<div dir="ltr">Call for Papers<br>
AAA 2019 Annual Meeting<br>
Vancouver, BC, CAN<br><div>
November 20-24</div><div><br></div><div>"Anthropologies of Ground"</div><div><br></div><div>Organizer</div><div>Joshua Shapero (College of William and Mary)</div><div><a href="mailto:shaperoj@umich.edu">shaperoj@umich.edu</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Abstract:</div><div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">This panel gathers together the frayed ends of an old and
familiar concept: ground. It is now commonly recognized that the physical
surface of the earth is not an empty stage for human culture (nor space an
undifferentiated template for human geography). However, this consensus certainly
hasn’t entailed a growing enthusiasm to embrace environmental determinism. The
physical world in which we live and work, we have come to believe, is neither
an empty canvass nor a primary cause, but rather a question that always needs
asking. Ironically--and a bit fittingly--this leaves us at a philosophical
juncture in which the environment becomes epistemologically unstable just as it
becomes equally volatile in its essential materiality and threatens to take on
the worst kind of determinism. There is no doubt that anthropology’s serpentine
tradition of research on human-environment interactions places the discipline
in a position to respond that can be ideal if carefully disentangled. In this
context, the panel proposes to explore the concept of “ground,” in the hopes
that its web of affordances can help suture our recently untethered notion of
“environment” to the fundamentally comparative and paradoxically empirical
study of human subjectivity--and intersubjectivity--that ethnography yields.<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 0.0001pt;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">One way of asking this question is to ponder what must be
added to--or subtracted from--the physical environment in order to arrive at an
idea of a <i>ground</i> against which human
subjectivity is figured. Is it phenomenology? Culture itself? Biology? Cognition?
History? Language? Such answers seem to go too far and not far enough at the
same time. There is no doubt that the embodied and shared knowledge engendered
by cultural patterns of habitual environmental practices--whether herding routes,
fishing streams, or riding metros--indelibly shapes our perceptions of
personhood, foregrounding individual subjects against the dark silence of the
naturalized like figures in chiaroscuro. However, this presents an opportunity--
yet to be seized--to ask a number of important questions. How uniform is this
relationship? Are there any hard boundaries among the myriad forms of
environmental engagement that resonate as fundamentally different kinds of
subjectivities? Might New Yorkers and Appalachians differ in ways that we have
yet to perceive? Or perhaps might New Yorkers themselves be differentiated at a
surprisingly deep level by their habitual mode of transportation? What are the
actual mechanisms by which this takes place? Do fluctuations in climate,
political ideology, or economic flows play causal roles here? Can we map
variability in patterns of communicative practice or abstract nonverbal
concepts onto the terrain of environmental subjectivity? By re-introducing--or
re-entwining--the concept of “ground,” this panel aims to provide a concrete
approach for answering these questions. To be precise, panelists will explore
the grounds--in both its physical and the logical senses--against which we can
make sense of humans’ senses of themselves as agents, their sense of what it
means to be related with (or unrelated to) others, and their sense about what
it means to be human at all. <span></span></p>
</div></div>