[URBANTH-L]AAA 2008 CFP: External Forms Internal Norms
Zeynep Gursel
zgursel at berkeley.edu
Mon Feb 25 15:24:25 EST 2008
Call for Papers
Proposed Session
American Anthropological Association (AAA), Nov. 19-Nov. 23, 2008
Hilton Park and Towers, San Francisco
EXTERNAL FORMS, INTERNAL NORMS: Investigating
critical terms of inclusion, engagement and
collaboration
Elif Müyesser Babül, Stanford University & Zeynep
Devrim Gürsel, University of Michigan
Anthropologists have long investigated processes
of inclusion and exclusion, whether based on
race, class, gender, ethnicity or nationality. In
relation to key issues of our times (social
identity, economic growth, cultural preservation,
peace-making, social justice) a widespread
assumption is that collaboration and engagement
should be promoted with an ideal situation being
expressed in terms of maximum inclusion. Yet,
what are the specific processes enabling maximum
inclusion? What kinds of mechanisms come into
play in an idealized inclusion? In realms as
diverse as politics, humanitiarianism, art,
journalism and energy distribution, collaboration
begins with an assumption that a certain
commensurability is feasible and desirable.
Inclusions are often determined in terms of
compliance to certain terms and conditions
defining the criteria for admission. Forms are
developed as supposed precursors or prerequisites
to collaboration and inclusion, imagined as means
of establishing commensurate (thus legitimate)
grounds of engagement. Hence despite the ideal of
maximum inclusion, everyday practices often
emphasize compliance rather than inclusion or
partnership.
What if we turn our attention to forms
themselves? What are the kinds of inclusion that
are precluded in the imposition of
outside/external/foreign/international forms in
an attempt to shape the
inside/internal/domestic/national norms? How do
established forms/formats/formalities determine
and/or negate developing
norms/normals/normativities?
This panel attends to how forms presented as
prerequisites for admission, collaboration or
engagement themselves function as processes of
inclusion or exclusion. This panel broadly
examines the mutually constitutive relationship
between forms/formations/formalities and
norms/normalities, and how an approach focusing
on this relationship might enable us to rethink
processes of inclusion, collaboration and
engagement. Paying specific attention to the
institutional practices (of the state, civil
society, inter/supranational formations, capital,
markets, communities, subjectivities, etc.) of
determining the conditions of possibility for
inclusion/integration, the panel will address the
widespread consequences, intended or otherwise,
of certain forms determining the grounds on which
inclusion and exclusion can be negotiated.
Tweaking classic dichotomies between form and
content, and arguing that the criteria of
inclusion are equally defined in formal terms
along with normative ones, the panel will attend
to the specific practices of inclusion/exclusion
employed by both the selectors and the selected
in various processes of admission/integration in
diverse ethnographic settings. The importance of
such forms has led to a development of formal
expertise and individuals who are considered
formal experts who can inform others. Focusing
on the power relations that emerge when forms
themselves are made into a topic of expertise by
casting the knowledge of form/formal knowledge as
essential for inclusion, the panel will also
explore the types of access that are implied in
those inclusions, often imagined in the form of
access to resources (linguistic, intellectual,
financial etc.) and opportunities (for dialogue,
understanding, wealth etc.).
We invite paper submissions to address these
issues through any of the following sets of
questions:
What are the kinds of norms/normalities that are
produced/incited via compliance to certain
forms/formalities?
How does a perspective focusing on the
constitutive aspect of the form enable us to
rethink processes of
inclusion/exclusion/collaboration/integration?
What kinds of subjects/objects are called forth
through the casting of multi/uni-formalities?
What are the kinds of power relations that are
inherent in different practices of
admission/integration?
What are the kinds of institutional practices
that define the forms that need to be complied
with in order to achieve or demonstrate certain
norms?
What kinds of negotiations happen during processes of selection?
Are there any possible sites of resistance to
those selective processes of inclusion/exclusion,
admission/integration?
Parallel to the way in which formalities are
constitutive of normalities, can we think of any
informalities constitutive of abnormalities?
How can we think of forms and norms as mutually constitutive of each other?
What would the possible promises/shortcomings of
an anthropology of the form be?
Please send abstracts (250 words) for 15-minute
papers and a brief bio or cv to Elif Müyesser
Babül, embabul at stanford.edu, or Zeynep Devrim
Gürsel, zgursel at berkeley.edu by by Friday, March
14, 2008.
--
Zeynep Devrim Gürsel, PhD.
Department of Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
More information about the URBANTH-L
mailing list