The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity Among Scholars and Refugees

7/30/2019 The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity Among Scholars and Refugees

1/22

National Geographic: The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity

among Scholars and RefugeesAuthor(s): Liisa MalkkiSource: Cultural Anthropology, Vol. 7, No. 1, Space, Identity, and the Politics of Difference(Feb., 1992), pp. 24-44Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/656519

Accessed: 13/11/2008 06:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell Publishing andAmerican Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access to Cultural Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/656519?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/656519?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/22

National Geographic:The Rooting of Peoples and theTerritorialization of National IdentityAmong Scholars and RefugeesLiisa Malkki

Departmentof AnthropologyUniversityof California,Irvine

Introduction"To be rooted is perhapsthe most importantand least recognizedneed ofthe humansoul," wrote Simone Weil (1987:41) in wartimeEngland n 1942. Inourday, new conjunctures f theoreticalenquiry n anthropologyand other fieldsaremaking t possibleandnecessaryto rethink hequestionof roots in relation-

if not to the soul-to identity,and to the formsof its territorialization.The met-aphorical onceptof havingroots involves intimate inkagesbetweenpeople andplace-linkages that are increasinglyrecognizedin anthropologyas areas to bedenatured ndexploredafresh.As Appadurai(1988,1990), Said(1979, 1986), Clifford 1988:10-11, 275),Rosaldo(1989:196ff.), Hannerz 1987), Hebdige(1987), Robertson 1988), andothers have recently suggested, notionsof nativenessand nativeplaces becomevery complex as more andmorepeople identifythemselves, or arecategorized,in reference odeterritorialized homelands," "cultures," and"origins." Therehas emergeda new awarenessof the global social fact that, now more thanper-hapsever before, people arechronicallymobile androutinelydisplaced, and in-vent homes and homelandsin the absence of territorial,national bases-not insitu, but throughmemories of, and claims on, places that they can or will nolongercorporeally nhabit.Exile and otherforms of territorialdisplacementare not, of course, exclu-sively "postmodern"phenomena.Peoplehavealwaysmoved-whether throughdesireorthroughviolence. Scholarshave also writtenaboutthesemovementsfora long time and from diverse perspectives (Arendt 1973; Fustel de Coulanges1980:190-193; Heller and Feher 1988:90;Marrus1985; Mauss 1969:573-639;Moore1989;Zolberg1983). What is interesting s thatnow particularheoreticalshiftshavearrangedhemselvesinto new conjunctureshatgive thesephenomenagreateranalytic visibility thanperhapsever before. Thus, we (anthropologists)haveold questions,butalso something very new.

24


3/22

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 25

The recognitionthat people are increasingly "moving targets" (Brecken-ridge and Appadurai1989:i) of anthropologicalenquiry is associated with theplacingof boundariesandborderlands t thecenterof ouranalytical rameworks,as opposedto relegating hemto invisibleperipheriesor anomalousdangerzones(cf. Balibar 1991:10; Comaroffand Comaroff 1987; Guptaand Ferguson, thisissue; van Binsbergen 1981). Often, the concern with boundaries and theirtransgressioneflectsnotso muchcorporealmovementsof specificgroupsof peo-ple, but, rather,a broad concern with the "culturaldisplacement" of people,things,and culturalproducts e.g., Clifford1988;Goytisolo 1987;Hannerz1987;Torgovnick1990). Thus, whatSaid, for example, calls a "generalizedconditionof homelessness" (1979:18) is seen to characterizecontemporary ife every-where.'In this new theoreticalcrossroads,examining the place of refugees in thenationalorderof thingsbecomes a clarifyingexercise. Onthe one hand,tryingtounderstand he circumstancesof particulargroups of refugees illuminatesthecomplexityof the ways in which people construct,remember,and lay claim toparticularplaces as "homelands" or "nations." On the other, examininghowrefugeesbecome an object of knowledge andmanagement uggests thatthe dis-placementof refugees is constituteddifferentlyfrom otherkinds of deterritorial-izationby those states, organizations,and scholarswho are concernedwith ref-ugees. Here, the contemporary ategoryof refugees is a particularlynformativeone in the studyof the sociopoliticalconstructionof space andplace.The majorpartof this articleis a schematicexplorationof taken-for-grantedways of thinkingabout identityand territory hat are reflectedin ordinary an-guage, in nationalistdiscourses,andin scholarlystudies of nations, nationalism,andrefugees.Thepurposehere is to drawattention o theanalyticalconsequencesof suchdeeply territorializing onceptsof identityfor those categoriesof peopleclassified as "displaced" and "uprooted." These scholarlyviews will then bejuxtaposedvery brieflywith two other cases. The first of these derives frometh-nographicresearchamong Huturefugees who have lived in a refugee camp inruralWesternTanzaniasince fleeing the massacresof 1972 in Burundi.It will betracedhow thecamprefugees' narrative onstructionof homeland,refugee-ness,and exile challenges scholarlyconstructionsand common sense. In the secondcase, the ethnographymoves amongthose Huturefugees in Tanzaniawho havelived (also since 1972) outside of a refugee camp, in and around he townshipofKigomaon LakeTanganyika.These "town refugees" presenta third,differentconceptualconstellationof links betweenpeople, place, anddisplacement-onethat stands in antagonisticopposition to views from the camp, and challengesfromyet anotherdirectionscholarly mapsof the nationalorderof things.

