Reflections on the “Anthropology of Time” and Regimes of Temporalities: Discussion Forum [Razmyshleniia ob “antropologii vremeni” i rezhimakh temporal'nosti: repliki k diskussii]

 
PIIS086954150017937-0-1
DOI10.31857/S086954150017937-0
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Affiliation: University of Tyumen
Address: Russian Federation, Tyumen
Affiliation: Munich Center for Technology in Society, Technical University of Munich
Address: Germany, Munich
Affiliation: European University at St. Petersburg
Address: Russian Federation
Affiliation: Senior Research Fellow of the Institute of Northern Development Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Address: Russian Federation
Affiliation: National Research University Higher School of Economics
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Affiliation: Sociological Institute of the RAS – Branch of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, St. Petersburg
Occupation: researcher
Affiliation: The Russian Museum of Ethnography
Address: Russian Federation, St. Petersburg
Affiliation: Institute of Sociology of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Affiliation: Moscow State University of Psychology and Education
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameEtnograficheskoe obozrenie
Edition№6
Pages104-128
Abstract

This is a forum discussion of the article “The Anthropology of Time: History and the State of the Art” by Nikolai Ssorin-Chaikov. Authors explicate the article’s main argument and critically engage with its main points, particularly with the concept of temporal multiplicity and relations within it. In doing so, they both complement Ssorin-Chaikov’s overview of the history and contemporary state of the anthropology of time and point out some of the directions in which this field might develop in the future.

Keywordsanthropology of time, temporality, singularity, multiplicity, history of anthropology, anthropological theory
AcknowledgmentThis research was supported by the following institutions and grants: Russian Foundation for Basic Research, https://doi.org/10.13039/501100002261 [project numbers 19-09-00126 and 18-05-60108] Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, https://doi.org/10.13039/501100001659 [D-A-CH]
Publication date23.12.2021
Number of characters64894
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной
1

ГИБРИДНАЯ ТЕМПОРАЛЬНОСТЬ: ПРОСТРАНСТВЕННАЯ МОБИЛЬНОСТЬ И РИТМЫ ЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКОГО ВРЕМЕНИ

2 © М.Г. Агапов
3

Описывая концепции времени нуэров, Эдуард Эванс-Притчард различает структурное и экологическое время. Первое указывает на происходящие в определенной последовательности события, связанные с отношениями нуэров друг с другом в социальной структуре, а второе – на события, связанные с их отношениями с окружающей средой. Николай Ссорин-Чайков в свою очередь показывает, как они взаимосвязаны в “отношения обмена” между ними на ряде примеров, в том числе и из собственной полевой работы (см. также Ssorin-Chaikov 2000; 2003; 2016; 2017). Этот аспект обсуждаемой работы представляется мне наиболее интересным.

4

С момента публикации классических трудов Дюркгейма и Мосса экологическое время считалось временем “архаических” и “традиционных” обществ. Но как справедливо замечает Тим Ингольд, оспаривая предложенное Э. Томпсоном различение проблемно-ориентированного экологического и временно-ориентированного искусственного (часового) времени, на фундаментальном уровне современные люди остаются такими же проблемно ориентированными, как и люди архаичных обществ (Ingold 2000: 323–338). Работы современных авторов показывают высокую продуктивность концепта экологического времени для понимания сложносоставной темпоральности нашего высокотехнологичного мира (Ingold 2000; Петряшин 2017; Гончаров 2019; Карасева, Момзикова 2019). Более того, Ссорин-Чайков рассматривает экологическое время как основополагающее для “глубокого времени” и антропоцена.

