Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to New Literary
History.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
An EthnographicPerspective
Dell Hymes
I
The relevanceof Blake as a symbolistwould seem to lie in the implication that Blake dealt with the primal source of literature.Through
him one would find an implicitdefinitionof the nature and role of
literature.Not onlywould Blake be seen "as a morecompletesymbolist
than thosewho have gone under the 'symboliste'banner,if one means
by symbolista poet who regardsliteratureas a 'symbolicform'of experience,in the sense that has become common since Cassirer," but
literaturewould be seen as one of the cardinal activitiesconstitutive
of
human culture,even thoughCassirerhimselfdid not accord it a clear
place.2 Literature,mythology,and ultimatelylanguage, however,become intertwinedin Adams' interpretation
of Blake and his implicit
Cf. my "Editorial Introduction," Language in Society, I (1972), 1-14.
Not in his three volumes on the philosophy of symbolic formsor his Essay on
Man, nor indeed in The Logic of the Humanities (New Haven, 1961), where
language, art, and religion are the categories ready to hand (e.g., pp. 173-74).
I
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
188
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
189
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
190
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
19I
tionalmaterials
are a modeofpersonalas wellas collective
expression.8
Here Kelloggis certainly
in
the
of
oralliterarelevance
right urging
tureto fundamental
The
one
his
fault
in
is that
argument
questions.
the bardictraditionis not sufficiently
the
western
(as
representative
AmericanIndian traditions
on which I draw also are not). It is
widelyreported(and knownto me fromfieldexperience)thatspecific
and typesof performance,
versions,
may be associatedwithspecific
and
their
versions
evaluated,not in termsof approximation
persons,
butin termsoftheselection
to an ideallycompleteversion,
theymake,
and theirabilityto maketheirversion"comealive." Thereis indeed
of incidentand detailthatgoesbeyondany
a community
knowledge
one performance;
of selection.A
just thismakespossiblethe effects
whichincludedit all mightbe judged as tedious.Not
performance
need be said or explained. (It is sometimes
a markof
everything
are given.) Thereis indeed
toldin Englishthatexplanations
versions
of completeness
below whicha performance
shouldnot
a threshold
and
dramatization
are
what
count.
but
This is
fall,
giventhis,point
can be considered
notto say thatsuchnarrators
authorsin the usual
in theirowneyesorin theeyesofothers.
sense;theyarenotoriginators,
combining,
reorienting,
freshly
They are, however,shapers,selecting,
But
all
materials
with
which
work.9
is
the
this
only
they
motivating
in
to agreewithKelloggthatoralliterature
opensup newpossibilities
ofsucha conceptas author.
theconsideration
8 Thus, with regard to narratives from Anna Nelson Harry, of the Eyak of
Alaska, recorded in 1932, and again in the 196os,
After being widowed and re-marryingamongst the Tlingits, Anna's stories
of intermarriage and displacement become much more meaningful. The
groundhog man and wolf woman are extremelypoignant, taking on several
more layersof meaning ....
As I have thought and thought in recent years about the way she tells these
stories,I come to an even greaterappreciation of the artisticand philosophical
of her own personal tragedy,and her understandmerit of Anna's storytelling,
ing of the tragedy of the Eyak people, and of the nature of human history,
as only an Eyak (or maybe an Irishman) could see it. [Michael Krauss,
personal communication,30 August I973]
Cf. also my "The 'Wife' Who 'Goes Out' Like a Man: Reinterpretationof a
Clackamas Chinook Myth," Structural Analysis of Oral Tradition, ed. P. and E.
Maranda (Philadelphia, 1971), pp. 49-80.
9 It may be that much of what is writtenin our own society,for magazines and
audiences of known or presumed preferences,is not "authored" in the sense of
strikingorigination,but is to be understoodas personal shaping of material essentially
commonlyknown. The apparatus of novelty (titles, names of characters, locales)
may be a differenceof degree, and not of kind, from the nature of tradition and
performancein a society such as that of the Wasco Chinook (originally living on
the Columbia River in the vicinityof what is now The Dalles).