Maps and SoilsTo begin to understand he meanings commonly attached to displacementand"uprootedness" n the contemporarynationalorderof things, it is necessaryto lay down some groundwork.This means exploring widely shared common-


4/22

26 CULTURALANTHROPOLOGY

sense ideas about countriesand roots, nations and national identities. It meansasking, in other words, what it means to be rooted in a place (cf. Appadurai1988:37). Such commonsense ideas of soils, roots, and territoryare built intoeveryday anguageandoften also intoscholarlywork, but theirveryobviousnessmakes them elusive as objects of study. Common sense, as Geertz has said(1983:92), "lies so artlesslybeforeoureyes it is almostimpossibleto see."That the world should be composed of sovereign, spatiallydiscontinuousunitsis a sometimesimplicit, sometimes statedpremisein much of the literatureon nations andnationalism(e.g., Gellner 1983; Giddens 1987:116, 119; Hobs-bawm1990:9-10).2To takeone example, Gellnersees nationsas recentphenom-ena, functional or industrial apitalism,3but he also conceptualizes hem as dis-creteethnologicalunitsunambiguously egmentedon the ground,therebynatu-ralizingthem along a spatialaxis. He invites us to examine two kinds of worldmaps.

Considerhehistory fthenationalrinciple;rconsiderwoethnographic aps,onedrawn pbefore heageofnationalism,nd heother fterheprinciplef nationalismhasdonemuchof its work.The firstmapresembles painting yKokoschka. heriotof diversepointsof colour s such hatno clearpatternanbe discernednanydetail .... Look now insteadat the ethnographic ndpoliticalmapof an area of themodemworld. t resembles otKokoschka,ut,say, Modigliani. heres very ittleshading; eat latsurfaces reclearly eparatedromeachother, t is generally lainwhereonebeginsandanothernds,andthere s little f anyambiguityroverlap.[1983:139-140]The Modiglianidescribedby Gellner (pace Modigliani) is much like anyschool atlas with yellow, green, pink, orange, and blue countriescomposing atruly global mapwith no vague or "fuzzy spaces" and no bleeding boundaries(Tambiah1985:4;Trinh1989:94). The nationalorderof things, as presentedbyGellner,usuallyalso passes as thenormalor naturalorderof things.Forit is self-evident that "real"4 nations are fixed in space and "recognizable" on a map

(Smith 1986:1). One countrycannot at the same time be anothercountry. Theworld of nations s thus conceived as a discretespatialpartitioning f territory;tis territorializedn the segmentary ashionof the multicolored chool atlas.The territorializationxpressedin the conceptual,visual device of the mapis also (andperhapsespecially) evident on the level of ordinary anguage. Theterm"thenation" is commonlyreferred o in English(andmanyother anguages)by suchmetaphoric ynonymsas "thecountry," "the land," and "the soil." Forexample, the phrase "the whole country" could denote all the citizens of thecountryor its entireterritorial xpanse. And "land" is a frequentsuffix, notonlyin "homeland," but also in the namesof countries(Thailand,Switzerland,En-gland)andin the old colonialdesignationsof "peoples and cultures"(Nuerland,Basutoland,Nyasaland).One dictionarydefinitionfor "land" is "the people ofa country,"as in, "the landrose in rebellion."5Similarly,soil is often "nationalsoil."6 Here, theterritory tself is mademore human(cf. Handler1988:34).This naturalizeddentitybetweenpeople andplace is also reflectedandcre-ated in the course of other, nondiscursivepractices. It is not uncommonfor a


5/22

NATIONALGEOGRAPHIC 27

persongoing into exile to takealong a handfulof the soil (or a sapling, or seeds)fromhis or hercountry,just as it is not unheardof for a returningnationalheroorotherpolitician o kiss thegrounduponsettingfoot once againon the "nationalsoil." Demonstrationsof emotionalties to the soil act as evidence of loyalty tothenation.Likewise, the ashesor bodies of personswho have died on foreignsoilareroutinely transportedback to their "homelands," to the land where the ge-nealogicaltree of their ancestorsgrows. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust: in death,too, native or nationalsoils areimportant.The powerfulmetaphoricpracticesthat so commonly link people to placearealso deployedto understand ndactuponthe categoricallyaberrant onditionof people whose claims on, and ties to, national soils are regardedas tenuous,spurious,or nonexistent. It is in this context, perhaps,thatthe recent events inCarpentras,SouthernFrance,should be placed (Dahlburget al. 1990:H1;Plenel1990:16;cf. Balibar1990:286). On the nightof 9 May 1990, 37 gravesin anoldJewishcemeterywere desecrated,and the body of a mannewly buried was dis-interredand impaledwith an umbrella(Dahlburget al. 1990:H1). One is com-pelled to see in this abhorrent ct of violence a connection to "love of country"in the ugliest sense of the term. The old man's membership n the Frenchnationwas denied because he was of the category "Jew." He was a person in the"wrong" soil, and was therefore aken out of the soil (cf. Balibar1990:285).

Roots and Arborescent CultureThe foregoingexamplesalreadysuggest that the widely held commonsenseassumptions inking people to place, nation to territory,are not simply territo-rializing, but deeply metaphysical.To begin to understand he meaningof dis-placement n this order of things, however, it is necessaryto explore furtheras-pectsof the metaphysic.The intentin this section is to show thatthe naturalizingof thelinksbetweenpeople andplace is routinelyconceived in specificallybotan-

ical metaphors.7Thatis, people are often thoughtof, and thinkof themselves, asbeingrooted nplaceand asderivingtheir dentity romthatrootedness.Therootsin questionhere are not just any kind of roots; very often they are specificallyarborescentn form.Even a brief excursion into nationalistdiscourses and imageryshows themto be a particularly ich field for the explorationof such arborescentroot meta-phors.Examplesareeasy to find:Keith Thomashas traced hehistoryof the Brit-ish oak as "an emblem of the British people" (1983:220, 223; cf. Daniels1988:47ff.;Graves 1966). EdmundBurkecombined "the greatoaks that shade acountry"with metaphorsof "roots" and "stock" (cited in Thomas 1983:218).A Quebecoisnationalist ikenedthe consequencesof tamperingwith the nationalheritage o the witheringof a tree (Handler1988:44-45). An old Basquenation-alistdocument inksnation,race, blood, andtree (Heiberg 1989:51).Butmorebroadly,metaphors f kinship(motherland, atherland,Vaterland,patria, isanmaa) and of home (homeland, Heimat, kotimaa) are also territorial-izing in this samesense;for thesemetaphorsarethought o "denote somethingto


