Ethnography and the Meta‐Narratives of Modernity

TLDR

Sociocultural anthropology seeks relevance by studying modernity, often revealing cultural diversity in globalization and multiple modernities, yet relying on sociological abstractions such as time‑space compression, commodification, individualization, disenchantment, and reenchantment. The article aims to demonstrate how a meta‑narrative preempts social scientific argument by naturalizing shifts in analytical scales, such as the supposed need to situate particulars in wider contexts. The authors support their claim with two ethnographic case studies—one in Melanesia on attitudes toward white people, money, and consumption, and another in Africa on born‑again Christianity and individuality. The analysis shows that the meta‑narrative undermines ethnography’s reflexivity, depriving subjects of authority over their contexts, and concludes that metropolitan meta‑narratives limit anthropology’s relevance while contemporary academic conditions further erode ethnographic knowledge practices.

Abstract

Current attempts to increase the relevance of sociocultural anthropology encourage anthropologists to engage in the study of modernity. In this discourse dominated by sociologists, the contribution of anthropology is often to reveal cultural diversity in globalization, leading to the notion of multiple modernities. Yet such ethnographic accounts draw upon familiar sociological abstractions such as time-space compression, commodification, individualization, disenchantment, and reenchantment. This article shows how an underlying meta-narrative preempts social scientific argument by making shifts in analytical scales look natural, as in the alleged need to "situate" the particular in "wider" contexts. This analytical procedure undermines what is unique in the ethnographic method-its reflexivity, which gives subjects authority in determining the contexts of their beliefs and practices. Two ethnographic case studies are presented to support this argument, one from Melanesia on current interests in white people, money, and consumption and the other from Africa on born-again Christianity and individuality. The article ends by reflecting not only on the limits of metropolitan meta-narratives in returning relevance to anthropology but also on the contemporary conditions of academic work that undermine the knowledge practices of ethnography and render such meta-narratives plausible.