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
192
II
In analysisof the nature of literature,conceptionsof language, includingconceptionsheld by linguists,inevitablyplay a part. Both Fish
and Ricoeur take linguisticconceptionsfor a startingpoint,and seek
to extend them. Ricoeur seeks to extend by analogy, taking certain
linguisticconceptionsfor granted; Fish criticizescertain conceptions
as inadequate to thenatureoflanguage.
Fish seems to be close to agreementwith Butlerin concludingthat
literatureis characterizedby an attitudetoward propertiesthatbelong
by constitutive
rightto language. This conceptionimpliesthe necessity
the institutional
of determining
relationsthataffectthejudgment. And
Fish givesimportantcontentto the implicationby Adams that literary
theoryrequires a sufficiently
complex conception of language at its
base. I would only qualify that it is not always as easy as his conclusionsuggeststo decidethatsomethingbelongsin theliterarycategory.
Most important,Fish is entirelyrightin the formof his analysis of
deficienciesin concepts of language, but incompletein his suggested
enrichment.The formof his argument-that a gap betweenordinary
and literarylanguage leaves both impoverished,and that much that is
essentialand meaningfulis missed or distortedas a consequence-is
preciselythe formof argumentemployedsome ten yearsago to justify
an approach called the "ethnographyof speaking."'01 Fish makes
originalpoints,and I have profitedfromhis analysis. But it should be
noted that the issues in linguistictheorytoday are not only as to the
statusof semantics,but also as to the statusof stylistic
organizationand
features. In brief,I would argue that modern linguisticshas been
dominatedby an implicitdefinitionof language in termsof the "referential" (or, in a narrow sense, "semantic") function,whereas language is organized in termsof two elementaryfunctions,the other
11It is importantthatvalue and intenbeing "expressive"or "stylistic."
tion be broughtwithinthe scope of language, but in this respect,it is
not only kinds of semantic contentthat have been missed. So also
have featuresand modes of organizationessentialto the expressionof
value and intention.These "stylistic"aspectsof the designof language
are necessaryto the linguist'sown intentionof capturinggeneralizaio Cf. Hymes, "The Ethnography of Speaking," Anthropology and Human
Behavior, ed. T. Gladwin and W. C. Sturtevant (Washington, D. C., I962), pp.
13-53; Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking, ed. R. Bauman and J. F.
Sherzer (Cambridge, forthcomingin I974).
I See Hymes, "Ways of Speaking," Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking.
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
193
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
194
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
195
source, and the enlargingof the horizon of the text may be better
but as bi- or even multi-temporaliunderstood,not as atemporalization,
zation. The Kathlamet Chinook "Myth of the Sun," forexample, can
be seen to speak of a traditionalcultural world, its values, and the
consequences thereinof a chief's hubris in insistingon possessinga
power properto the Sun, bringingdestructionon all his kin as a result.
It can be seen to speak of the world of its narrator,Charles Cultee, last
fluentuser of the language, conveyingthe mythwiththe supplemental
aid of Chinook Jargon to the ethnographer,Franz Boas, who had
sought him out, and reflecting,one cannot but sense, on his proud
people's initialacceptance of the marvelsof the whites,and subsequent
destructionthroughdiseasesbroughtby whites.It can be seen to speak
for us, perhaps,of a world in which the harnessedpower of the sun,
so eagerlysought,may yetbe our own destruction.
It is importantto develop a common descriptiveand interpretative
frame of referencefor language, and uses of language, among other
communicativemodalitiesand symbolicforms. But the directstrategy
would be to analyze, not language, then meaningfulaction, but language (speech) as partofmeaningfulaction.
III
I have argued foran ethnographicand ethnologicalbasis foranswering the question "What is literature?"on grounds of adequacy of
scope. Ethnologically,thereis the comparative,cross-culturaldimenthereis thedescriptive
sion,a matterofrangeof cases; ethnographically,
do
with
to
the
frame
of
reference
dimension,having
(especiallyas regards language) with which any case is approached. The argument
findsme seekingto defendand generalizethe concept "literature,"to
findforit a trulyuniversalbasis. This is in the traditionof the contributionsto analysisof language and culturegenerallyof Boas, Sapir,
and Kroeber earlierin this century. In that traditionone wants, like
Kernan and Roberts,to expose the historicaland social limitationsof a
received categoryin one's own culture,but one also wants to bring
withinthe pale of attentionand acceptance otherculturesand peoples.