6/22


which one is naturally ied" (Anderson1983:131). Motherlandand fatherland,asidefromtheirother historicalconnotations,suggest that each nation is a grandgenealogicaltree, rootedin the soil that nourishes t. By implication,it is impos-sible to be a partof more than one tree. Such a tree evokes bothtemporalconti-nuityof essence andterritorial ootedness.

Thinking n termsof arborescent ootsis, of course, in no way theexclusiveprovinceof nationalists.Scholars, too, often conceptualize identityand nation-ness in preciselysuch terms. Smith's TheEthnicOrigins of Nations (1986) pro-vides one exampleof the centralityof rootmetaphors n this intellectualdomain.In an effort to find constructivemiddle groundbetween "primordialist"8and"modernist"versionsof theemergenceof nations,he setsout "to tracethe ethnicfoundationsand rootsof moder nations" (1986:15), and states: "No enduringworldordercan be createdwhich ignoresthe ubiquitousyearningsof nationsinsearch of roots in an ethnic past, and no study of nations and nationalismthatcompletely ignoresthe pastcan bear fruit" (Smith 1986:5).9Thinkingabout nationsand nationalidentitiesmay take the form of roots,trees,origins, ancestries,raciallines, autochthonism,evolutions, developments,or any numberof otherfamiliar,essentializing images;what they shareis a ge-nealogicalformof thought,which, as Deleuze and Guattarihave pointedout, ispeculiarlyarborescent.

It isoddhow hetreehasdominatedWesterneality ndallof Westernhought,rombotanyobiologyandanatomy, utalsognosiology,heology,ontology,all of phi-losophy. . : theroot-foundation,Grund,racine,fondement.The West has a specialrelation o theforest, and deforestation. . . . [1987:18]The Need for Roots and the Spatial Incarceration of the Native

Two kinds of connection between the conceptof the nation and the anthro-pological conceptof culture are relevanthere. First, the conceptualorder of the"nationalgeographic" map (elucidatedabove by Gellner) is comparable o themanner n which anthropologistshave often conceptualizedthe spatialarrange-ment of "peoples and cultures." This similarityhas to do with theways in whichwe tend to conceptualizespace in general.As Guptapointsout:

Ourconcepts of space have always fundamentally ested on . . . images of break,rupture,nddisjunction.herecognitionfcultures,ocieties,nations, ll ntheplu-ral, is unproblematicxactlybecause hereappears nunquestionableivision,anintrinsic iscontinuity,etweenultures, etweenocieties, tc. [Gupta 988:1-2]This spatialsegmentation s also built into "the lens of culturalrelativitythat, as JohannesFabianpoints out, made the world appearas culturegardensseparatedby boundary-maintainingvalues-as posited essences" (Prakash1990:394). The conceptualpracticeof spatial segmentation s reflected not onlyin narratives f "culturaldiversity," but also in the internationalistelebrationofdiversity n the "family of nations."


7/22


A second, related set of connections between nation and culture is moreovertlymetaphysical.It has to do with the fact that, like the nation, culturehasfor long been conceived as something existing in "soil." Terms like "native,""indigenous," and "autochthonous"have all served to rootcultures n soils; andit is, of course, a well-worn observationthat the term culture derives from theLatinfor cultivation(see, e.g., Wagner 1981:21). "The idea of culturecarrieswith it an expectationof roots, of a stable, territorialized xistence" (Clifford1988:338). Here, culture and nation are kindredconcepts: they are not only spa-tializingbutterritorializing;heybothdependon a culturalessentialismthat read-ily takes on arborescent orms.A powerfulmeansof understanding ow "cultures" are territorialized anbe found in Appadurai's 1988:37) account of the ways in which anthropologistshave tended to tie people to places throughascriptionsof nativestatus: "nativesarenotonly personswho are from certainplaces, andbelong to thoseplaces, buttheyarealso those who aresomehowincarcerated,orconfined, in thoseplaces."'The spatial ncarceration f the nativeoperates,he argues, through he attributionnot only of physical immobility, but also of a distinctly ecological immobility(1988:37). Natives arethoughtto be ideally adapted o theirenvironments-ad-mirablescientists of the concretemutelyanddeftly unfoldingthe hidden innardsof their particularecosystems, PBS-style (1988:38). As Appaduraiobserves,theseways of confiningpeople to places have deeply metaphysicaland moraldi-mensions(1988:37).The ecological immobilityof the native, so convincingly arguedby Appa-durai,canbe considered n the context of a broaderconflationof cultureandpeo-ple, nationand nature-a conflation that is incarceratingbut also heroizingandextremelyromantic.Two ethnographic xampleswill perhapssuffice here."On a certainNorthAmericanuniversitycampus,anthropology acultywererequestedby the RainforestAction Movement(RAM) Committeeon IndigenousPeoplesto announce n theirclasses that"October 21st through he 28th is WorldRainforestWeek. The RainforestAction Movement will be kickingthe week offwith a candlelightvigil for IndigenousPeoples." (Theflyeralso lists other activ-ities: a march hroughdowntown,a lecture "on IndigenousPeoples," anda film.)One is, of course, sympatheticwith the projectof defendingthe rainforestsandthe people who live in them, in the face of tremendous hreats.The intent is notto belittle or to deny the necessity of supranationalpolitical organizingaroundthese issues. However, these activities on behalf of "The Indigenous," in thespecificculturalforms that they take, raise a numberof questions:Why shouldthe rightsof "Indigenous People" be seen as an "environmental"issue? Arepeople "rooted" in theirnative soil somehowmorenatural, heirrightssomehowmoresacred,thanthose of otherexploitedandoppressedpeople?And one won-ders, if an "IndigenousPerson" wanted to move away, to a city, would his orher candle be extinguished?The dictatesof ecological immobility weigh heavilyhere.Butsomethingmore is going on with the "IndigenousPeoples' Day." Thatpeoplewouldgather na small town inNorthAmerica o hold a vigil bycandelight


