This article was downloaded by: On: 28 February 2011 Access details: Access Details: Free Access Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Visual Anthropology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713654067
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology Gareth Davey
To cite this Article Davey, Gareth(2008) 'Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology', Visual Anthropology, 21: 3, 189 — 201 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/08949460801986046 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08949460801986046
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Visual Anthropology, 21: 189–201, 2008 Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0894-9468 print=1545-5920 online DOI: 10.1080/08949460801986046
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
Gareth Davey I recently invited my colleague Gareth Davey to do a content analysis of the first 20 volumes of Visual Anthropology, to mark a milestone that we reached at the end of last year. Dr. Davey is a British psychologist who was also trained in biology and holds a Ph.D. from Bolton University in Environmental Psychology. It seemed to me—to avoid bias—that it was important not to have the survey done by an anthropologist, and especially not by an American one, as 48 percent of all contributed articles originated in the United States. I am particularly grateful to Dr. Davey for the heavy work he has put into this report. Occasional content analyses have been done before in the field of communication studies for journals in other fields, but so far as I know this is the first thorough attempt to evaluate what went into an anthropology journal that we are justified today in considering as a mainstream one. Your discussion of Davey’s findings is invited. —Paul Hockings Editor-in-Chief During the past 20 years, visual anthropology has been transformed from its neglected and marginalized presence to an established and respected subdiscipline of sociocultural anthropology. As one of only two peer-reviewed journals in the field, Visual Anthropology has played an important role in this development. The present study analyzed the original articles published in Visual Anthropology (since its inaugural issue in 1987 to the end of 2007) in order to understand their characteristics. The findings showed that a diverse range of topics had been reported, classified into five main areas. Public presentation and specialized applications were the most salient areas, which seems to reflect their increasing popularity in the discipline. The articles published in the journal covered more than 80 countries, authored by scholars in 25 countries. Book and film reviews came from dozens more countries; altogether, 475 authors have contributed to the journal so far. This confirms that the journal has met its goal to serve the global community of visual anthropologists. However, the United States received the most attention, indicative perhaps of renewed interest there by the academic community. The contributors were based in a wide range of occupations; not surprisingly, the majority was university faculty in anthropology and media studies departments, although others were spread across a wide range of disciplines, representative of the field’s interdisciplinary nature. The findings discussed in this study are important as the journal represents a large proportion of the discipline’s research output.
GARETH DAVEY is a behavioral and social scientist with research interests in the interdisciplinary study of quality of life and well-being. He is an honorary research fellow at the University of Chester, UK, and is currently a visiting scholar in the People’s Republic of China. E-mail: g.davey@chester.ac.uk
189
190
G. Davey
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
INTRODUCTION The journal Visual Anthropology has served a pivotal role in the development of visual anthropology as a subdiscipline of sociocultural anthropology. As it is one of only two peer-reviewed academic journals that represent the field, and furthermore is the only truly international one, the journal has become the main avenue to introduce new scholarship and criticize existing work. Visual Anthropology is published five times a year by Taylor & Francis, and focuses mainly on the scholarly study of human behavior through visual aspects, art and artifacts, and visual symbolic forms in a cultural-historical context. The journal also promotes the use and production of anthropological and ethnographic films, videos, and photographs for both teaching and research. The editor is Paul Hockings, who took over editorial control from Jay Ruby in 1989; he is assisted by Felicia Hughes-Freeland (Old World film review editor), Keyan Tomaselli (Old World book review editor), Joanna Kirkpatrick (New World film review editor), Mary Strong (and now Sam Pack, New World book review editors). Rolf Husmann (associate editor) and an international editorial board based in 16 countries have also lent their support. Since its first issue, the journal has witnessed profound changes in visual anthropology. Twenty years ago, the area was beginning to overcome a quite marginalized presence, for it was not then regarded by many as an established area of study. Although photography had been used as a research tool even before the emergence of mainstream anthropology in the 1870s, anthropologists had initially based their work on written texts and verbal presentations such as lectures, and had overlooked the valuable contributions of a visual perspective [Grimshaw 2001; Pink 2006]. The tide began to turn, however, in the 1980s, when visual analysis was gradually being recognized and accepted as a worthwhile endeavor, a change of heart spearheaded by previous key works of such prominent