f8sjga3e8n8.html

<div>Autoethnography is a multifaceted approach to anthropology, allowing for it to combat colonialism in many ways. It has become part of a larger response to some of the colonial methods used in anthropology and included alongside an acceptance of differing sources such as oral traditions. <b>(Delaney - added this sentence to highlight autoethnography and other so-called 'non-traditional' sources as an attempt to move away from colonial techniques)&nbsp;</b>An alternative to Murphy’s autoethnographic approach, where an anthropologist studies their own culture, is the work of Julie Cruikshank. Cruikshank translates and contextualizes the narratives of indigenous women. In&nbsp;<i>Life Lived Like a Story&nbsp;</i>Cruikshank collaborates with three Athapaskan and Tlingit women from the Yukon, focusing on how these women utilize narrative to explain their life histories as well as their culture&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Cruikshank1990}</cite>. While at first the stories of these women might come across as autobiographical, an examination makes it evident that these narratives are laden with anthropological insight, addressing social contexts, kinship, and the value of stories&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Cruikshank1990}</cite>. Collaborative autoethnography diverges from conventional<b>&nbsp;</b>participant observation by giving the observed their own voices. This approach remedies Barbeau’s questionable&nbsp;<b>salvage ethnography</b> and its perpetuation of colonial power. By allowing Indigenous people to be an authority on their own culture not only do we renegotiate power balances, but we gain an unfiltered anthropological account of a culture from someone who has been immersed in it for the majority of their life. This example further serves to highlight Canadian anthropology. Here we see that autoethnography gives a studied group in Canada their own voices, helping restore a power balance in Canadian anthropology. Methodology is a key factor in decolonizing anthropology, but to decolonize entirely there must be more effort than just a diversion in conventional fieldwork. While perhaps not the&nbsp;<i>coup de     grâce&nbsp;</i>to colonial anthropology, progressive values are instrumental for decolonization.</div><div>            &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Using autoethnography as a means to decolonize anthropology extends beyond a progressive approach to fieldwork. Autoethnography is not only a polymorphous remedy to colonial anthropology, but is also an intersection for other anthropological methods. For instance, autoethnography is an ideal vessel for public anthropology, making it doubly effective for decolonization. Louise Lamphere states that public anthropology is based in “increased collaboration and partnership with communities we study, expanded outreach to the public so that research results are broadly disseminated, and concrete efforts to influence policy”&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{lamphere2009}</cite>. Because autoethnography often focuses on these issues its efforts to decolonize are intertwined with public anthropology. An instance of this anthropological intersectionality can be seen in Joel Martineau’s work "Autoethnography and Material Culture: The Case of Bill Reid". This is a further example of how autoethnography has been used in the decolonization of Canadian anthropology. In this work Martineau examines how the sculptures of Bill Reid, the prolific Canadian artist, elaborate on the methodology of autoethnography. Contrary to Pratt’s definition of autoethnography, stating that Indigenous groups must create a dialogue using the mediums of the colonizer,Martineau argues that Reid’s art can be read as “autoethnographic texts”&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Martineau2001}</cite>. When Indigenous material culture is interpreted as autoethnographic work colonialism is challenged by a shift away from Eurocentric mediums. Relevant to this, it has been argued that academic writing has an English bias&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{curry2010}</cite>. This poses a challenge to Indigenous people who look to represent their own culture to an academic audience without assuming the role of subject. Not only are indigenous people required to use English if they look to portray their own culture, but they also need an understanding of “concepts and categories historically and epistemologically defined by that language”&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{ryang1997}</cite>.  Consequently, a contradiction arises which questions the viability of autoethnography when limited to English academic writing; to present one’s own culture a degree of assimilation or adaptation is necessary for it to be presentable. conventionally, to represent ones own culture they would have to remove themselves from it to a degree. Autoethnography through material culture, exemplified by Reid, transcends conventional academic mediums and allows for the incorporation of Indigenous ones, facilitating cultural introspection without conforming to colonial powers. While not to say all writing is colonial, if Indigenous people are allowed to convey their own histories and cultural understandings through their own mediums we remove an underlying colonial aspect of anthropology.</div><div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Aside from showing how autoethnography decolonizes anthropology by subverting conventional mediums, The Case of Bill Reid also draws attention to how autoethnography intersects with public anthropology’s goal of communal outreach.&nbsp; Martineau’s article looks to justify Reid’s work as autoethnographic by using Mary Louise Pratt’s framework from her "Imperial Eyes" article&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Martineau2001}</cite>. Martineau draws attention to how Reid was such a well-known figure in the Canadian art world that “only the wilfully oblivious can ignore his project”. Not only does this reaffirm Reid’s work as autoethnographic in Pratt’s structure, as it is presented to a broad public, but it further consolidates autoethnography with public anthropology, decolonizing Canadian anthropology not only with progressive methodology but also with progressive ideology. According to Martineau, Reid’s work “thrusts awareness of aboriginal culture and sensibilities into dominant culture”, an endeavour that directly confronts colonialism through the reinforcement of an Indigenous presence&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Martineau2001}</cite>. In 2004, Reid’s autoethnographic&nbsp;<i>The Spirit of Haida Gwaii</i> was reiterated nation-wide when it was chosen to be portrayed on the Canadian $20 bill (Search on Bank of Canada website, accessed 01/11/2017).&nbsp; The wide dissemination of Reid’s work implies the increased accessibility of autoethnography, and how it can relay ethnographic information without the need for encumbering academic texts. Again, power balances are renegotiated through autoethnography, this time by questioning who ethnographic knowledge is for. Autoethnography democratizes ethnographic knowledge, challenging the colonial position of anthropology in academia.&nbsp;</div><div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Finally, through Martineau’s work we see how Reid’s autoethnographic art followed public anthropology’s goal of influencing policy, effectively showing how autoethnography has decolonized Canadian anthropology by acting as a vehicle for a progressive ideology. As previously mentioned, a requirement for public anthropology is effort to change policy.&nbsp; According to Martineau, Reid’s wide-spread art made him a spokesperson for the indigenous community, a role which placed him in a position convenient for influencing policy.&nbsp; Martineau explains that in 1986, shortly after commissioned by the government of Canada to create a piece of art, the Council for the Haida Nation clashed with the government of British Columbia over logging rights. Essentially the Haida wanted to restrict the government of British Columbia’s access to logging, a restriction that the government opposed. To contest the colonial agenda that the government of British Colombia was asserting Reid placed his recently commissioned work on hiatus. While perhaps convoluted, here we see how Reid conveys autoethnography’s progressive values through his threatening to abandon an autoethnographic work commissioned by the government. He offers a colonial power an ultimatum, directly challenging policy with his work. Because of this the government of British Columbia reassessed their logging policy, converting the disputed territory into a wildlife preserve&nbsp;<cite class="ltx_cite raw v1">\cite{Martineau2001}</cite>. Overall, Martineau highlights how Reid’s work is autoethnographic, and through this work we gain an understanding of how autoethnographic decolonization extends beyond the removal of physical imposition. Autoethnographic decolonization is dependent on a set of progressive ideals, often overlapping with public anthropology, making autoethnography an exceptionally powerful tool for restoring power to Indigenous groups.</div>