5

Обсуждаемая статья подтолкнула меня к размышлениям о “гибридности” времени. Поясню это понятие, но начну с пространственного фактора. Эванс-Притчард указывал, что ритмы экологического времени точнее всего определяются по тем явлениям, от которых зависит передвижение людей (Evans-Pritchard 1940). Рассмотрим это при помощи моих полевых наблюдений на Обском севере в 2019 г. Предметом моего исследования были плавучие магазины (плавмагазины, далее ПМ). В период нефтегазового освоения севера Западной Сибири типовые самоходные ПМ широко применялись для снабжения геологов, нефтяников, газовиков и строителей (Соколова 2017). “Золотой век” ПМ пришелся на середину 1990-х – начало нулевых, когда платежеспособность и потребительский спрос населения северных территорий уже заметно возросли, но слабая транспортная инфраструктура еще не могла обеспечить поступление товаров в требуемом объеме. В этих условиях ПМ оказались чрезвычайно прибыльным бизнесом. Им занялись предприниматели из портовых городов южной части Обского бассейна – Тобольска, Тюмени, Омска, Томска. Сегодня ПМ – это уже уходящая натура. Их число заметно сократилось к середине 2010-х гг., когда наземные пути сообщения дотянулись до большинства населенных пунктов Средней и Нижней Оби, в некоторые из которых пришли крупные торговые сети.

Number of purchasers: 1, views: 1033

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Adam, B. 1995. Timewatch: The Social Analysis of Time. Cambridge: Polity Press.

2. Adam, B. 1998. Timescapes of Modernity: The Environment and Invisible Hazards. London: Routledge.

3. Anderson, B., and P. Adey. 2011. Affect and Security: Exercising Emergency in “UK Civil Contingencie”’. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 29: 1092–1109. https://doi.org/10.1068/d14110

4. Appadurai, A. 1991. Global Ethnoscapes: Notes and Queries for a Transnational Anthropology. In Recapturing Anthropology: Working in the Present, edited by R.G. Fox, 191–210. Santa Fe: SAR Press.

5. Bakhmann-Medik, D. 2017. Kul'turnye povoroty: novye orientiry v naukakh o kul'ture [Cultural Turns: New Goals in Sciences of Culture]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie.

6. Barak, O. 2013. On Time: Technology and Temporality in Modern Egypt. Berkeley: University of California Press.

7. Bear, L. 2013. “This Body Is Our Body”: Vishvakarma Puja, the Social Debts of Kinship, and Theologies of Materiality in a Neoliberal Shipyard. In Vital Relations: Modernity and the Persistent Life of Kinship, edited by S. McKinnon and F. Cannel, 155–178. Santa Fe: SAR Press.

8. Bear, L. 2014. 3 For Labour: Ajeet’s Accident and the Ethics of Technological Fixes in Time. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 20: 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.12094

9. Bear, L. 2016. Time as Technique. Annual Review of Anthropology 45: 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030159

10. Bevernazh, B. 2016. Allokhronizm, ravenstvo vo vremeni i sovremennost': kritika proekta radikal'noi sovremennosti Iokhannesa Fabiana i dovody v pol'zu novoi politiki vremeni [Allochronism, Equality in Time and Modernity: Critique of Radical Contemporaneity Project of Johannes Fabian]. Sotsiologiia vlasti 2: 174–202.

11. Birth, K.K. 1996. Trinidadian Times: Temporal Dependency and Temporal Flexibility on the Margins of Industrial Capitalism. Anthropological quarterly 2: 79–89. https://doi.org/10.2307/3318035

12. Birth, K.K. 2012. Objects of Time: How Things Shape Temporality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

13. Calhoun, C. 2006. The Idea of Emergency: Humanitarian Action and Global Disorder. In Contemporary States of Emergency: The Politics of Military and Humanitarian Intervention, edited by D. Fassin and M. Pandolfi, 29–59. New York: Zone Books.

14. Davydov, V.N. 2018. Strategii ispol'zovaniia prostranstva i rezhimy avtonomnosti: otnosheniia evenkov i gosudarstva na Severnom Baikale [Strategies in Spatial Use and Regimes of Autonomy: Relations of Evenki and the State in Northern Baykal]. Etnografiia 2: 46–48.

