| Title | : | Structural Anthropology |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 046509516X |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780465095162 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 410 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 1958 |
Structural Anthropology Reviews
-
This collection of Levi-Strauss' essays, studies and polemic articles often has a manifesto-like tone. However, the chapters vary in style and substance. Some are more ethnographical, others (more numerous) are more theoretical and have a programmatic character. Although Levi-Strauss' analyses are highly competent and thorough and his position supported by solid and sound arguments, I find it hard to subscribe to the approach to anthropology that he advocates. He is a proponent of anthropology borrowing tools from structural linguistics and mathematics in order to penetrate deeper into its object of study and to refine its processing of material. However cool that may sound and however impressive the application of this stance (as illustrated in many chapters of the book), I couldn't help feeling some kind of reluctance to accept it. It may be perhaps because of my lack of knowledge and theoretical abilities that I failed to fully grasp the advantages of his method.
I don't advise laymen or beginners in the field of anthropology to take on the whole book. Some chapters, nonetheless, are brilliant and accessible enough and one should not miss out on them only because the book as a whole seemed to intimidating. Most of the chapters can be read separately and are definitely worth the effort. -
This is just a masterpiece. Particularly his study of myth in this book is just astonishing. His study of myth in Structural Anthropology II is even more astonishing.
-
Antes de ler o livro criei uma expectativa muito forte sobre seu conteúdo. Acabei de ler O Cru e o cozido, já tinha lido partes de O Pensamento selvagem e alguns artigos soltos de autoria do Levi-Strauss e sobre sua obra. Sabia que precisava de uma leitura de base a respeito da abordagem estruturalista. Considerando que As estruturas elementares do parentesco possui um objeto bem específico, a escolha óbvia era pela Antropologia Estrutural. Por esse motivo, esperava algo mais didático, próximo de um passo a passo de como realizar uma análise estrutural de determinado objeto. De certa a tive e não tive minha expectativa atendida. O livro é um conjunto de artigos, alguns deles bem didáticos, outros nem tanto. Levi-Strauss efetivamente apresenta muito de seu instrumental teórico, mas ele se encontra disperso ao longo dos mais de 15 capítulos. Em termos de embasamento teórico, a leitura evidenciou uma lacuna minha, a falta de um estudo mais aprofundado da linguistica estrutural, algo que o autor aborda, mas muito superficialmente ou considerando que o leitor já domina os temas e a proposta. Em outros momentos, tive dificuldade parecida ao ler os artigos sobre parentesco, momento em que me pareceu faltar As estruturas... De qualquer forma, recomendo a leitura de todos os artigos, mesmo os mais complexos e de objetos muito específicos contém passagens esclarecedoras sobre a antropologia, o espírito cientifico e o pensamento humano.
-
Yes yes, I know this is a remarkably important book, but it was a slog, and a slog I tended to disagree with. While I admire the tenacity of his research and I admire the historical step of applying Saussure's linguistic method to culture, I can't help but be annoyed by Levi-Strauss' hard-line structuralism. Seriously, the chapter on the structure of myth pissed me off.
-
A good Introduction to structural (and other types of) anthropology (I am sure Claude would hate me for saying that). I think the only downside is that it is one of the founding texts of anthropology, which means it is a bit outdated (some chapters in the book were written as articles in the 40s, and since then anthropology has evolved in leaps). But, yes, a classic, so if you are interested in anthropology is is a must read. (Even tough I wrote at the beginning it is an introduction to..., I guess it helps if you have read some other texts before).
