|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910295747803321 |
|
|
Autore |
Mills David <1969-> |
|
|
Titolo |
Difficult folk? [[electronic resource] ] : a political history of social anthropology / / David Mills |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
New York, : Berghahn Books, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
1-78533-663-0 |
1-282-62682-5 |
9786612626821 |
0-85745-031-X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (232 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collana |
|
Methodology and history in anthropology ; ; v. 19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Ethnology - Political aspects - Great Britain |
Ethnology - Great Britain - History - 20th century |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Description based upon print version of record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references (p. [189]-203) and index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
Title page-Difficult Folk?; Contents; Acknowledgements; Abbreviations; Ch 1-Introduction; Ch 2-Why disciplinaty histories matter; Ch 3-A tale of two departments?; Ch 4-The Politics of disciplinary professionalisation; Ch 5-Anthropology at the end of empire; Ch 6-Tribes and territories; Ch 7-How not to apply anthropological knowledge; Ch 8-Anthropologists and 'race'; Ch 9-Discipline on the defensive?; Ch 10-The uses of academic identity; Appendix; Bibliography; Index |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
How should we tell the histories of academic disciplines? All too often, the political and institutional dimensions of knowledge production are lost beneath the intellectual debates. This book redresses the balance. Written in a narrative style and drawing on archival sources and oral histories, it depicts the complex pattern of personal and administrative relationships that shape scholarly worlds. Focusing on the field of social anthropology in twentieth-century Britain, this book describes individual, departmental and institutional rivalries over funding and influence. It examines the effort |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|