8/22


for otherpeople known only by the name of "Indigenous" suggests thatbeingindigenous,native, autochthonous,orotherwiserooted in place is, indeed,pow-erfullyheroized.12At the same time, it is hard not to see thatthis very heroiza-tion-fusing the farawaypeople withtheirforest-may have the effect of subtlyanimalizingwhile it spiritualizes.Like "the wildlife," the indigenousare an ob-ject of enquiryand imaginationnot only for the anthropologistbut also for thenaturalist, he environmentalist,and the tourist.13Theromanticvision of the rootingof peoples hasrecentlybeen amplified nnew strandsof "green politics" thatliterallysacralizethe fusion of people, cul-ture,andsoil on "MotherEarth."A recent article n TheNation, "How ParadiseWas Lost:WhatColumbusDiscovered," by Kirkpatrick ale (1990), is acase inpoint. Starting romthe worthwhileobservation hat the historyof the "discov-ery" of the Americas needs to be rewritten,Sale proceedsto lay out a politicalprogramhatmightbe describedas magicalnaturalism.Thediscovery, he writes,"begantheprocessby which the cultureof Europe, aptlyrepresentedby thiscap-tain [Columbus],implanted ts diseased and dangerousseeds in the soils of thecontinents ..." (1990:445). The captain,we aretold, is best thoughtof as "aman without place . . . always rootless and restless" (1990:445). By contrast,"the cultures" discoveredanddestroyedare best thoughtof as orginally "rootedin place" (1990:445). They had "an exquisite sense of . . . the bioregions"(1990:445). Sale is not content with merenostalgia;he distills moral essons anda new formof devotionalpolitics from this history.

Theonlypolitical ision hatoffersanyhopeof salvations one basedonan under-standingof, a rootedness n, a deepcommitment o, and a resacralization f,place. ... It is the only way we can build a politics that can spread he messagethatWesterncivilizationitself, shot throughwiththe denialofplace and a utilitarian on-ceptof nature,mustbe transformed...Sucha politics,based,as theoriginal eoplesof theAmericas ad t, upon ove ofplace,also mplies heplaceof love. Forultimatelyoveis thetrue radle f politics,the ove of theearth nd tssystems, he loveof theparticularioregionwe inhabit,the love of thosewho share t withus in ourcommunities,nd he loveof thatun-nameablessence hatbindsustogetherwith heearth, ndprovideshewaterortherootswesink.[Sale1990:446, mphasis dded]The "natives" are indeedincarceratedn primordialbioregionsandthereby

retrospectively ecolonizedin Sale's argument.But a moral esson is drawnfromthis:therestless,rootless "civilization" of thecolonizing "West," too, urgentlyneedsto root itself. In sum, the spatialincarceration f the nativeis conceived asa highly valuedrootingof "peoples" and "cultures"-a rootingthat is simul-taneouslymoral andliterallybotanical,or ecological.It is when the native is a nationalnative that the metaphysicaland moralvaluationof rootsin the soil becomesespecially apparent. n thenationalorderofthings, the rootingof peoples is not only normal; t is also perceivedas a moralandspiritualneed.

Justas there recertain ulture-bedsorcertainmicroscopicnimals, ertainypesofsoil for certain lants, o there s a certain artof thesoulineveryone andcertain


9/22


waysofthoughtndaction ommunicatedromonepersono another hich anonlyexist in a nationalsetting, anddisappearwhen a country s destroyed.[Weil1987:151-152]

A Sedentarist MetaphysicsThe territorializing, ften arborescent onceptionsof nationand cultureex-ploredhere are associatedwith a powerfulsedentarism n ourthinking.Were weto imagine an otherworldlyethnographer tudyingus, we might well hear thatscholarobserve, in Tuan's (1977:156) words: "Rootedness in the soil and the

growthof piousfeeling toward t seem natural o sedentaryagricultural eoples."This is a sedentarism hat is peculiarlyenablingof the elaborationand consoli-dation of a nationalgeographythat reaffirms he segmentationof the world intoprismatic,mutuallyexclusive units of "world order"(Smith 1986:5).This is alsoa sedentarismhatis taken for granted o such an extent thatit is nearlyinvisible.And, finally, this is a sedentarism hat is deeply metaphysicalanddeeply moral,sinking"peoples" and "cultures" into "nationalsoils," and the "family of na-tions" into MotherEarth. It is this transnational ulturalcontext that makes in-telligible the linkages between contemporarycelebratory nternationalismsandenvironmentalisms.The effectsof this sedentarismare the focus of the following section on ref-ugees. Refugees are not nomads, but Deleuze andGuattari'scomments on alle-goricalnomads are relevantto them:

Historys alwayswrittenroma sedentaryointof view and nthenameof aunitaryStateapparatus,t leastapossible ne,evenwhen hetopic s nomads.What s lack-ingis aNomadology,heopposite f ahistory. 1987:23]Uprootedness: Some Implications of Sedentarismfor Conceptualizing Displacement

