Law Library See Hours. Marine and Atmospheric Science Library.
Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology | Claire Smith | Springer
Medical Library See Hours. Music Library. Digital Collections Online. Scholarly Repository Online. Special Collections Kislak Center. University Archives Kislak Center. Alumni Faculty Graduate Undergraduate Visitor. Planning a Visit? Research Guides Anthropology. Table of Contents. Welcome to the Richter Library's Guide to Anthropology! Vitruvian Man. Leonardo da Vinci. Provided by Artstor.
Subject Specialist. Lowe Art Museum. Looking for Art? Library Catalog. Alexander Bentley Editor ; Herbert D. Maschner Editor ; Christopher Chippindale Editor.
Shop now and earn 2 points per $1
John P. Feinman Foreword by. WorldCat Search. Advanced Search. International Bibliography of Social and Cultural Anthropology.
- The International Encyclopedia of Biological Anthropology, 3 Volume Set?
- See a Problem?!
- Advances in Quantum Field Theory.
- About Berg Encyclopedia of World Dress and Fashion Vol 1;
- Anthropology: Anthropology Reference Works.
Journals with Book Reviews. Looking for book reviews? Check out the journals below! Online access to the journal 'Reviews in Anthropology', dating back to Online Databases. Google Scholar Search. Find items in Google Scholar. More Anthropology Databases. Need more Anthropology databases? Help Centre. Track My Order. My Wishlist Sign In Join. Be the first to write a review. Add to Wishlist. Ships in 7 to 10 business days. Link Either by signing into your account or linking your membership details before your order is placed. Description Product Details Click on the cover image above to read some pages of this book!
This work is also available as an online resource at www. Industry Reviews "Some reference works are so definitive that nearly every research and teaching collection will want them.
Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology
But this is just the tip of the iceberg. This pattern is repeated in A thousand plateaus , where, in addition to many of the aforementioned authors, the list is expanded to include figures such as Marshall Sahlins and Robert Lowie. This engagement with anthropology and ethnography was something that Deleuze deeply desired to get right.
When writing on this subject, he broke form and did something he rarely did: he consulted with actual experts in a different discipline Dosse But this engagement should not be taken to mean that the joint project he and Guattari were engaged in was itself an instance of conventional anthropological thought, or in harmony with the mainline form of the discipline. It should also be noted that anthropologists who went to the field familiar with Deleuzian conceptions abstracted from specific collectivities have found it hard to use those concepts to describe the very social practices that Deleuze and Guattari relied upon, and have often had to modify them substantially in order to make them fit see, e.
Tylor a, b. The specific history that they want to trace out is that of production, both in the specific Marxist sense, but also as a general rubric which would encompass the creation of other material, with the most central material being libido.
This interest in seeing both capitalist production and the production of desire could make their project seem to be just another example of the sort of Freudo-Marxism that characterised so much of critical thought during the immediate post-war years of the twentieth century see, e. In Anti-Oedipus , there is no subject, whether that subject be conscious, unconscious, or a labor-producing class acting in accordance with its species-being. The category of machines is more capacious than the category of physiology or biology. In the understanding of Deleuze and Guattari, the function of all these machines can be grasped as either connective, disjunctive, or conjunctive, and the synthesis of these operations allows for broader operations such as production in the common sense, recording, and enjoying.
The socius organises production by being the site where all these disparate machines are woven together, but the socius is also misrecognised as the source of all this production as well. What are these shifts in the socius, and what effects fall from them?
For Deleuze and Guattari, the business of making kin is the premier form of inscription. In their eyes, this is the most important mode through which the flows of intensive filiation are made into the code of alliance and affiliation. The stage is eventually supplanted by capitalism. In this stage, capital itself is the socius, and codes are replaced by axioms.
This last mapping is to create the minimum territoriality needed to keep capitalism from running off the wheels, and is also the point of entry to the Oedipal complex, a mode of control that is treated as much as an institutional dispositif as a psychoanalytic reality.
The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology, 12 Volume Set
In later works by these authors, machines are replaced by assemblages, and the tribal transforms into the nomadic, a dispensation constituted by disciplined itinerants whose rootlessness operates as a Clastres-like self-inoculation against the formation of the State. However, it was in articulating this systemitization of the world that Deleuze had his greatest and most prolonged encounter with ethnography and anthropology. That deep engagement does not mean that this system caters to anthropological tastes.
- Fisher Library Reference Works!
- Introduction · to Mathematical Structures and · Proofs?
- Números em texto integral.
- Choke on Your Lies.
Even the anthropologists that Deleuze was in conversation with as he crafted his system expressed to him anxieties about his epoch-spanning periodization Dosse The social-evolutionary element of the argument is also a bone that many anthropologists would choke on, even though Deleuze and Guattari deny that their schema could be described as social evolution.
But that should not be taken to mean that anthropologists have accorded the same low level of respect to Deleuze himself. The difficulty is that anticipating the zeitgeist, and being an intellectual influence on thinkers who express it, are two different things and this is putting to the side the possibility — and to be honest, the high likelihood — that the current era is informing our reading of Deleuze in such a way that other readings of Deleuze, including readings that Deleuze himself might have endorsed, are either foreclosed to us or unrecognizable.
There is also the question of what counts as influence, and what simply counts as being a part of an intellectual genealogy.