figures as Hortense Powdermaker, Gregory Bateson, and Margaret Mead, and later Jean Rouch, John Marshall, Robert Gardner, and Timothy Asch [Powdermaker 1950; Ruby 1996; Grimshaw 2001]. In the intervening years, the use of visual research methods increased in popularity. The area has also diversified from its roots in ethnographic filmmaking, which dominated the middle and latter parts of the 20th century, to embrace a rapid diversification of visual media and their technology. There is currently an interdisciplinary interest in visual research, along with more economically accessible visual technologies [Pink 2006]. Given these opportunities, the future outlook for visual anthropology remains optimistic and signals a great potential to advance understanding and application of it. Several scholars have provided interesting interpretations of the history and recent development of visual anthropology [e.g., Griffiths 2002; Prins and Ruby 2001; Lewis 2003; Pink 2006; Ruby 2005]. Visual Anthropology holds a unique position from which to contribute to this dialogue, as its published contents since the late 1980s represent a substantial proportion of the subdiscipline’s research output; therefore, it would be useful to explore further the articles published in this journal. With this in mind, the overarching aim of the present study is to peruse the 20 volumes of Visual Anthropology in order to identify their key
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology
191
characteristics. It provides an alternative standpoint by regarding the content of Visual Anthropology as valuable data that can be analyzed empirically. This approach offers some advantages over existing analyses [e.g., Ruby 2005], which are limited by their focus on speculative reflection. Previous interpretations of the subdiscipline’s development have highlighted some gaps in knowledge. For example, it is difficult to gauge with confidence the research foci that have been pursued by visual anthropologists. Although the area is traditionally associated with photography and ethnographic filming—which at one point dominated it—the agenda is now much more diverse. At the extreme, it has even been argued that the mere breadth of topics has perhaps caused at times an identity crisis [Banks and Morphy 1997]. To tackle this issue, it is first necessary to identify and classify the different topics explored by researchers. Although not an easy task, an examination of Visual Anthropology will help, as each published article has been allocated by the editor to a category believed to be representative of its main focus [Hockings 2007]. This information will be discussed in this study, to furnish information about the discipline’s research agenda to date. Therefore, the first aim of this article is to reanalyze information about each of the articles in order to understand their diversity and whether some are more salient than others. Another interesting line of inquiry is to study the visual anthropologists themselves. Who are they? The question is deceptively simple: although it is easy to exercise some judgment based on one’s involvement within the academic community, there has been no objective survey, and the interdisciplinary nature of the field suggests that it may be difficult to find an answer. The articles published in Visual Anthropology will help to shed light on this issue, as they provide biographical information about each contributor, including type of employment, academic affiliation, country of residence, gender, and job title. Therefore, the second aim of this study is to summarize the details provided in each article in order to gain some insights into the characteristics of the contributors. This is important because the journal’s contributors probably represent a large proportion of all active researchers in the discipline. The third aim is to provide a commentary on the editor’s lengthy editorship of Visual Anthropology. Paul Hockings took over editorial control in 1991 (Volume 4) from Jay Ruby, and has skillfully guided the publication to its current success. He is well-known in the discipline, particularly for his edited volume Principles of Visual Anthropology [Hockings 1975, 1995, 2003], which emerged from the International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences in 1972. The book he edited, which was the first of its kind, became the standard textbook on the subject and had a major impact on the field. (A Japanese edition, 1978, and two Chinese editions, 2001 and 2007, as well as a short French edition edited by Claudine de France in 1979, have greatly expanded the reach of the book.) Alongside editorial responsibilities, Hockings also developed a reputation for his work on the cultural anthropology and history of India, South Asian demography, and Dravidian linguistics. To serve as an editor of the journal for two decades, coupled with his eminence in the field, signifies a well-versed standpoint from which to appreciate the field’s progress. It is also a fitting time to reflect on the journal’s achievements and the scholarly work published in it, as
192
G. Davey
last year Visual Anthropology celebrated an important milestone—its 20th year of publication—marking two decades of its service to anthropology and media studies. In summary, the aim of the present study is to outline the characteristics of the research published in Visual Anthropology during the past two decades. The specific objectives are these: 1. Identify the main areas of research published to date. 2. Summarize biographical information of the contributors (i.e., their type of employment, academic affiliation, country of residence, gender, and job title). 3. Provide some numerical data on the field’s development and the journal’s achievements during Hockings’ lengthy editorship.
