In writing Anthropology and Egalitarianism, Eric Gable is trying to achieve several goals: to discuss the role of ethnography as a part of anthropology’s program, to delve into how anthropology learns by exploring difference, and to reflect on decades of doing ethnography. In these goals, he mostly succeeds, and Anthropology and Egalitarianism is, by and large, a successful text. Two major themes run through the course of the book, providing a structure and continuity to Gable’s writing. Firstly, he expresses an affinity for Geertz and his theories, to which he makes reference throughout the book. Secondly, he takes as his basic thesis that anthropology’s mission is to explore and understand “culture by contrast” (3), a phrasing he borrows from Deborah Kaspin. The term has multiple levels of meaning for Gable, including the obvious notion that anthropology builds understandings of self and other at least partly by exploring realms of life in which they differ. Also captured by that term is “the idea that culture as a theory emerges as a series of contrasts to other theories of what it means to be human” (xiii). In exploring these multiple layers, Gable makes clear the importance of ethnography as a methodology and anthropology as a discipline. The contrast between real, theorized anthropology and what he terms “vernacular anthropology” (2)--the commonsense understandings of how culture works that most people have – is ground covered elsewhere (for example, Breidenbach and Nyíri’s Seeing Culture Everywhere), but it is fruitfully revisited here.

As the book unfolds, Gable gives many examples of contrasts that illuminate aspects of his ethnographic subjects. He is able to do this because this book includes discussions of three periods of fieldwork with different cultural groups: the Lauje of Sulawesi, Indonesia; the Manjaco of Guinea-Bissau, West Africa; and Americans in “American heritage sites,” including Colonial Williamsburg and Monticello. This is not a straightforward multi-sited ethnography, though. Gable is reflecting back upon these discrete instances of ethnographic fieldwork and drawing connections from the critical distance of today. Throughout the book, he moves from one field site to another, exploring a particular question centered on power in the process. At times, the text feels a bit scattered because of this movement, but on the whole, Gable does an admirable job of navigating the reader through the various sites.

One of the reasons Anthropology and Egalitarianism maintains its fluidity is because Gable embraces the Geertzian notion that “anthropology works best as an essay,” and that it is “a discipline that emerges out of highly personal encounters” (xii). This book is a very personal encounter with Gable, and he cleaves strongly to another idea from Geertz, that “ethnography is always part philosophy and part confession” (5). In the text, Gable allows the reader a large and nearly transparent window (although still, obviously crafted by him) into his thoughts, placing himself firmly within both the ethnographic and the anthropological processes. Perhaps it is the reflective nature of the author, perhaps an allowance made for someone looking back over a portion of a career, but the reader gets interesting and useful glimpses into the workings of the anthropological mind. Anthropology as a discipline has been pulling back the curtain, showing its readers how the sausage is made, for a while now. Gable’s enacting of the process is nothing new. However, his fluid and engaging writing makes this iteration of the process enjoyable and accessible. Glimpses behind the curtain include such truths as “it is a dirty little secret that we don’t always like” our ethnographic participants (10), or “anthropologists often use the word ritual without bothering to explain what we mean” (47). These snippets are indicative of the very human narrative that Gable has crafted, as well as useful tidbits for students to read before they step into their fields themselves.

The chapters of the book delve into several different topics, all relating to his thesis about power. The first chapter explores food and shared meals as an arena of power negotiation, while the second makes the most quotidian American experience, standing in a line, an avenue for understanding power differences. Gender and race come into play in both chapters 3 and 7, where Gable discusses the relationship between Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings and the sexual norms of the Lauje and Manjaco, respectively. Chapters 4 and 5 examine clothing and costuming as makers and markers of power, and the sixth chapter explores belief and religion. The topics covered vary widely, but they are held together by Gable’s narrative. Indeed, his writing ties the book together more than the nominal thesis of power and hierarchy. While the book is certainly about expressions of power in many different situations, I felt at times that I wanted more theory, more depth in the exploration of the situations being discussed. The self-confessional nature of the book has its value, but it disallows a certain amount of deeper theorization. This issue is particularly prevalent in the book’s discussions of authenticity (99 ff.) and gender (chapters 3 and 7), and the idea of enchantment (135) could be enlightened by some reference to Bettelheim. To be fair, I am faulting the book for something it is not trying to do. I just felt myself wishing that the book fulfilled its title more--that it was more about power and egalitarianism than it is.

Overall, this book is a success and a useful text for ethnographers of all types. Its self-reflective nature should make any researcher think deeply on her or his own process, and the accessibility of the writing makes it useful for classrooms of all levels. Gable provides a history of the development of certain ideas within anthropology in several places, which has the side effect of offering lower-level students some disciplinary context. This added value increases the book’s usefulness in classroom settings. Additionally, he turns a phrase well, such as “Monticello is a text written in artifacts” (80), or “history is to fiction as desire is to its fulfillment” (163). Gable’s writing is always pleasant and at times beautifully eloquent.

Works Cited

Bettelheim, Bruno. 1976. The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. New York: Vintage Books.

Breidenbach, Joana, and Pál Nyíri. 2009. Seeing Culture Everywhere: From Genocide to Consumer Habits. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

--------

[Review length: 1046 words • Review posted on April 23, 2012]