"He slowly inserts a pair of manicure scissors into the center of the inflammation, pushing one of the blades all the way up to the handle. He then slowly swirls the blade around to loosen the flesh. Pus flows out of the gash like a weeping eye. He finally pulls the scissors out and, with slow deliberation, squeezes the gash between his two thumbs to 'drain it.' After ten or twenty more seconds of grimacing and squeezing, he pokes a toenail clipper into the center of the abscess, using it as tweezers. He pulls out some sort of black gunk and, satisfied, holds it up for me to photograph." (Bourgois 102)
Shocking. Horrifying. Mesmerizing. A day in the life of a homeless heroin addict, as told by Philippe Bourgois and Jeffery Schonberg in their photo-ethnography--Righteous Dopefiend. I have never, in the history of my academic career, encountered a single source that manages to be so inherently repulsive, yet simultaneously demand my complete and undivided attention. The gut-wrenching disgust I have experienced while reading passages akin to the one aforementioned are routinely paralleled by feelings of awe and excitement, but above all else, I have garnered an immense respect for Bourgois and Schoberg. Righteous Dopefiend has redefined my definition of the anthropologist's role in society. But why?
Make no mistake, this is quality anthropology. But, does it approach the brilliance of Levi-Strauss or Boas? The genre-bending theory of Bourdieu or Foucault? Frankly, no. When broken into its component parts, nothing about Righteous Dopefiend screams literary genius. And that is exactly what I needed.
Up until this work, ANT 340 has been a nonstop assembly line of massive ideas and thinkers. Time constraints have demanded an average of one theory per week, and we often but scratched the surface of what these people were trying to say. Derrida cannot be entirely condensed into a few hours. Hell, I'm not even sure he can be condensed into an entire lifetime! These minds have transcended the confines of Anthropology, and have become quintessential elements of social discussion--regardless of field. And herein lies the problem...they're too big! It became a chore grinding through such broad, lofty discourse, week in and week out, and I would more often than not enter and exit class without much confidence in my mastery of the material. While intellectually impressive, I would argue that the majority of theories we analyzed this semester have lacked what anthropology requires most--tangibility. Tangibility is what ultimately distinguishes anthropology from armchair philosophy and everyday journalism. This quality has always been the ultimate factor in determining my anthropological experiences. Can I put myself in the shoes of the speaker? When I close my eyes, can I envision their field?
Enter Righteous Dopefiend. Between the gritty photography work (the likes of which make subtle yet excellent use of shadows, angles, and juxtaposition) and bare-all descriptions, my mind can establish a physical connection with its people, places, and subject matter. I feel as if I am sitting next to Bourgois and Schoberg as they observe this esoteric society. Do I want to be? Absolutely not. After reading this work...after visualizing Hogan arriving in the ER with a maggot-infested abscess, having it cut out, returning to his camp and then immediately injecting heroin into his gaping wound...I feel as if I am reading the accounts of an actual Hell on Earth. And, most importantly, it is a modern Hell. Unlike Malinowski, Boas, Levi-Strauss, Mead, Foucalt, and virtually every other anthropologist mentioned in our class, Bourgois and Schoberg are still alive, and so is their subject. Righteous Dopefiend poses pertinent questions about my world--from social ideology to policy reform--making the entire experience an interactive one. Instead of assuming the role of historian, content with making widespread generalizations about the broadest of concepts (all of which are ultimately based on uniquely personal, biased, and incomplete sets of information), Bourgois and Schoberg conduct tangible anthropology. Every passage is full of purpose, and each photograph is immediately relevant. While I do not envy their situation, I cannot help but admire their dedication to the field--a field that felt so stagnant to me but one week ago.
Shocking. Horrifying. Mesmerizing. A day in the life of a homeless heroin addict, as told by Philippe Bourgois and Jeffery Schonberg in their photo-ethnography--Righteous Dopefiend. I have never, in the history of my academic career, encountered a single source that manages to be so inherently repulsive, yet simultaneously demand my complete and undivided attention. The gut-wrenching disgust I have experienced while reading passages akin to the one aforementioned are routinely paralleled by feelings of awe and excitement, but above all else, I have garnered an immense respect for Bourgois and Schoberg. Righteous Dopefiend has redefined my definition of the anthropologist's role in society. But why?
Make no mistake, this is quality anthropology. But, does it approach the brilliance of Levi-Strauss or Boas? The genre-bending theory of Bourdieu or Foucault? Frankly, no. When broken into its component parts, nothing about Righteous Dopefiend screams literary genius. And that is exactly what I needed.
Up until this work, ANT 340 has been a nonstop assembly line of massive ideas and thinkers. Time constraints have demanded an average of one theory per week, and we often but scratched the surface of what these people were trying to say. Derrida cannot be entirely condensed into a few hours. Hell, I'm not even sure he can be condensed into an entire lifetime! These minds have transcended the confines of Anthropology, and have become quintessential elements of social discussion--regardless of field. And herein lies the problem...they're too big! It became a chore grinding through such broad, lofty discourse, week in and week out, and I would more often than not enter and exit class without much confidence in my mastery of the material. While intellectually impressive, I would argue that the majority of theories we analyzed this semester have lacked what anthropology requires most--tangibility. Tangibility is what ultimately distinguishes anthropology from armchair philosophy and everyday journalism. This quality has always been the ultimate factor in determining my anthropological experiences. Can I put myself in the shoes of the speaker? When I close my eyes, can I envision their field?
Enter Righteous Dopefiend. Between the gritty photography work (the likes of which make subtle yet excellent use of shadows, angles, and juxtaposition) and bare-all descriptions, my mind can establish a physical connection with its people, places, and subject matter. I feel as if I am sitting next to Bourgois and Schoberg as they observe this esoteric society. Do I want to be? Absolutely not. After reading this work...after visualizing Hogan arriving in the ER with a maggot-infested abscess, having it cut out, returning to his camp and then immediately injecting heroin into his gaping wound...I feel as if I am reading the accounts of an actual Hell on Earth. And, most importantly, it is a modern Hell. Unlike Malinowski, Boas, Levi-Strauss, Mead, Foucalt, and virtually every other anthropologist mentioned in our class, Bourgois and Schoberg are still alive, and so is their subject. Righteous Dopefiend poses pertinent questions about my world--from social ideology to policy reform--making the entire experience an interactive one. Instead of assuming the role of historian, content with making widespread generalizations about the broadest of concepts (all of which are ultimately based on uniquely personal, biased, and incomplete sets of information), Bourgois and Schoberg conduct tangible anthropology. Every passage is full of purpose, and each photograph is immediately relevant. While I do not envy their situation, I cannot help but admire their dedication to the field--a field that felt so stagnant to me but one week ago.
Brilliantly written. I am glad B & S have brought you back into the fold!
ReplyDelete