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
It is important to emphasize that this analysis is not positioned as an evaluation or retrospective appreciation of the journal’s scholarly contribution. Nor does it evaluate the important role that has been played by the 135 book reviews and 194 film reviews. Instead, the study was conducted in the spirit of a preliminary and exploratory enquiry, in order to raise some discussion among visual anthropologists. METHOD The study surveyed the articles published in Visual Anthropology between its inaugural issues in 1987 and the end of 2007—the first 20 volumes=years of publication. Although contributions to the journal are presented in different formats (original articles, commentary, discussions, epilogues, book and film reviews, interviews, and occasionally editorial notes), only original articles were included in this analysis. There were several reasons for this decision: first, the main aim of this study is to ascertain the characteristics of visual anthropology research, as opposed to speculative reflection, commentary, and reviews. Also, focusing solely on original articles improves the reliability of the analysis, as they were published in every issue (whereas commentary, discussion, reviews, etc. represent a lower proportion of the total number of articles published and are not found in every issue). Note also that the submission of original articles was usually unsolicited and subject to anonymous peer review by other scholars, a mechanism that helped to eliminate possible confounding factors that could have distorted any identified patterns. In the initial analysis, the original articles in each issue and the number of special issues (i.e., issues that focused on a specific topic and were often edited by a guest editor) were identified. Each original article was then considered further in relation to its main topic, geographical focus, and the contributors’ characteristics. RESULTS A total of 20 volumes were published during 1987–2007, and each volume consisted of either four (1987–2004) or five (2005–2007) issues. Thirty issues were catalogued as special issues [Table 1]. A total of 305 original papers were
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology
193
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
TABLE 1 List of Special Issues Issue No.
Volume
Year
Special Editions
30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
20 20 19 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 17 16 15 15 15 14 13 13 13 12 11 11 10 9 8 6 6 4 3 2
2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2005 2005 2005 2004 2004 2004 2003 2002 2002 2002 2001 2000 2000 2000 1999 1998 1998 1997 1997 1996 1993 1993 1991 1990 1989
The Frontiers of Visual Anthropology Visual Media and Women in West Africa—Part 2 Visual Media and Women in West Africa—Part 1 Out of Africa—Visions and Evidences Wedding Photography in East Asia A Cavalcade of Visual Methods Chinese Entertainment Views of the City: New York, Antwerp, Prague, Hong Kong Confronting World Art Visible Knowledge, Writing, Picturing, Visual Message Authenticity and the Indian Dancing Girl Andean Visual Anthropology Persistent Popular Images of Pastoralists Images from the Kalahari Travelogues and Travel Films Photographies and Modernities in Africa New Africa, New Perceptions Excursions with the Camera in Hindustan Images from Mediterranean Lands Encounters in the Kalahari Cinema and Society in India Culture Recreated Visual Culture in the Middle East Images and Human Rights Signs of Human Action Anthropology, the Media, and the Public French Studies in Filmic Anthropology Australasia and Southeast Asia Revisited Historical Photographs in Anthropological Inquiry The Cinema of Jean Rouch