-
Sin lugar dudas cuando uno empieza a leer el libro ya siente que tiene entre manos algo importante y de gran trascendencia. Se trata de la reconstrucción metodológica de todo el campo antropológico y del inicio de una escuela (el estructuralismo) que trasciende con mucho a esta sola disciplina. Estos ensayos y conferencias de Levi Strauss responden a ese objetivo y hay que decir que lo cumple, ya que la cantidad de elementos teóricos (e innovadores) de la obra es brutal. Personalmente, por no venir de la antropología y quizás por no leer con más detenimiento cada capítulo, hay cuestiones que se me escaparon. La escritura de Levi Strauss muchas veces es árida y demasiado cargada conceptualmente. Cierto que da ejemplos, pero muchas veces no queda claro como ejemplifican lo que dijo anteriormente. Será cuestión de volver a leer, claro. El capítulo dos, sobre lenguaje y parentesco, es el más famoso de la obra y sin dudas es el que me gustó más por cómo da claridad sobre cómo pueden ser usados los avances de la lingüística para el estudio de la estructura del parentesco en la antropología. La famosa teoría del tío materno (avunculado), las investigaciones de Radcliff-Brown, el incesto como regla universal de las sociedades y las etnografías de tribus al rededor del mundo le dan oportunidad para empezar a desentrañar que entiende por el método estructuralista y por lo que llamamos "antropología estructural". Dejo abajo dos citas de dicho capitulo que me gustaron y me parece resumen todos los elementos importantes:
"El carácter primitivo e irreductible del elemento de parentesco tal como lo hemos definido resulta, en efecto, de manera inmediata de la existencia universal de la prohibición del incesto. Esto equivale a decir que, en la sociedad humana, un hombre únicamente puede obtener una mujer de mano de otro hombre, el cual la cede bajo la forma de hija o hermana. No es necesario pues, explicar cómo el tío materno hace su aparición en la estructura de parentesco: no aparece sino que está inmediatamente dado, es la condición de esa estructura. El error de la sociología tradicional, como el de la lingüística tradicional, consiste en haber considerado los términos y no las relaciones entre los términos".
"Hemos interpretado el avunculado como un rasgo característico de la estructura elemental. Está, resultante de las relaciones definidas entre cuatro términos, es, en nuestra opinión, el verdadero átomo del parentesco (...) todo sistema de parentesco es elaborado a partir de esta estructura elemental, que se repite o se desarrolla por integración de nuevos elementos". -
Anthropologie structurale is not a treatise but a collection of seventeen articles, originally published in the decade following World War II, organized into five sections. Many of the articles are translated from English, as he was teaching in the United States during part of this period. He has updated them all, at least with notes, mainly responding to criticisms.
The first article, "Introduction: Histoire et ethnologie" and the four articles grouped under the heading "Langage et parenté", together with the three articles in the last section, "Problèmes de méthode et d'enseignement", attempt to define the subject of anthropology and in particular the concept of (unconscious) "structure" which underlies his project of "structural anthropology". These are the most important articles for understanding his method and theories, and how they were influenced by the rise of structural linguistics. The other sections are on "Organisation sociale", three rather technical articles mainly concerned with kinship structures, which elaborate on and modify somewhat the ideas presented in Structures élémentaires de la parenté, the first of his books which I read last year; "Magie et religion", four articles trying to find underlying structures of myths and rituals; and "Art", two articles on specific styles/themes in "primitive" art.
This book is important for understanding the aims and methods of the structuralist school in anthropology. I was interested to read in his reply to criticisms by Maxime Rodinson that he considered his theoretical work to be within the Marxist tradition. These articles are all much better than Tristes tropiques which I was not impressed by. -
Levi-Strauss' contention and, by extension, that of the structuralists in general, is that language is a social convention and that much of linguistic behavior takes place on a subconscious level and also, that it is not affected by the presence of an observer as a negative participant who directly affects the outcome of a given speech-situation. The reason he is important is that, when language is conceived as an object of scientific analysis, this leads the philosopher to discover systems of relationship -- what Levi-Strauss terms basic fundamental realities -- that are based upon this unconscious process and it becomes a question of whether, through the creation of socio-historical texts, can his critique of primitive societies be extended to include all forms of social phenomena? The question he presents the reader with is manifest: "Can we conclude that all forms of social life consist of systems of behavior that represent the projection, on the level of conscious and socialized thought, of universal laws that regulate the unconscious mind?" Do the post-structuralists simply abandon this problem or do they seek to engrave it in their tablature? Rather, their productions testify to the belief that truth, meaning and all criteria for judgment is an impossible project. Post-structuralists recognize, perhaps falsely, that the various structuralist projects are benighted with a conception of totality that is largely a social illusion. From an argument that the natural basis of the phonemic system resides in the structure of the brain to the concentration of postmodern thought in wild schizophrenic dithyrambics, surely you don't have to be a Levi-Straussian to see what we've lost in this fatal progression. However, when Levi-Strauss cites as evidence for his thesis that the highly concentrated presence of polynucleotides in the nerve cells of individuals predisposed to psychosis, it should be understood that post-structuralism is really post-Marxism and that what he is really calling for is a new regime of science that puts the old epistemological debates as to the value of knowledge on a level beneath the concerns of his postmodern ideology.
