<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Historical anthropology
Review: El-Haj's thesis is on the mark. The ways in which nation states reformulate their own archaeological record and national landscape to generate a primordial national identity is a process we can observe in many parts of the planet. The fact that she examines Israel where the current political climate is tense to say the least, makes her an easy target for writers who instinctually back Israel and support outsiders' "imperial"
interests in the region. The previous critique (below) seems critical of Anthropology as an entire discipline. The writer is correct to point out that El-Haj is indebted to Anderson, Said and even Thomas Kuhn, but I am not quite sure why this is damning, as these writers are in many ways foundational to the very study of anthropology and history of science--they question inherent power structures in state, labor class and scientific institutions and dissect how power structures mask and reformulate what we percieve to be "Truth". Anthropology is certainly well suited to "building and interpreting social and intellectual history" as the previous critic claims it is not. This is called historical anthropology and is well-outlined in the "Journal of Ethnohistory" published out of Wisconsin. Admittedly, 'Facts on the Ground' could be written better, and towards the middle of the book you feel like throwing it down because El-Haj repeats herself for the length of about three chapters. There is a feeling that the book was meant to be a journal article that was expanded into a full length book in pursuit of a tenure track position. But, most importantly, her content is on track. I recommend this book for those interested in the present Israel/Palestine conflict and are looking to search various sources (and biases) on the matter.
<< 1 >>
| 
