashion, Nippon TV’s Man,
produced by Junichi Ushiyama, continues to be among the most popular programs
in Japan. Television systems in many parts of the world have scheduled series
for school and college use, drawing on the growing anthropological-film
resources.
CONCLUSION
Anthropology is a word-driven discipline. It has
tended to ignore the visual-pictorial world perhaps because of distrust of the
ability of images to convey abstract ideas. When engaged in ethnography, the
researcher must convert the complex experience of fieldwork to words in a
notebook and then transform those words into other words shifted through
analytic methods and theories. This logocentric approach to understanding
denies much of the multisensory experience of trying to know another culture.
The promise of visual anthropology is that it might provide an alternative way
of perceiving culture-perception constructed through the lens.
References Cited
Ø BATESON, GREGORY, and MARGARET MEAD. Balinese
Character: A Photographic Analysis.
New York New York Academy of Sciences, 1942.
Ø BIRDWHISTELL, RAY. Kinesics and Context: Essays
on Body Motion Communication.Philadelphia
:University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970.
Ø EDWARDS,ELIZABETH,
ed. Anthropology and Photography: 1860-1920.New Haven, Conn.:
Yale University Press, l992.
ØGARDNER, ROBERT
and HEIDER,KARLG.Gardens of War. New York:
Random House, 1968.
ØHALL,EDWARD. The Silent
Language. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1959.
Ø HEIDER, KARL G. Ethnographic Film.Austin: University of Texas Press, 1976.
Ø INTINTOLI, MICHAEL. Taking Soaps Seriously: The
World of Guiding Light. New York:
Praeger, 1984.
Ø KOTTAK, CONRAD P. Prime-Time Society:An
Anthropological Analysis of Television and Culture. Belmont,Calif: Wadsworth,
1990.
Ø LIPPARD, LUCY, ed. Partial Recall. New York: New Press,
1992.
Ø LYMAN, CHRISTOPHER M. The Vanishing Race and
Other Illusions: Photographs of Indians by Edward Curtis. New York: Pantheon, 1982.
ØMARTINEZ,WILTON. Who Constructs
Anthropological Knowledge? Toward a Theory of Ethnographic Film
Spectatorship." In Film as Ethnography, edited by Peter Crawford and David
Turton. Manchester,England: Manchester University Press, 1992.
Ø MEAD, MARGARET, and RHODA METRAUX, eds. The
Study of Culture at a Distance. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1953.
Ø MICHAELS, ERIC. For a Cultural Future: Frances
Jupurrurla Makes TV at Yuendumu. Art and Criticism Series, vol. 3.Sydney: Art Space, 1987.
Ø MUSELLO, CHRTSTOPHER. Studying the Home
Mode." Studies in Visual Communication (1980): 23-42.Ø RUBY, JAY. "Is an Ethnographic Film a
Filmic Ethnography?" Studies in the AInthropology of Visual Communication
2 (1975): 104-111.
Ø RUBY, JAY."Images of Rural America."
History of Photography 12 (1988):327-343.
Ø TURNER, TERENCE. Defiant Images: The Kayapo Appropriation
of Video." Anthropology Today 8 (l992): 5-16.
Ø WORTH, SOL. Studying Visual Communication,
edited by Larry Gross.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 198l.
Ø WORTH, SOL, and JOHN ADAIR. Through Navaho Eyes. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972.
LIGA ANTROPOLOGI 2006
Sepak Bola :
Ø Team bebas (Antropologi only)
Ø Terdiri dari maksimal 12 pemain, minimal 10
pemain
Ø Pemain asing maksimal 3 orang (2 orang main)
Ø Pendaftaran team Rp 5000
Ø Pemain lokal (kerabat Antropologi) Rp 2000,
pemain asing (bukan kerabat / mahasiswa jurusan lain di Fisip) Rp 3000
Ø Pendaftaran team terbatas ( 6 team)
Ø Pertandingan menggunakan sistem gugur
Voli :
Ø Team terdiri dari setiap angkatan, angkatan 2000
ketas (’99, ’98 dst) digabung
Ø Pendaftaran team Rp 5000
Ø 2 kali kemenangan (3 babak)
Ø Pertandingan menggunakan sistem gugur
Tenis meja :
Ø Perorangan
Ø Pedaftaran per orang Rp 2000
Ø 2 kali kemenangna (3 babak)
Ø Pertandingan menggunakan sistem gugur
Mulai tanggal 04 – 15 September 2006
NB: TM dan hal-hal lain akan diberitahukan kemudian
Contact person:
Momo ‘04
From: "Aryo Danusiri" <aryodanusiri@gmail.com>
LOWONGAN: ASISTEN EDITOR
UNHABITAT Indonesia sedang
memproduksi sebuah dokumenter
mengenai rekonstruksi perumahan
pasca Tsunami di Aceh.
Film dokumenter panjang ini
dikerjakan oleh Aryo Danusiri.
Saat ini sudah memasuki tahap
pasca-produksi dan
ditargetkan selesai pada bulan
November mendatang.
Untuk kepentingan tersebut, kami
mencari seorang
ASISTEN EDITOR (kontrak
September-November)
untuk BEKERJA DI JAKARTA.
TUGAS:
(1) Me-logging footage
(2) Membantu Penerjemah bahasa
Aceh mentranskrip kedalam file notepad
penerjemahan bahasa Aceh ke Bahasa
Indonesia
(3) Membantu proses offline
(pembentukan cerita) dengan
sistem Linear (VHS) dan Non-liner (Final
Cut Pro)
(4) Membantu persiapan,
pengerjaan dan pengawasan proses online.
QUALIFIKASI:
(1) Pengalaman minimal 1 tahun
menjadi asisten editor
(2) Bisa melakukan editing dengan
non-linear/linear sistem
(Final Cut Pro + Avid DV).
(3) mampu bekerja dalam tekanan,
penuh disiplin dan ulet.
(4) bersedia bekerja penuh waktu
(5) mampu mengaplikasikan
komputer (word & excel)
(6) pendidikan minimal SMA atau
sederajat
surat lamaran dan CV anda selambat-lambatnya
segera kirimkan
30 Agustus 2006
ke danusiri@gmail.com
Deskripsi mengenai UNHABITAT, Banda Aceh, INDONESIA
UN-Habitat has been working in
the disaster reconstruction field, including disaster preparedness, for more
than two decades and it has implemented several natural disaster-related
projects in countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh,
Myanmar, Sri Lanka and the Philippines.
The earthquake that struck north
Sumatra in the morning of 26th December 2004 and the resulting tsunamis have
caused extensive damage to the Aceh special region of
Indonesia
.
Presently UN-Habitat is implementing the Aceh and Nias Settlements Support
Programme (ANSSP), an umbrella Programme of UNDP supported by various donors
and government.
UN-Habitat ANSSP has been
involved in the design and implementation of a number of innovative projects
revolving around "adequate shelter through community empowerment. "
UN-Habitat
Indonesia
unit is supported by a team of international and national professionals in
Human Settlements and supported by UNDP