Conceiving the relationships hatpeople have to places in the naturalizingand botanical ermsdescribedabove leads, then, to apeculiarsedentarism hat isreflected n languageand in social practice. This sedentarism s not inert. It ac-tively territorializes ur identities, whetherculturalor national. And as this sec-tion will attempt o show, it also directlyenables a vision of territorialdisplace-ment as pathological.Thebroader ntenthere is to suggestthat t is in confrontingdisplacement hat the sedentaristmetaphysicembeddedin the nationalorder ofthingsis at its most visible.Thatdisplacement s subject o botanical hought s evident fromthecontrastbetweentwo everydaytermsfor it: transplantationnduprootedness.The notionof transplantations less specific a termthan the latter,but it may be agreedthatit generallyevokes live, viable roots. It strongly suggests, for example, the co-lonial andpostcolonial, usually privileged, categoryof "expatriates"who pickup theirroots in an orderlymannerfrom the "mothercountry," the originativeculture-bed,and set about their "acclimatization"'4in the "foreign environ-ment" or on "foreign soil"-again, in an orderlymanner.Uprootedness s an-


10/22

32 CULTURAL NTHROPOLOGY

othermatter.Even a brief overview of the literature n refugeesas uprootedpeo-ple shows thatin uprooting, he orderlinessof the transplantation isappears.In-stead, broken and dangling roots predominate-roots that threaten to wither,along with the ordinary oyalties of citizenshipin a homeland(Hellerand Feher1988:89;Malkki1985:24-25).Thepathologizationof uprootedness n the nationalorderof thingscan takeseveraldifferent butoftenconflated)forms, amongthempolitical, medical, andmoral.Afterthe Second WorldWar, and also in the interwarperiod, the loss ofnationalhomelandembodiedby refugeeswas often definedby policymakersandscholarsof the time as a politico-moralproblem.Forexample, a prominent1939historicalsurveyof refugees states, "Politically uprooted,he [therefugee] maysink into the underworldof terrorismand political crime;and in any case he issuspectedof political irresponsibilityhatendangersnationalsecurity" (Simpson1939:9).15It is, however, the moral axis that hasprovento commandthe greatest on-gevity in theproblematization f refugees. A particularly lear, if extreme, state-ment of the perceivedmoralconsequencesof loss of homeland s to be found inthe following passagefrom a postwarstudyof the mental and moral characteris-tics of the "typicalrefugee":

Homelessness is a serious threat o moral behavior. ... At the moment the refugeecrosses he frontiers f his ownworld,his wholemoral utlook,his attitudeowardthe divine orderof life changes .... [The refugees'] conduct makes it obvious thatwe aredealingwith individualswho arebasicallyamoral,withoutany sense of per-sonalor social responsibility. . . . They no longerfeel themselvesboundby ethicalpreceptswhicheveryhonest citizen ... respects. Theybecome a menace,dangerouscharacterswho will stopat nothing. [Cirtautas1957:70, 73]The particular historical circumstances under which the pathologization ofthe World War II refugees occurred has been discussed elsewhere (Malkki 1985).

The point to be underscored here is that these refugees' loss of bodily connectionto their national homelands came to be treated as a loss of moral bearings. Root-less, they were no longer trustworthy as "honest citizens."The theme of moral breakdown has not disappeared from the study of exileand displacement (Kristeva 1991; Tabori 1972). Pellizzi (1988:170), for instance,speaks of the "inner destruction" visited upon the exile "by the full awarenessof his condition." Suggesting that most of us are today "in varying degrees ofexile, removed from our roots," he warns: "1984 is near" (1988:168). Anotherobserver likens the therapeutic treatment of refugees to military surgery; in bothcases, time is of the essence.

Unless treatedquickly, therefugeealmostinevitablydevelopseitherapathyor a reck-less attitude hat "the worldowes me a living," which laterprovesalmost ineradic-able. There is a slow, prostratingand agonizing death-of the hopes, the idealismand thefeeling of solidaritywith whichthe refugeesbegan. [Aall 1967:26]'6


11/22


The morecontemporaryield of "refugee studies" is quitedifferent n spiritfromthepostwar iterature.However, it shares with earliertexts the premisethatrefugeesarenecessarily "a problem." They are not ordinarypeople, but repre-sent, rather,an anomalyrequiringspecializedcorrectives and therapeutic nter-ventions. It is strikinghow often the abundant iterature laimingrefugees as itsobjectof studylocates "the problem"not in the politicalconditionsor processesthatproducemassive territorialdisplacementsof people, but, rather,within thebodiesand minds(andeven souls) of people categorizedas refugees.Theinternalization f theproblemwithin"therefugee" in the more contem-porary tudyof refugeesnow occurs most often alonga medicalizing,psycholog-ical axis. Harrell-Bond, or instance,cites evidence of the breakdownof familiesandthe erosion of "normative social behaviour" (1986:150), of mental illness(1986:152, 283ff.), of "psychological stress" (1986:286), and of "clinical levelsof depressionandanxiety" (1986:287ff.).17Thepointhere is obviouslynot to denythatdisplacementcanbe a shatteringexperience.It is rather his:Oursedentaristassumptionsaboutattachment o placelead us to definedisplacementnot as a fact aboutsociopoliticalcontext, but ratheras an inner,pathologicalcondition of the displaced.

