Douglas Raybeck's Ethnography: The Essentials Of Cultural Anthropology

1045 Words3 Pages

In Essentials of Cultural Anthropology, the book defines ethnography as “a written account of how a single human population lives” (Bailey & Peoples, 2014, p. 8). It seems to be such a simple definition to the multiple levels needed to make a successful ethnography as shown by Douglas Raybeck in Mad Dogs, Englishmen, and the Errant Anthropologist. These multiple levels of ethnographic methods include problems that often arise, the assimilation into a culture, and the many different ways of perceiving culture. This method of study is particularly unique to the social sciences because of the extensive amount of assimilation one does in order to interpret a society's culture. There is the need for a year-long period--occasionally even longer-- …show more content…

91). One extreme perspective is materialism: the belief that the main influences on humans is how “people produce and distribute resources from their environment” (Bailey & Peoples, 2014, p. 91). In Wakaf Bharu there is the process of bargaining that Raybeck’s wife, Karen, was expected to participate in (1996, p. 46). Materialists would speculate that the high value placed on bargaining is placed on economic gains and losses for both the vendor and customer. This is true, but they miss an aspect that the other extreme would evaluate. Postmodernists question “the truth values of belief and knowledge” (Bailey & Peoples, 2014, p. 94). This group would see the importance bargaining plays in culture, not just for economics, but the power relationship played out in losing money and gaining a crowd to show skill and talent. Raybeck employs a combination of many different theoretical perspectives, and it is shown in the ways he views and records the Kelantanese culture. If he had focused primarily on one perspective instead of a combination he would have missed out on many of the key nuances of the …show more content…

One of the first tasks that Raybeck takes on in the ethnography is documenting kinship. He later describes the usefulness of the genealogies he created, but the process of creating them was quite difficult. He says that the Kelantanese often use “Arabic naming conventions” (Raybeck, 1996, p.62), making a task that seems relatively simple, quite complex. Combine that with a high divorce rate and the number of relatives sky rockets. But through his interviews on kinship he discovered that most Kelantanese had a “detailed and accurate knowledge of very extensive kin networks” (Raybeck, 1996, p. 62). This helped him to make the discovery of the level of importance placed on family and village support. Raybeck credits much of his success to this ethnography to his key informants. One that he often praises is his neighbor Hussein. When Raybeck was first conducting his interviews he had to learn the difference in politeness in Kelantanese culture. Hussein had to subtly remind him that Raybeck (1996) must “behave like a hen, not a rooster” (p. 60). His key informant helped to set him on the right path to gaining the information for his research question, but also taught him a key aspect of culture that, until then, he was failing in as a participant

Open Document