(2–3) (1) (5) (2) (1) (4) (2–3) (1) (3–4) (2) (1) (2–3) (3–4) (2) (1) (3) (4) (2) (1) (2–3) (4) (1–2) (2–4) (3–4) (2–4) (3) (1) (3–4) (2–3) (3–4)
identified and included in the study. Including the reviewers of books and films, there were 475 contributors altogether over the 20 years. Research Areas The main topic of each article was categorized previously by the editor in Vol. 20, No. 5 [Hockings 2007]. This list was reanalyzed in order to determine the prevalence of each category [Table 2]. The articles were categorized within five main areas: the history of visual anthropology (15 percent of the original papers); the uses of tape, film, and diskette (18 percent); public presentation (23 percent); specialized applications (26 percent); and the analysis and synthesis of anthropological knowledge (17 percent). Within these categories, the most salient subtopics seem to be methods of still photography; methods and results of filming; analysis of national and regional cinemas; biographies and interviews;
194
G. Davey TABLE 2 Main Research Topics of the Articles Published in Visual Anthropology Percentage of Papers 1. History of Visual Anthropology General history of the subject Early professionalization of photography Photo archives and collections Conferences and film festivals Biographies and interviews
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
2. Uses of tape, film, and diskette Methods and results of filming Methods of still photography Sound recording and ethnomusicology 3. Public presentation Film for television Television beyond the Western world Teaching visual anthropology Cultural preservation and reinterpretation Film in museums and archives Photojournalism Postcards Computer processes 4. Specialized applications Film in primatology Film in sociolinguistics Circus and public spectacles Dance, opera, and theatrical performance Architecture and social space Crafts and material techniques Gesture, bodily techniques, and decoration Portraiture and paintings Prehistoric and ethnic visual arts Children’s art and life Advertising 5. Analysis and synthesis Analysis of national and regional cinemas Analysis of ritual and ceremony Neurology and psychology Cinematographic theory and ethnographic filmmaking Anthropological theory
3 2 3 1 7 15 8 9 2 18 2 5 1 7 3 3 1 2 23 <1 1 2 7 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 27 7 3 1 5 1 17
Note that this classification scheme was proposed by Hockings [2007] and not by the author. Further, this analysis included all contributions to the journal, and not only original papers, and therefore differs slightly from the remainder of this paper’s analysis. Hockings’ classification did not encompass book and film reviews.
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology
195
and dance, opera, and theatrical performance [Table 2]. However, Table 2 shows that a wide range of topics received attention from researchers, and no single category or subcategory seemed to dominate the research as a whole. Further, when the proportion of each category was calculated for each volume= year, no meaningful pattern was identified, and therefore was not considered further here.