The "Family of Nations" and the Externality of "the Refugee"These different exts onthe mental and moralcharacteristics f refugeesfirstof all create the effect of a generalized,even generic, figure:"the refugee." Butthegeneralization ndproblematization f "the refugee" maybe linked to a thirdprocess, that of the discursive externalizationof the refugee from the national(read:natural)orderof things. Threeexamples may clarifythis process.Ina studyof the post-World War II refugees, Stoessinger(1956:189) notesthe importanceof studying"the peculiar psychologicaleffects arisingfrompro-longed refugeestatus," and stressesthat "such psychologicalprobingsconstituteanexcursion ntowhat is still largelyterra incognita." The title of a morerecent

articlereflectsa comparableperceptionof thestrangenessandunfamiliarity f theworld peopled by refugees: "A Tourist in the Refugee World" (Shawcross1989:28-30). The article is a commentary n a photographicessay on refugeesaround the world entitled Forced Out: The Agony of the Refugee in Our Time (Kis-maric 1989). Excursions into terra incognita, guided tours in "the refugeeworld," andthe last image of being "forced out"-all threepoint to the exter-nalityof "the refugee" in the nationalorderof things.HannahArendtoutlinedthese relations of strangenessand externalityveryclearlywhen writingabout the post-World War II refugees andotherdisplacedpeoples in Europe.The world map she saw was very different from the schoolatlas consideredearlier.

Mankind,orso longa timeconsiderednder heimageof a familyof nations,hadreached hestagewherewhoeverwasthrown ut of one of thesetightlyorganizedclosedcommunitiesoundhimself hrown utof the amilyof nations ltogether..theabstractnakednessof being nothingbuthumanwas theirgreatestdanger.[1973:294, 00]18


12/22


Refugees, liminal in the categoricalorderof nation-states, hus fit Turner'sfamouscharacterization f liminalpersonaeas "naked unaccommodatedman"or "undifferentiated aw material"(1967:98-99). The objectification o whichArendt'sandTurner'sobservationsrefer is very evidentin the scholarlyandpol-icy discourseon refugees.The term"refugees" denotesanobjectified,undiffer-entiatedmass thatis meaningfulprimarilyas an aberration f categoriesand anobjectof "therapeuticnterventions"(cf. Foucault1979). One of the social andanalyticalconsequencesof the school atlas, then, is the political sensitivityandsymbolicdangerof people who do not fit, who represent"matterout of place"(Douglas 1966).Theserelationsof orderandaberration lso raisequestionsfor anthropolog-icalpractice: f "the refugee" is "naked unaccommodatedman," naked and notclothedin culture,why should the anthropologist tudyhim?The heroizingcon-cept of the "family of nations" is comparable o anothernaturalistic erm: the"familyof man" (cf. Haraway1986:9, 11). Thus does the nakednessof the ideal-typicalrefugee suggestanother ink:that between nationlessnessandcultureless-ness. Thatis, territorially"uprooted" people areeasily seen as "torn loose fromtheir culture" (Marrus 1985:8),19because cultureis itself a territorialized andeven a botanicalandquasi-ecological) concept in so manycontexts. As Clifford(1988:338)observes: "Common notionsof culture" arebiased "towardrootingrather hantravel." Violated,brokenrootssignalan ailingcultural dentityand adamagednationality.The ideal-typicalrefugee is like a native gone amok (cf.Arendt1973:302). It is not illogical in this culturalcontext thatone of the firsttherapiesroutinelydirected at refugees is a spatialone. The refugee camp is atechnologyof "care and control" (Malkki 1985:51;Proudfoot 1957)-a tech-nology of power entailingthe managementof space and movement-for "peo-ples out of place."In the foregoing, an attempthas been madeto clarify the following points:(1) The world of nationstends to be conceived as discretespatialpartitionings fterritory. 2) The relationsof people to place tendto be naturalized n discursiveand otherpractices. This naturalizations often specifically conceived in plantmetaphors. 3) The conceptof culturehas many pointsof connectionwith thatofthe nation,and is likewise thoughtto be rootedin concrete localities. These bo-tanicalconcepts reflect a metaphysicalsedentarism n scholarlyand othercon-texts. (4) The naturalizationf thelinks betweenpeopleandplaceleadsto avisionof displacementas pathological,andthis, too, is conceived in botanical erms,asuprootedness.Uprootedness omes to signala loss of moraland, later,emotionalbearings.Since both culturaland national identitiesare conceived in territorial-ized terms,uprootednessalso threatens o denatureandspoil these.In the next section, these often taken-for-grantedways of thinkingandtwodifferentconceptionsof the links betweenpeople andplace will bejuxtaposed.

Nationals and Cosmopolitans in ExileThetwo verycondensedethnographic xamplesto be given are drawnfromdetailedaccountspresentedelsewhere (Malkki 1989, 1990). Based on one year


13/22


of anthropological ield research n ruralwesternTanzaniaamongHuturefugeeswho fledthegenocidalmassacresof 1972 in Burundi, his workexploreshow thelived experiencesof exile shapethe constructionof national dentityandhistor-icity amongtwo groupsof Huturefugeesinhabiting wo verydifferentsettingsinTanzania. One group was settled in a rigorously organized, isolated refugeecamp, and the other lived in the morefluidsettingof Kigoma Townshipon LakeTanganyika.Living outside of any camp context, these "town refugees" weredispersed n non-refugeeneighborhoods.Comparisonof the campand town set-tingsrevealedradicaldifferences n themeaningsascribed o national dentityandhomeland,andexile andrefugee-ness.The most strikingsocial fact aboutthe camp was that its inhabitantswerecontinuallyengaged in an impassionedconstructionand reconstructionof theirhistoryas "a people." Rangingfrom the "autochthonous"originsof Burundiasa "nation" to the coming of the pastoralTutsi "foreignersfrom the North" tothe Tutsicaptureof powerfrom the autochthonsby ruseto, finally, theculminat-ing massacres of Hutuby Tutsi in 1972, which have been termed a "selectivegenocide" (Lemarchand nd Martin1974), the Huturefugees' narratives ormedanoverarchinghistorical rajectory hat was fundamentallyalso a national rajec-toryof the "rightfulnatives" of Burundi.The camprefugees saw themselves asa nation in exile, and defined exile, in turn, as a moraltrajectoryof trials andtribulations hat would ultimatelyempowerthemto reclaim(or createanew) the"Homeland"in Burundi.