Thus the apparentironyof a literaryscholarattacking,and an anthropologistdefending,the universalityof "literature." Let me say a little
more on the anthropologicalconcern,and then deal with the irony.
Recognitionof the value of other literaturesis one of the oldest
themes of an anthropologicalorientation,from at least the time of
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
196
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
197
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
198
IV
For some,the argumentat the beginningof III amountsto flogging
a dead horse. Having flogged,I should admit that thereis fault on
the otherside as well. Many studentsof the literatureof minortraditions have themselvesperpetuateda dichotomy,calling theirsubject
by another name, such as "folklore"or verbal art. Some have even
maintained that their subject was of value because it did not show
features,such as personal creativityand aestheticshaping, that are
valued in literature.They were wrong. As indicated,such featuresare
present. But because theyhave not been much sought,our understanding of them is verylimited. I myselfhave been guiltyin this regard,
in that for some years I would refermaterialsto a purely collective
entity,a tribal name such as "Wasco" (or "Wishram"). Having discovered the factor of personal and situational shaping of narrative
performanceand consequenttextto be so important,I hope neverto
committhaterroragain.16
Let me admit furtherthatmuch of the materialavailable under the
folklore,and linguisticsis marredby a failure
auspicesof anthropology,
to take adequatelyinto account the second sense of evaluation. There
are of coursegood and bad performances,
strongand weak poems and
etc.
Those
who
such
material
do so in large part benarratives,
study
cause it is rewarding,just as studentsof fineEnglish literaturefindit
(we trust)rewarding.Characterizations,
expressivedetails,imaginative
worldsbecome part of our sense of the world. But it is clear thatsome
of the materialwe have does not representtrue performance,does not
have the qualities we value. Sometimesintimacyand motivationcan
be such thata field-worker
can be audience appropriateenoughto elicit
true performance,
but when thisis not the case, what is collectedis not
the literature,but a derivativeof it. (This is the sense in which Kel15 Cf. Hymes, "Linguistic Method of Ethnography," Method and Theory in
Linguistics,ed. P. L. Garvin (The Hague, 1970), p. 265.
16 Hence "Louis Simpson's 'The deserted boy,'" not "The Deserted Boy: A
WishramMyth," or the like, in n. 4.
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
PERSPECTIVE
199
the relevant
logg'snotionof an ideal normis universally
pertinent;
is notso muchcompleteness,
dimension
as fullnessof performance.)
We haveto realizehowmuchofwhatwe haveis an outline,an explanation,a resume,a sketchofhowa storygoes,but nota doingofthe
foritsquality.17
narrative
withthetakingoffullresponsibility
me
do
not
understand
as
Finally,please
arguingsimplythatthe
and ethnological
founusualstudyofLiterature
needsan ethnographic
alsoneedcontributions
dation.It does,butethnography
and ethnology
have in fact occurredindifromliterary
study. Such contributions
of
and
that
some
others,particularly
vidually(in my case,
through
much
theinfluence
ofKennethBurke); butthereis a generalrelation,
inneedofattention.
in thesensein
Much oftheworkofethnographers
is interpretation,
is discussed
withregardto literary
and otherworks
whichinterpretation
ofethnography
in ourownculturaltradition.The jointunderpinnings
havebeensporadically
notedin anthropology
and interpretation
(A. L.
Kroeber,forexample,remainedconsciousof Diltheyand Rickertin
ofhistory
and culture.);butin a contextin whichthe
hisconceptions
to be continuing
suchqueswas
assumed
ethnography,
typicalactivity
wereslighted.We are nowin a periodin which
tionsunderstandably
in ethnography
mustbe understood
muchofthematerialaccumulated
now irretrievably
or stagesof cultures,
as referring
to cultures,
gone.
If anthropology
abandonsthesematerials,in pursuitof perpetual
youth,it betraysits own hard-wonheritage.Other
ethnographic
ofsomeof
history,
maytakeup theinterpretation
especially
disciplines,
of thecommunities
fromwhichthey
and descendants
thesematerials,
comemaywishto repossess
them,but in bothrespectsanthropology
roleto play. Indeed,thisroleis beingtakenup by a
has a mediating
is becoming,
fairnumberofscholars,and partof anthropology
in the
the
sense
of
broad
term,philology.
old,
The anthropologist,
as ethnographer,
is an interpreter
of documents
are contemporary
and hisown. Fieldnotes,
evenwhenthedocuments
textsdo notspeakunivocally.18
andfilms,
photographs
in presenting
face
findings.What
questions
Anthropologists literary
factconvincing?