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
Contributors Most contributors were affiliated with a university, college, or research institute (86 percent), whereas others were either museum staff (5 percent), employed in film or dance production (2 percent), or in other activities (7 percent). Among the academic contributors, a third held the position of professor or emeritus professor (34 percent), and a smaller proportion held the title of associate professor or senior lecturer (18 percent), assistant professor or lecturer (26 percent), research fellow or associate (6 percent), postdoctoral (2 percent), research student (13 percent), or others (1 percent). Interestingly, the majority of articles (91 percent) were single-authored, and only a minority were coauthored with either two (7 percent) or three or more (2 percent) contributors. This contrasts starkly with the production of articles in most other scientific fields. Half (49 percent) of the academic contributors were based in anthropology departments, whereas the second largest group (17 percent) were affiliated to media studies (including journalism, film studies, and communication studies). Other contributors worked in departments concerned with analysis of regions and regional issues (e.g., Asian studies, East Asian studies, Middle Eastern studies; 8 percent altogether), art (5 percent), sociology (5 percent), and health and psychology (4 percent; see Table 3). Only a minority were affiliated with other areas such as music, English, history, tourism, religious studies, law, museum studies, or others [Table 3]. Other demographic information (gender and country of residence) of each contributor was also analyzed. When all contributors in all of the volumes are considered collectively, there has been a good balance between the number of male (57 percent) and female (43 percent) authors. However, the proportion of each gender fluctuated yearly. Specifically, during the first four volumes (1988–1991) there was a greater proportion of male authors, which declined gradually until 1992, when there was an equal proportion [Figure 1]. Thereafter, the proportion of male and female authors fluctuated and, in the most recent volume, there were a greater number of female contributors [Figure 1]. It is of interest in this context therefore that, among these North American departments of Anthropology reporting to the American Anthropological Association, 1987– 88 was the first year in which more new female than male Ph.D.s were produced (167=156), and this feminization of the discipline continued right down to 2006– 07 (310 females, 214 males). (At the undergraduate level the distinction was much greater: in 2006–07, 5432 female graduates in anthropology, as against only 2514 males.) The journal published articles from contributors based in 25 countries [Table 4]. Half (48 percent) resided in the United States, and about a quarter (26 percent)
196
G. Davey TABLE 3 Departmental Affiliation of Contributors
Academic Department of Contributor
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
Anthropology Media studies Regional studies Art Sociology Health and psychology Music English History Tourism Religious studies Law Museum studies Others
Percentage of Original Papers in Vols.1â&#x20AC;&#x201C;20 48 17 8 5 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2
Concerned with analysis of regions and regional issues (e.g., Asian studies, East Asian studies, Middle Eastern studies).
were based in countries in Western Europe [Table 4]. A total of about 75 countries have been studied in the journal [Table 5]. The United States was the most frequently studied country (17 percent), followed by India (11 percent) and Egypt (4 percent). Southwest Africa (Namibia) has also received extensive treatment. When these data are grouped into broader geographical regions [Table 6], it is apparent that the Americas (25 percent) and Africa (22 percent) are the most
Figure 1 Proportion (percentage) of male and female contributors in each volume.
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology TABLE 4
Geographical Distribution of the Contributors
Contributors’ Country of Residence
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
197
United States United Kingdom Germany France South Africa Australia China Canada Switzerland Israel Italy Holland Belgium Austria India New Zealand Denmark Kazakhstan Singapore Poland Norway Sweden Hungary Greece Egypt Unknown
Percentage of Papers Published 48 7 7 5 5 4 4 4 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 2
studied regions, whereas the Middle East (6 percent) is the least studied. Finally, it is interesting to note that the majority of articles (63 percent) focused on a country that was different from the author’s country of residence. DISCUSSION The aim of this study is to analyze the key characteristics of the articles published in Visual Anthropology to identify the main areas of research published to date and summarize contributors’ biographical information. This study is important because the original articles published in the journal constitute a significant proportion of all the discipline’s research: it is a genuinely international journal with no significant competition. Some interesting findings emerged from the analysis. A wide range of topics has been published, which were divided into five main groups and various subgroups. This breadth of coverage seems to be a characteristic feature of the subdiscipline. The findings also show that, although the traditional emphasis