-
Structuralism was a mistake.
-
Ενδιαφέρον μεν κουραστικό και μονότονο δε.
-
(3.5)
-
One of the greatest Structuralist classics. :') The outmoded language is really not that bad aside from the use of the word "primitive" and the obvious presence of the white gaze constantly at work. The overall suggestion of this presence, why it might make the reading uneasy, is that none of the knowledge we call "anthropological" seems at all trustworthy.
But this is exactly what Lévi-Strauss chooses to address at the very beginning, unfolding his methodology in the familiar French Hegelian style. Not necessarily calling it the "white gaze," his critique of the prior attempts to assimilate the definition of "anthropology" with the scientific method is merciless. You can never predict where his reasoning is gonna go next... For someone with a more postcolonial leaning hermeneutics, a quite complicated dialectic ensues within the consideration of anthropological study, the white gaze, and knowledge-as-such. Eye-opening on a number of levels, this work is really good for understanding some of Lacan's more cryptic statements about the Enlightenment, and perhaps why he sought so persistently to get psychoanalysis ratified as a "science." -
In terms of the enjoyment of the reading experience, I give 3 stars. In terms of value for someone interested in structuralism outside of linguistics, it's a must-read, if for no reason other than historical value. It's a bit uneven as well, but I found myself highlighting a lot of passages.
-
I forgot everything that’s in this book.
This was a required reading for Anthropology 201 at Reed College.
I scored an A for the class so I guess I must have really understood this book therefore this is a good book. -
Strangely enough for a structuralist manifest this book is very poorly structured. Basically it’s just a collection of Levi-Strauss’ previously published papers on different subjects relating to anthropology.
It’s not an easy read...I’d say Pick up Marvin Harris or Malinowski instead. -
Friend/enemy.
-
Some great essays, some highly specialised and a bit inaccessible - 4 stars though for the great ones
-
motherfucker, šis bija grūts
-
Read for the Great Book of the Western World reading project.
-
yes honey everything is dialectical now can you go back to making jeans
-
Sum up a book in one sentence challenge: human beings organize themselves in certain ways, even if we have different cultures, it’s not random.
-
gênio. foi difícil foi, mas intercalei a leitura com minha bff, momentos que nunca mais voltarão da faculdade :'(
-
(5 stars)
The method this book proposes and uses for its research is great and helpful for anyone trying to develop research and opinions in anthropology. Its dissection of other social sciences as they relate to what he's talking about is pretty good and thorough. My favorites are the discourses on primitive art & the concept of archaism which come with a lot of clever linguistic analogies and art references that give the work a lot of depth.
Update: 11-27-2018
(4 *'s)
I think this method is good but not enough to expose deep properties in behavior and language. -
الأنتروبولوجيا البنيوية أحد الكتب المميزة جداً جداً التي قرأتها هذا العام..
الجانب النظري أو التنظيري كان معقداً في إطار البحث عن المنهج وعلاقته بمناهج العلوم الأخرى فكانت الطروحات والنقاشات دقيقة للغاية إلا أن الاستشهاد بحالات كان أغلبها من نصوص ميثولوجية كندية أو أسترالية أو أميركية (هندية) ترك فجوة إدراك لمحيط النموذج المطلوب سبره..
كتاب مميز وملهم ويستحق قراءة متأنية للغاية.. -
I feel like such a butt giving this book a one star, but it's not that the book is bad -- it's not. It's just that I didn't like it, precisely what the * rating says.
I'm thankful, though. Made me realise that Anthropology is not for me, despite all the other allure of this course. -
I got my B.A. almost ten years ago and only just got around to this anthropology classic. Well, better late than never I guess. I can see how a lot of the courses I took drew on some of L-S's fundamentals, even if we only superficially covered him.
-
This is one of those books that is more edifying than entertaining. I have a much better appreciation for all social sciences having read this book, and I do recommend it, if you have any curiosity about this discipline, at all.
