Book review: "After Ethnos" iv
 |
| After Ethnos |
The nurse literature has drawn attention to transcultural nursing and ethnography in nursing theory and practice. There are books, conferences, societies, journals - papers, dedicated posts and a history derived from Madeleine Leininger's model. While tempted, I'm not about to go off-topic, suffice to emphasize the initial point about nurses being 'anthropologists' and the conceptual scope of Hodges' model.
Rees provides reassurance in this respect. As mentioned, be it lines, contours (p.41), theory, practice or concepts all play a part in avenues to disrupt, break away, escape.
Within this (for me) movement and moment are equivalent - leading to surprise, discovery, recognition, observation ...
"Put in a formula, the idea is to render visible ruptures and mutations of established conceptions of the human (an analysis of movement) by way of bringing into view how instances in the here and now derail and defy the normative conceptions of the human (or other things, really) that are silently transported by the analytical concepts on which anthropology thus far has relied (in terms of movement).
The form such analysis of movement / in terms of movement would take is what I refer to as exposure: the exposure of oneself, of one's analytical categories, of the established conceptions of the human that are built into these categories, in one's fieldwork/research. The task would consist in immersing oneself into scenes of everyday life in order to let the chance events that make up fieldwork/research give rise to an unanticipated, unforeseen difference." p.41
"... I mean a discovery of a space/a realm, the dynamic of which - its speed, its velocity, its logic of composition - is no longer reducible to this conceptual history, that escapes it." p.42.
I'm sorry to interpret this text in terms of Hodges' model, but I noted; "h2cm as a carrier for the 'human'". Perhaps this book can prove as pivotal and thought provoking for you?
From a health perspective I see irony in Rees's talk of new concepts and their emergence. (The book is about finding this opportunity and if not creating the opportunity?) In healthcare at present we seem to be suffering 'conceptual churn' as terminology (concepts) is called into question. Perhaps this is facet of (academic?) and the everyday life to which Rees refers. This is why and how Hodges' model can help assure 'carriage' and person-centredness that is experiential (clinically and ethnography?).
Yes, the center of Hodges' model can be a scary place too. Research in the 'open' (p.51). I'd like to think some people may find this blog and my 'take' of Hodges' model somewhat abstract if not theory-laden (I do make things more complicated than necessary). I know I need data, data, data in order to propose Hodges' model as evidence-based (with a theoretical underpinning). Rees differentiates (somewhat) between theory and theoretical and admits due to the mission to a certain disregard - disrespect for theory (p.52). This is music to the four (five -- spiritual) domains: Foucault (1972) - the echo, 'theory as a prison.'. The paradox - 'after ethnos' as a theory - is recognised too.
Rees signposted to specificity within anthropology and books on bees, insects, and cheese. This reminded me of the extracts I had heard of Sheldrake's 'Entangled Life' on fungi (roots, biomass volumes Vs human-made). I noted 'compound' but added 'compound fracture'. Philosophers may enjoy the discussion on epistemology with emphasis upon ontology. Health and medicine figures here too: public health, Pasteur, microbes, malaria (evidence back in time: the bones often have it?). Ethnoi also; what is the unit of analysis in Hodges' model (single concept, conceptual space, threshold concept, pattern, schema ...?
Rees quotes Descola (2013, xx) that includes:
"Anthropology is faced with a daunting challenge: either to disappear as an exhausted form of humanism or else to transform itself by rethinking its domain and its tools in such a way as to include in its object far more than the anthropos: ..."
On page 65, "Latour is exemplary here. ... the distinction between nature and culture has, insofar as it runs diagonal to how the world is, ..."
Very diagonal:
|
modernity (individualism...?) |
nature | |
|
culture | modernity (capitalism...?) |
The present to follow Latour early in the book, is reference to Michel Serres (p.85). This really warmed me. Ensembles - assemblages are clearly structures, forms to add as units of analysis in Hodges' model..
Despite my initial rock onto the back-foot, there is so much I can still draw upon here (bio-politics). Chapters 4 and 5 deserve re-reading. This is a brilliant book. Clear typology, comprehensive index. Prescient too, even though pre-COVID: with SARS and reference to avian and swine flu.
I hope to return to the notes at some point in the future.
orcid.org/0000-0002-0192-8965