198
G. Davey
TABLE 5
Countries Studied
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
Country United States India Egypt (North Africa) Nigeria (West Africa) South Africa United Kingdom France Germany Hong Kong Indonesia Papua New Guinea Australia Namibia (Southwest Africa) Italy Kenya (East-Central Africa) Canada China Japan Africa (not specified) Bolivia Ghana (West Africa) Iran Switzerland Iraq Ireland Israel Peru Poland Spain Yemen Bangladesh Belgium Belize Cameroon (West Africa) Columbia Costa Rica Coˆte d’Ivoire (West Africa) Cyprus
Percentage of Papers 17 11 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Country Czech Republic Ecuador Ethiopia Greece Guatemala Hungary Jordan Korea Laos Lebanon Mali Mauritania (West Africa) Mexico Netherlands New Guinea New Zealand Nicaragua Niger (West Africa) Pakistan Palestine Qatar Romania Senegal (West Africa) Singapore Sri Lanka Sudan (East Africa) Syria Thailand Tibet Togo (West Africa) Uganda (East-Central Africa) Venezuela West Irian (New Guinea) Zambia Others
Percentage of Papers <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 2
on photography and ethnographic film continues to be focal, it no longer dominates. In fact, no topic overshadows the research agenda, although two groups— the specialized applications and public presentation of visual anthropology—are salient. This is in line with the subdiscipline’s increased acceptance by mainstream anthropology, its more prominent public role, and the increasing
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology TABLE 6
Geographical Regions Studied
Region Africa Americas East Asia=Pacific Europe Middle East South Asia
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
199
Percentage of Papers with a Regional Reference 22 25 18 18 6 12
popularity of applied uses for anthropology [Pink 2006]. That these areas have received increased interest in the journal demonstrates that skepticism about them is diminishing. Finally, the classification scheme adopted by the journal’s editor and in this study does not support concerns by some scholars that visual anthropology has suffered from an identity crisis. Instead, as shown in Table 2, the topics can be divided into manageable groups that fall under the discipline’s overall philosophy of the inclusive pursuit of the anthropological use of visual material and the study of visual systems and visible culture. It is remarkable that the articles published in Visual Anthropology covered more than 80 countries, and received contributions from 25 countries. This demonstrates that the journal has succeeded in its mission to serve the global community of visual anthropologists. Indeed, Visual Anthropology prides itself on being the only international publication within the subdiscipline, and it benefits from a rich international team of editors and a network of reviewers. It is important to bear in mind that cultural anthropology hinges traditionally on the study of others’ countries, and researchers were expected initially to produce new ethnographic work on different cultures. Also, some members of the anthropological community (particularly department chairpersons) may attach greater prestige to fieldwork conducted in overseas and exotic locations. This means that anthropology journals are likely to be more global in perspective than those in other social science disciplines. Despite the large number of countries studied, the United States received most attention (17 percent of papers), and there are several reasons for this. First, about half of the contributors were based in the United States, where visual anthropology originated and is most developed. (There are now just over 11,000 members of the American Anthropological Association.) Further, the majority of university departments, courses, and research opportunities are based there. Second, cultural anthropologists have shown renewed interest in North America as a study site, evidenced perhaps by an increasing number of Ph.D.s that focus on it, and a sizable proportion of national funding for the study of American groups such as women, minorities, and subcultures [Shankman and Ehlers 2000]. The study also showed that Middle Eastern countries were the least represented in the journal; therefore, the editors should consider taking action to reverse this situation by, for example, inviting contributions from visual anthropologists based there. There has been one special issue devoted to the Middle East [10(2–4), 1997]; yet in general, it
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
200
G. Davey
