WEKO3
アイテム
「マルチカルチュラル」オーストラリアにおける人類学
https://doi.org/10.15021/00003931
https://doi.org/10.15021/00003931333b055b-c580-44ab-8bfc-1212df8b0e19
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
KH_033_3_004.pdf (859.3 kB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2010-02-16 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | 「マルチカルチュラル」オーストラリアにおける人類学 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | Anthropology in ‘Multicultural’ Australia | |||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 言語 | ||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | オーストラリアにおける人類学 | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | オーストラリアのマルチカルチュラリズム | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | アボリジニ研究 | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | メラネシア研究 | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | 「ホーム」研究 | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | anthropology in Australia | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | Australian multiculturalism | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | Aboriginal studies | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | Melanesian studies | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | anthropology at home | |||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
| ID登録 | ||||||
| ID登録 | 10.15021/00003931 | |||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
| 著者 |
大野, あきこ
× 大野, あきこ |
|||||
| 抄録 | ||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
| 内容記述 | Australian society has been transformed from a settler colony to a multicultural nation state, having passed through the racially discriminative White Australia Policy. The problems of present-day anthropology in terms of disciplinary survival among the competing social sciences derive from the historical particularities which this process of transformation of Australian society has generated. This paper briefly reviews the discourses of official Australian multiculturalism, followed by a history of anthropology in Australia. It then explores the present-day problems and possibilities of anthropology. Lastly, I offer some suggestions as to what might be useful in the task of solving these problems. Multiculturalism was introduced into Australia to serve the official policy of controlling the diversification of domestic ethnic minority groups. Its fundamental concept consists in maintaining integration into the public social system while aiming at controlling the ethnic minority groups of immigrants from hundreds of different cultural backgrounds. The official discourses of Australian multiculturalism have emphasised the national identity which is expected to grow on the basis of the mainstream ‘Anglo-Celtic’ culture. As to the development of the institutionalisation of anthropology in Australia, it is important to look at past national expectations of the uses of anthropology for colonial administration at home and later in Papua New Guinea especially, and also, in the present, to the diversifying interdisciplinary enterprises and projects in the applied social sciences, although the history of the push to institutionalise Australian anthropology was driven by intellectual fascination with Aboriginal societies and cultures. There has never been an Australian school or even style of anthropology in Australia. Expatriates have occupied the majority of the Australian chairs over the years, which has led ‘anthropology in Australia’ (rather than ‘Australian anthropology’) to be influenced by most of the schools and currents to be found elsewhere. Postgraduate training, however, today seems to be overly project-centred, i.e., being exposed to a higher educational milieu in Australia does not necessarily mean one can internalise the discipline’s own codes and standards of research, theoretical frames of reference and so on. Aboriginal studies have been resurrected by the need for involvement in land claims and native title cases regarding which anthropologists must deal with the frame of recognition of ‘unchanging’ tradition and culture imposed by legislators. Those who attempt to do anthropology at home are extending their research interests beyond ethnic minority groups and white Australian communities into such differences as gender, class and so on. I conclude by suggesting that anthropology’s challenges lie in better appreciating the role of fieldwork and ethnography as well as rethinking the dichotomy between ‘home’ and ‘the field’. |
|||||
| 書誌情報 |
国立民族学博物館研究報告 en : Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 巻 33, 号 3, p. 359-395, 発行日 2009-02-27 |
|||||
| 出版者 | ||||||
| 出版者 | 国立民族学博物館 | |||||
| 出版者（英） | ||||||
| 出版者 | National Museum of Ethnology | |||||
| ISSN | ||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||
| 収録物識別子 | 0385-180X | |||||
| 書誌レコードID | ||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||
| 収録物識別子 | AN00091943 | |||||
| 著者版フラグ | ||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||
