ASA Globalog

By Magnus Course

A recent proposal to make a documentary on Shuar head-hunting has a led to a flurry of activity on a variety of lowland South America anthropology lists. The ensuing debate evolved gradually from the airing of concerns about the proposed documentary, to a more reflective discussion about what we as anthropologists want to see in popular ethnographic films. Following Steve Rubenstein’s suggestion that a good place to start is by looking at films we regard as successful and positive, several anthropologists sent lists of their favourite ethnographic films about indigenous South American peoples. Perhaps not surprisingly, the majority cited films made by indigenous peoples themselves. Such films of course bypass (or at least, obscure) several rather sticky problems of the ethics and politics of representation. Furthermore, many of these films are beautiful, evocative, and provocative from an anthropological perspective. The question I want to pose in this post is that of whether such films really offer a solution to the central problem we are addressing in this blog: the nature of representation of indigenous peoples in popular ethnographic television documentaries. I am inclined to say that, despite their undoubted worth, they do not. My reason is that what makes them interesting to anthropologists is precisely what makes them uninteresting to everyone else: their capacity to represent life from a truly indigenous perspective. Put simply, anthropologists are trained (and paid) to understand and appreciate these perspectives, general television audiences are not.

There is of course a much broader debate in public broadcasting, to which Andre referred, about the extent to which progamming should be determined by audience demand. Is television entertainment or education? Of course it is ideally both; simultaneously informative and entertaining. Yet the recent plethora of ‘tribal’ reality shows favours entertainment at the expense of education, while the indigenously-produced films favoured by anthropologists (at least, the ones I have seen) are heavily weighted towards the informative end of the spectrum. I would be very surprised (and very pleased!) if a film made by indigenous peoples about themselves made it onto British television at this particular juncture in time. The issue for anthropologists and broadcasters alike, then, is that of how to educate an audience, how to increase awareness of alternative understandings of the world, in increments small enough to prevent the viewer reaching for the remote, but big enough to lead to significant change. My next post will contain a few ruminations about how this might be achieved.

by Daniel Rodriguez

I would like to continue the discussion by making a further point in connection to the complex issue of representation of indigenous peoples in current television trends. It could be argued that one of the consequences of the ongoing profusion of essentialised images of indigenous peoples in television is the collapse of the ‘indigenous’ to the ‘tribal’. The emerging discursive space of the idealized ‘Tribe’ has created a new site to reinforce long-standing views on the ‘indigenous’ and the constructing of new ones in the context of the ‘extreme’ exotica. This contrasts radically with the present complexities of indigenous identities, views and politics –particularly evident for instance in Latin America where indigenous peoples are increasingly active in broad social changes.
Careless or purposeful stereotyping of indigenous peoples in current television shows is particularly striking considering that the essentialisation of collectivities in the media (and western societies) has become an increasingly sensitive issue. This raises the question whether the media, and to a certain extent ‘us’ (meaning the public and those who hold media accountable) might not be applying different ethical standards regarding the representation of different minority groups?
Stereotypes- of course- are not value-free; they are (and have been) traditionally used to justify violence, rights, deny political agency and so on (see for instance the recent cases of Peru and Bolivia). Hence, I think we could rightly ask those who produce and consume this form of media to examine at which point these exoticised representations of indigenous peoples express a form of racism. I wonder if us anthropologists have a tendency to regard these images just as ‘inaccurate’ or ‘biased’ representations of indigenous peoples. The question to ask seem to be at what point does an essentialised ‘innacuracy’ become racism?

by André Singer

It has been a momentous few years for representations of anthropology on television. When in the 1970′s we thought Disappearing World would be a pioneering experiment aimed at popularizing the discipline and in turn providing visual insights,  it was not universally welcomed by anthropologists.  Over time, I think it is fair to say that the ouevre of more than 50 films that formed that series became more and more acceptable and set standards that lasted for decades. For many years up to 2004, the demands of UK television have consistently blocked the production of many new series as other disciplines (history, science and always, natural history) became broadcaster and audience favourites.  Then came Tribe. It was with some misgivings that I acted as consultant to BBC Wales when they proposed this project, but their willingness to listen to objections from anthropologists, and their wish to treat the film subjects with respect and sensitivity, won the day.  What was unforseen was the impact of that series on broadcasters desperate for popular formats and ideas in a television age where so-called reality television ruled.  Tribe spawned an endless array of derivative programming much of which not only used indigenous goups for pure entertainment but also could be seen to put vulnerable peoples  at risk.

Out of that morass, there are two areas that this blog could fruitfully tackle.  The first is to see what anthropologists feel about all or any of the many series that have crossed our screens in the past few years/months.  The second is to discuss the ethical impact of fim crews chasing stories in every accessible village or community  in order to feed television’s voracious hunger to take things a step further in the name of entertainment.

By Simone Abram, ASA Secretary

Welcome to the latest ASA Globalog.

Members of the committee of the ASA have been increasingly concerned about the boom in TV programmes based on the idea of an ‘encounter with the primitive’, from The Tribe to what we teasingly referred to as ‘tribal wife swap’ (but which to our horror did actually appear as ‘tribal wives’).

The issue came to a head for us when we received news of a film company heading into the Peruvian jungle to looked for ‘uncontacted tribes’, leading to accusations of the spreading of respiratory infections. The ASA commissioned a full report from Daniel Rodriguez about the Cicada affair, and we are delighted that he has agreed to start off the globalog this time.

The blog will continue until the end of November, with guest bloggers Andre Singer and Magnus Course. We look forward to a lively blog, and hope that there will be many of you who have comments and responses to add to this debate.