Refugee-ness had a centralplace in these narrativeprocesses (cf. Malkki1990:44ff.). Far frombeing a "spoiled identity," refugeestatus was valuedandprotectedas a sign of the ultimatetemporarinessof exile and of the refusal tobecome naturalized, o put down roots in a place to which one did not belong.Insistingon one's liminalityand displacementas a refugee was also to have alegitimateclaim to the attentionof "internationalopinion" and to internationalassistance.Displacement s usuallydefinedby those who study refugeesas a sub-versionof (national)categories,as aninternational roblem Malkki1985, 1989).Here, in contrast,displacementhad become a form of categoricalpurity.Being arefugee,a personwas no longera citizenof Burundi,and notyet an immigrantnTanzania. One's purityas a refugee had become a way of becoming purerandmorepowerfulas a Hutu.The "true nation" was imaginedas a "moral community" being formedcentrallyby the "natives" in exile (Malkki1990:34;cf. Anderson1983:15). Theterritorial xpanse namedBurundiwas a mere state. The camp refugees' narra-tives agree with Renan: "A nation is a soul, a spiritualprinciple" (1990:19).Here,then,wouldseem to be a deterritorialized ationwithoutroots sunkdirectlyinto the nationalsoil. Indeed, the territory s not yet a nationalsoil, because thenationhas notyet been reclaimedby its "truemembers"and is insteadgovernedby "impostors"(Malkki 1989:133). If "anythingcan serve as a reterritorializa-tion, in otherwords, 'stand for' the lost territory,"then the Hutu nation has re-territorialized tself precisely in displacement, in a refugee camp (Deleuze andGuattari1987:508).Thehomelandhere is notso muchaterritorial rtopographic


14/22


entityas a moraldestination.Andthecollective, idealized return o thehomelandis not a mere matterof traveling.The real return an come only at the culminationof the trialsand tribulationsn exile.Thesevisions of nation, identity,anddisplacementchallenge the common-sense andscholarlyviews discussed in the first section of this article, not by re-futing the national order of things, but, rather,by constructingan alternative,competingnationalistmetaphysic.It is being claimed that state andterritoryarenot sufficient to make a nation, and that citizenship does not amount to a truenativeness.Thus, present-dayBurundi s an "impostor" in the "family of na-tions."In contrast,the town refugees had not constructedsuch a categoricallydis-tinct, collective identity. Rather than defining themselves collectively as "theHuturefugees," they tendedto seek ways of assimilatingand of manipulatingmultiple dentities-identities derived or "borrowed"from the social contextofthe township.The town refugees were not essentially "Hutu" or "refugees" or"Tanzanians" or "Burundians," but ratherjust "broad persons" (Hebdige1987:159). Theirs were creolized, rhizomatic identities-changing and situa-tional rather han essential and moral(Deleuze andGuattari1987:6ff., 21; Han-nerz 1987). In the process of managingthese "rootless" identitiesin townshiplife, they were creatingnot a heroizednational dentity, but a lively cosmopoli-tanism-a worldliness hatcaused thecamprefugeesto see them as an "impure,"problematic lement in the "total community" of the Huturefugees as "a peo-ple" in exile.Formanyin town, returningo the homelandmeanttraveling o Burundi, oa spatiallydemarcated lace. Exile was not a moraltrajectory,andhomelandwasnot a moraldestination,butsimplya place. Indeed,it often seemedinappropriateto thinkof the town refugees as being in exile at all. Many among them wereunsureaboutwhether heywouldever return o Burundi,even if politicalchangeswere to permitit in the future.But more important, hey had created lives thatwere locatedin thepresentcircumstancesof Kigoma, not in the pastin Burundi.Thetownrefugees'constructionsof their ived circumstancesand theirpastswere different rom both the nationalmetaphysicof thecamprefugeesandthatofscholarlycommon sense. Indeed, they dismantled the nationalmetaphysicsbyrefusinga mappingandspurningorigin queriesaltogether.Theymounted nsteada robustchallengeto culturaland nationalessentialisms; heydenaturalized hosescholarly,touristic,and otherquests for "authenticity"thatimply a mass trafficin "fake" and"adulterated" dentities;and, finally,theytrivialized henecessityof living by radicalnationalisms.They mightwell agreewith Deleuze and Guat-tari.

To berhizomorphouss toproducetemsand ilamentshat eem o beroots,orbetteryetconnectwiththemby penetratinghetrunk,butputthem o strange ew uses.We're iredof trees.Weshould topbelievingntrees,roots,andradicles.They'vemadeus suffer oomuch.All of arborescentulturesfounded nthem, rombiologytolinguistics.1987:15]


15/22

NATIONALGEOGRAPHIC 37Conclusion

Anderson(1983:19) proposes that "nationalism has to be understoodbyaligningit, not with self-consciouslyheld political ideologies, but with the largeculturalsystems that preceded it, out of which-as well as against which-itcame intobeing" (cf. Bhabha1990:lff.; Kapferer1988;Orwell 1968:362). It isin this spiritthat thephrase"the nationalorderof things" has been used here (inpreference o "nationalism").Its intenthas been to describeaclass of phenomenathat s deeplyculturalandyet global in its significance.Thatis, the nation-hav-ing powerful associations with particular ocalities and territories-is simulta-neously a supralocal,transnational ultural form (Appaduraiand Breckenridge1988:1ff.).