15. Estalella, A., and T. Sánchez Criado, eds. 2018. Experimental Collaborations: Ethnography Through Fieldwork Devices. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

16. Evans-Pritchard, E.E. 1940. The Nuer: A Description of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilotic People. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

17. Fabian, J. 1983. Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object. New York: Columbia University Press.

18. Fassin, D. 2007. Humanitarianism as a Politics of Life. Public Culture 3: 499–520. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-2007-007

19. Felt, U. 2017. Under the Shadow of Time: Where Indicators and Academic Values Meet. Engaging Science Technology and Society 3: 53–63. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2017.109

20. Gell, A. 1992. The Anthropology of Time: Cultural Construction of Temporal Images and Maps. Oxford: Berg.

21. Giddens, A. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.

22. Giddens, A. 1981. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

23. Glennie, P., and N. Thrift. 2009. Shaping the Day: A History of Timekeeping in England and Wales 1300–1800. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

24. Golovnev, A.V. 2020. Skorost' v antropologii dvizheniia [Speed in the Anthropology of Motion]. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniia 2: 57–78.

25. Goncharov, N.S. 2019. Elementy deiatel'nosti: mesta, dvizheniia, ritmy i resursy [Elements of Activity: Places, Movements, Rhythms and Resources]. Kunstkamera 4: 220–231.

26. Harvey, D. 1989. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Oxford: Blackwell.

27. Ingold, T. 2000. The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge.

28. Istomin, K.V. 2018. Tol’ko truslivyi plutaet': strakh, bespokoistvo i orientatsiia v prostranstve u olenevodov – nentsev i komi [Only the Coward Confuses: Fear, Anxiety and Spatial Orientation among Reindeer Nentsy and Komi]. Etnografiia 2: 67–83.

29. Karaseva, A.I., and M.P. Momzikova. 2019. Chasovye poiasa i sinkhronnye telekommunikatsii: nezametnaia rabota po temporal'noi koordinatsii u gorozhan Dal'nego Vostoka Rossii [Time Zones and Synchronous Telecommunications: An Invisible Work of Temporal Coordination in Urban Far Eastern Russia]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 3: 42–61.

30. Kontareva, A.Yu., A.I. Masal’skaia, and L.V Zemnukhova. 2019. Lokal’noe vremia mirovogo IT: o vospriiatii vremeni russkimi programmistami v Rossii i za rubezhom  [Local Time of Global IT: Views of Time among Russian Programmers in Russia and Abroad]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 3: 62–79.

31. Landes, D. 1983. Revolution in Time: Clocks and the Making of the Modern World. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

32. Lansing, S. 1991. Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

33. Lefebvre, H. 1996. Rhythmanalysis: Space, Time and Everyday Life. NewYork: Continuum.

34. Lefebvre, H. 2015. Proizvodstvo prostranstva [Production of Space]. Moscow: Strelka Press.

35. McLuhan, M. Galaktika Gutenberga: stanovlenie cheloveka pechataiushchego [Gutenberg’s Galactic: The Making of the Homo Printing]. Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt, 2005.

36. McLuhan, M., and K. Fiore. 2012. Voina i mir v global'noi derevne [War and Peace in the Global Village]. Moscow: AST: Astrel', 2012.

37. Melnikova, E.A. 2020. Biografii pereezda iz goroda v derevniu i ritorika samotransformatsii v sovremennoi Rossii [Biographies of Relocation from the City to the Village and the Rhetoric of Self-Transformation in Contemporary Russia]. Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 6: 88–105.

38. Moran, C. 2015. Time as a Social Practice. Time and Society 3: 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X13478051

39. O’Grady, N. 2016. Protocol and the Post-Human Performativity of Security Techniques. Cultural Geographies 3: 495–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474015609160

40. Perry, R.W. 2007. What Is a Disaster? In Handbook of Disaster Research, edited by H. Rodrígues, R.R. Dynes, and E.L. Quarantelli, 1–16. New York: Springer.

