Where is the next, STS-inspired, George Stocking?


Lawrence Cohen, in one of the seemingly endless stream of insights he casts around, once suggested to me that the history of anthropology needs to be understood in terms of its  status as a “field science” over and against the development of “the laboratory” in the 19th century.

I guess I’m just now coming to terms with what we lost with the passing of George Stocking, but it seems to me that what such a project would require–and I am certainly not the person to do it–is a kind of George Stocking for the 21st century.  Stocking’s histories of anthropology pushed aside the easy origins myths the discipline liked to tell itself and opened the possibility to situate anthropology as a discipline within a broader intellectual, emotional and political tradition.

V0010792 A quack pharmacist(?) tying up his pet monkey. Etching by Jo
Credit: Wellcome Library, London
A quack pharmacist(?) tying up his pet monkey. Etching by Jor after Ma.
By: Ma
Published: Ve. ChereauParis (rue St. Jacques aux 2. Piliers d’or) :

Certainly “laboratory studies” are now plentiful, to the point of being basically passe, in anthropology and in STS more generally.  But do any of them take up this question of “the field” in such a way as to insist on anthropology’s central role in constructing scientific knowledge? Who will be anthropology’s next Stocking, placing it at the core of how we understand “knowledge” and “power” today?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s