has always been true that the social sciences have been poorly supported within Islamic countries. The analysis revealed other information about the contributors. Most worked within a university; this is not surprising, as universities tend to be the largest employers of anthropologists, and an academic journal is more likely to receive contributions from faculty than from those employed in other areas. The majority of contributors were based in anthropology and media studies departments, as the field is grounded in both of these disciplines. Other contributors were based in a wide range of academic departments, which is indicative of the interdisciplinary nature of the field. Another reason may be that 90 percent of articles were single-authoredâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;that is, most contributors had worked alone on their projects. Anthropology, particularly ethnography, is distinguished from other disciplines by the individual and often lengthy pursuit of data. Another point to consider is that research students in anthropology, who also spend several years working alone on their doctoral degrees, are likely to publish their work by themselves rather than jointly with their supervisors (as tends to happen in the hard sciences). This situation may be different from some other disciplines, in which a studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s individual project links up to others projects within a team and therefore readily leads to joint publications. While this situation is, to a large extent, a necessity of anthropological work, it does raise the suggestion that more effort may be needed within the anthropological community to foster collaborative research; husband-and-wife teams have thus far been the most common form of such research. It is encouraging to note that researchers at all stages of their career (from research students to emeritus professors) have contributed to the journal. Although full or emeritus professors were the largest group, lower-ranking staff also constitute a sizeable proportion; and the journal has been commendably liberal in accepting graduate students papers, as well. Therefore, all members of the academic community, and not only the more eminent scholars, have had the opportunity to publish their work here. This is important, particularly for research students and young scholars, as publishing an article in Visual Anthropology, the leading journal in the discipline, is a hallmark of professional excellence. Another positive sign is a lack of a marked gender difference in the proportions of men and women who have contributed to the journal, which again shows that there have been equal opportunities for all to publish their work. The range of countries where contributors are located [Table 4] speaks in eloquent support of this egalitarian approach. Despite the encouraging results, the painstaking business of going through each article and volume is fraught with difficulties. First, it should be emphasized that the present analysis is confined to Visual Anthropology, and it is quite possible that scrutiny of other journals or other research outlets (e.g., conference proceedings) would reveal different results and conclusions. For this reason, this study ought to be replicated elsewhere. Another major weakness is that only original articles were analyzed, which means it has not been possible to provide an overview of the journalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s entire content (i.e., including the commentaries and book or film reviews). A second weakness is that the categories used to group articles were deliberately simple in order to augment their universality across
Twenty Years of Visual Anthropology
201
such a diverse body of literature. Thus the classification of topics [Table 2] is rather tentative, and particular articles might easily have been categorized differently; also, special issues (such as hunter=gatherer studies) may have distorted the data about the popularity of each country and topic. Notwithstanding these caveats, it is important to reiterate the uniqueness of the present study. The journal provides perhaps the best source for information about the nature of visual anthropological research. Further, this study provides an empirical approach that is an advantage over previous speculative reflections. Finally, the limitations need to be considered in the context of this study’s preliminary and exploratory approach, in order to provide insights for more discussion. It is hoped that this study will serve as a primer for further research.
Downloaded At: 22:19 28 February 2011
REFERENCES Banks, Marcus, and Howard Morphy 1997 Rethinking Visual Anthropology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Griffiths, Alison 2002 Wondrous Difference: Cinema, Anthropology, and Turn-of-the-Century Visual Culture. New York: Columbia University Press. Grimshaw, Anna 2001 The Ethnographer’s Eye. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Hockings, Paul 1975 Principles of Visual Anthropology. The Hague: Mouton Publishers. 1995 Principles of Visual Anthropology (rev. ed.). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 2003 Principles of Visual Anthropology (3rd ed.). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. 2007 Subject Index. Visual Anthropology, 20(5): 438–451. Lewis, Douglas 2003 Timothy Asch and Ethnographic Film. London: Taylor & Francis. Pink, Sarah 2006 The Future of Visual Anthropology: Engaging the Senses. Oxford: Routledge. Powdermaker, Hortense 1950 Hollywood, the Dream Factory: An Anthropologist Studies the Movie Makers. Boston: Little, Brown. Prins, Harald, and Jay Ruby (eds). 2001 The Origins of Visual Anthropology. Special Issue of Visual Anthropology Review, 17(2). Ruby, Jay 1996 Visual Anthropology. In Encyclopedia of Cultural Anthropology. David Levinson and Melvin Ember, eds. Vol. 4: 1345–1351. New York: Henry Holt. 2005 The Last 20 Years of Visual Anthropology—A Critical Review. Visual Studies, 20(2): 159–170. Shankman, Paul, and Tracy Ehlers 2000 The ‘‘Exotic’’ and the ‘‘Domestic’’: Regions and Representation in Cultural Anthropology. Human Organization, 59(3): 289–299.