41. Petriashin, S. 2017. Modernizatsiia sel'skogo vremeni: orientatsiia po nebesnym svetilam i chasam [Modernisation of the Village Time: Orientation by Heavenly Bodies and Clocks]. Antropologicheskii forum 34: 156–178.

42. Sirina, A.A. 2012. Evenki i eveny v sovremennom mire: samosoznanie, prirodopol'zovanie, mirovozzrenie [Evenki and Eveny in the Modern World: Self-Consciousness, Uses of Nature, World Outlook]. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura, 2012.

43. Sokolova, Z.P. 2017. Sovetskii magazin: torgovlia i alkogol' na Obskom severe (korennoe naselenie v 1950–1980 gg.) [The Soviet Shop: Trade and Alcohol in the Ob River North (Indigenous Populations in 1950s–1980s). Etnograficheskoe obozrenie 1: 97–108.

44. Soto Bermant, L., and N. Ssorin-Chaikov. 2020. Introduction: Urgent Anthropological Covid-19 Forum. Social Anthropology 2: 218–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12901

45. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2000. Bear Skins and Macaroni: The Social Life of Things At the Margins of a Siberian State Collective. In The Vanishing Rouble: Barter Networks and Non-Monetary Transactions in Post-Soviet Societies, edited by P. Seabright, 345–361. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511720628.015

46. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2006. On Heterochrony: Birthday Gifts to Stalin, 1949. Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute 2: 355–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2006.00295.x.

47. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2016. Soviet Debris: Failure and the Poetics of Unfinished Construction in Northern Siberia. Social Research: An International Quarterly 3: 689–721. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/639862/summary

48. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2017. Two Lenins: A Brief Anthropology of Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press and HAU Malinowski Monographs.

49. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2019. Reassembling History and Anthropology in Russian Anthropology: Part I. Social Anthropology 2: 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12628

50. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2019. Reassembling History and Anthropology in Russian Anthropology: Part II. Social Anthropology 2: 336–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-8676.12627

51. Ssorin-Chaikov, N. 2020. Rethinking Performativity: Ethnographic Conceptualism. Journal of Cultural Economy 6: 672–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2019.1708779

52. Stallings, R.A. 1998. Disaster and the Theory of Social Order. In What Is a Disaster? Perspectives on the Question, edited by E. Quarantelli and R. Perry, 127–146. London: Routlege.

53. Stern, P. 2003. Upside-Down and Backwards: Time Discipline in a Canadian Inuit Town. Anthropologica 1: 147–161. https://doi.org/10.2307/25606121

54. Thompson, E.P. 1967. Time, Work-discipline, and Industrial Capitalism. Past and Present 1: 56–97.

55. Urry, J. 2000. Sociology beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge.

56. Vasilyeva, Z.S. 2020. Po sledam foruma: kollektivnye proekty v sotsial'nykh naukakh [Following Forum’s Tracks: Collective Projects in Social Sciences]. Antropologicheskii forum 45: 189–214.

57. Vasilyeva, Z.S., A.K. Kasatkina, and R.I. Khandozhko. Sotrudnichestvo kak priem: etnografiia avtorizatsii transkriptov [Collaboration as a Device: Ethnography of Authorizing Transcripts]. In Novoe vremia, novoe pole: meniaiushchiisia mir kachestvennykh issledovanii i novye tekhnologii [New Time, New Field: The Changing World of Qualitative Research and New Technologies], edited by O. Zvonareva, A. Kontareva and E. Popova, 402–433. St. Petersburg: Aleteiia.

58. Ylijoki, O.-H. 2016. Projectification and Conflicting Temporalities in Academic Knowledge Production. Theory of Science 1: 7–26. https://teorievedy.flu.cas.cz/index.php/tv/article/view/331

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up