The impersonality
makesan accountofethnographic
ofincident?The rhetoric
ofstatistics
oftone? The selective
marshaling
how
much
of the
and tables? An acceptedterminology?
Again,
17 Cf. Hymes, "Breakthroughinto Performance,"Folklore: Communication and
Performance, ed. D. Ben Amos and K. Goldstein (The Hague, forthcomingin
1974).
18 On these issues, see CliffordGeertz, "Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture," The Interpretationof Cultures (New York, 1973), Ch. i.
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
200
effective
sense anthropologists
have of the ethnographicworld is based
on personalanecdotes,narrativestransmitted
in conversation?
And what are we to make of the increasingly
frequentphenomenon
of ethnographers
publishingone book, to satisfytheirscientificobligation, and then a second book, to satisfythemselves,to tell what the
thefirstbook was reallylike?
experienceunderlying
What I wish to suggestis that in evaluating ethnographieswe are
influencedby considerationsthat influenceour interpretation
of works
of literature; that when ethnographicaccounts lack some of the
qualities to be found in novels, readers may miss them, and, even
more instructive,
the writersmay miss them. There is an inescapable
tensionin ethnographybetweenthe forms,the rhetoricaland literary
forms, considered necessary for presentation (and persuasion of
colleagues), and the narrativeformnatural to the experienceof the
work,and natural to the meaningfulreportof it in otherthan monographic contexts. I would even suggestthat the scientificstylesoften
imposed on ethnographicwritingmay produce, not objectivity,but
distortion.This is an old problem-I was told of a Berkeleyethnographerin the I930s who said, data in hand, "Now all I have to do is
to take the lifeout of it." It is a currentproblemtoo. A man writing
last yearwroteme thathe was beinginstructed
his doctoraldissertation
to omitall referenceto himself-"I am sure that yourreaderswant to
know about the people of X, not about you." He pointedout that his
own assessmentof the validityof his informationdepended crucially
on the circumstancesunder which it was obtained, including his
relationto those circumstances.By suppressinghis presence,he was
suppressingan opportunityfor anyone else to evaluate the validityof
his report. Moreover,therewere aspectsof the materialfromwhichhe
could hardlybe excised. When an electionwas held to send a representativesomewhere,the communityin which he workedelectedhim.
In sum, I am suggestingthat an ethnographicaccountis partlyto be
assessed in termsof attributesproperlyinvestigatedin literatureand
that a franklynarrativepresentation,
drawingupon literaryskills,is in
some cases the mostaccurate,or even the onlyway to conveyessential
qualitiesof communitiesand events. This is not to reduce ethnography
to literarycreation. The ethnographerhas othermeans available for
some purposes (statistics,questionnaires,etc.-though, now, novelists
are making use of any and all paraphernaliatoo) and is not freeto
inventincident,howeverapt it mightbe. But ethnographyand literaturedo have an inescapablecommonelement,such thatsome contributionsto literature(in termsoftheirinstitutional
audience) are valuable
to ethnographyin theiraccomplishment,and that some
contributions
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AN ETHNOGRAPHIC
201
PERSPECTIVE
V
It should be clear that the point of view I have expressed,here as
elsewhere,is essentiallyin accord with Todorov's penetratinganalysis,
and proposal for a typologyof discourses. I have held to the term
literatureas a justificationforattentionand acceptance with regardto
Native Americanliteratureand the like, and because I anticipatethat
empirical and comparativestudieswill justifyit as designationfor a
major part, or set of dimensionsand features,of such a typology. I
thinkthat our presentcritical,dissolvingstage will lead eventuallyto a
stageofsynthesis.
UNIVERSITY
OF PENNSYLVANIA
19 Nothing of what I say here is new, except perhaps the effortto bring these
matters to focus in this way. I am deeply indebted to John Szwed for numerous
conversationsin this regard.
This content downloaded from 201.234.181.53 on Mon, 27 Apr 2015 04:40:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions