Beyond the suffering subject: toward an anthropology of the good

TLDR

In the 1980s, anthropology moved away from studying radically “other” societies and faced uncertainty about what should replace the other as its main focus. The study traces the shift from the anthropology of the other to the suffering subject, evaluates the loss of critical capacities, and proposes a further move toward an anthropology of the good. The author traces the historical shift by analyzing how the suffering subject addressed problems of the anthropology of the other and noting the loss of earlier critical capacities. The analysis concludes that the suffering subject has replaced the other and that future anthropology may shift toward an anthropology of the good to regain critical power without its earlier weaknesses.

Abstract

In the 1980s, anthropology set aside a focus on societies defined as radically ‘other’ to the anthropologists' own. There was little consensus at the time, however, about who might replace the other as the primary object of anthropological attention. In important respects, I argue, its replacement has been the suffering subject. Tracing this change, I consider how it addressed key problems of the anthropology of the other, but I also suggest that some strengths of earlier work – particularly some of its unique critical capacities – were lost in the transition. The conclusion considers how recent trends in anthropology might coalesce in a further shift, this one toward an anthropology of the good capable of recovering some of the critical force of an earlier anthropology without taking on its weaknesses.