In this order of things, conceptualizationsof the relations between peopleandplacereadilytake on aspectsof the metaphysicalsedentarismdescribedhere.It is thesenaturalized elations hatthis article has tried to illuminateanddecom-posethrough hethree-waycomparisonof sedentarist ommonsense, of the Hutuin the refugeecamp, and of the cosmopolitanrefugees in Kigoma. These ethno-graphicexamplesunderscorewhat a troubledconceptualvehicle "identity" stillis, even when the more obvious essentialismshave been leached out of it. Timeand again, it reappearsas a "root essence," as that "pure product" (Clifford1988:1 f.) of thecultural,and of thenational,soil from whichit is thought o drawits natureand its sustenance. Thatmany people (scholarsincluded)see identitythrough his lens of essentialism is a culturalandpolitical fact to be recognized.Butthisdoes not meanthatouranalytical ools must take this form. The two mainoppositionsin this article-first, thatbetween sedentarismand displacement ngeneral,and, second, thatbetween "the nationals" and "the cosmopolitans" inexile in Tanzania-suggest alternativeconceptualizations.They suggest thatidentityis always mobile andprocessual,partlyself-con-struction,partly categorizationby others, partlya condition, a status, a label, aweapon, a shield, a fund of memories,et cetera. It is a creolizedaggregatecom-posed throughbricolage. The camprefugees celebrateda categorical"purity,"the town refugees a cosmopolitan"impurity." But both kinds of identitywererhizomatic,as indeed is any identity,andit would not be ethnographically ccu-rate to study these as mere approximationsor distortions of some ideal "trueroots."20WhatDeleuze andGuattari 1987:3ff.) somewhatabstractlydescribe as rhi-zomatic is very succinctlystatedby Hebdigein his studyof Caribbeanmusicandcultural dentity.Definingthe terms of his project,he says:

Ratherhanracing ack heroots .. to their ource, 'vetried oshowhow herootsthemselves re n astate fconstantluxand hange.The ootsdon't tay noneplace.Theychange hape.Theychange olour.And heygrow.There s nosuch hingas apure pointof origin . .. butthatdoesn'tmeanthere isn'thistory.[1987:10,emphasisadded]Observing hatmoreandmore of theworldlives in a "generalizedconditionof homelessness'"-or thatthere s trulyanintellectualneed fora new "sociology


16/22

38 CULTURALNTHROPOLOGY

of displacement," a new "nomadology"-is not to deny the importance of placein the construction of identities.21 On the contrary, as this article has attempted toshow, and as Hebdige suggests above, deterritorialization and identity are inti-mately linked. "Diasporas always leave a trail of collective memory about an-other place and time and create new maps of desire and of attachment" (Breck-enridge and Appadurai 1989:i).22 To plot only "places of birth" and degrees ofnativeness is to blind oneself to the multiplicity of attachments that people formto places through living in, remembering, and imagining them.

Notes

Acknowledgments. wouldlike to thank hefollowing friendsandcolleaguesfor theirval-uedcommentson this article:JimFerguson,LaurieKainHart,AnnStoler,KarenLeonard,JaneGuyer,FernandoCoronil,David Scobey, MihalisFotiadis, the faculty and studentsattheDepartments f Anthropologyat Stanford,Princeton,andColumbia,and at the De-partment f Ethnic Studiesat the Universityof California,San Diego. My colleagues atthe Michigan Society of Fellows, the Universityof Michigan, Ann Arbor, providedanexcitingintellectualenvironmentduring he writingof this article.The Society of Fellowsand a Grant or AdvancedArea Researchfrom the Social Science ResearchCouncilpro-videdfundingthatmade this workpossible.'Kristeva 1991) arrivesat similarobservationsalong quite differenttheoretical rajecto-ries.2A more detailed discussionof the literature n nationsand nationalismcan be locatedinMalkki 1989:11 f.).3A recentcritiqueof Gellner'spositionhas beendone by Moore(1989).4The"real" nation s impliedin suchtermsas Giddens's"classical form" (1987:269) andSmith's"standard r 'classic' European nation' " (1986:8). See also Smith(1986:17) on"dubious" forms.5Webster'sNew CollegiateDictionary, 9thed., s.v. "land."6Extracted nd translated rom a 1950s SouthTyroleanalmanacby Doob, cited in Tuan(1977:156):Heimat s firstof all the motherearthwho has given birth o our folk andrace, who is the holy soil, andwho gulpsdownGod's clouds, sun, andstorms. . . . But more than all this, ourHeimat s the land which has become fruitfulthrough he sweat of our ancestors.For this Heimatour ancestorshave foughtand suffered, for this Heimatourfathershave died.7Clearly, he othergreat metaphor or communityis blood, or stock. But the tree morecloselyrevealstheterritorializationf identity,andis thusgiven primacyhere.Frequently,these dominatingmetaphorsare also combined, of course, as in the family tree. My un-derstanding f the politico-symbolic significanceof blood has been enrichedby conver-sationswith Ann Stoler.8Onevarietyof primordialisms to be foundin Mazzini'sview thatGod "dividedHuman-ity intodistinctgroups uponthe face of ourglobe, and thusplantedthe seeds of nations"(citedin Emerson1960:91).


17/22


9Cf.Kapferer 1988:1) on culturesas the "root essence" of nations and national dentitiesin discoursesof nationalism.'OElsewhereMalkki1989:16)it has been examined how Durkheimian iews of the nationseemto rest on metaphorsof the organismand the body (the female body, in particular)."Thefirstexampleraisesthe issue of rainforestsand the people who live in them. Hereitis necessary o emphasizethat t is notbeing suggestedthatthepoliticaleffortsconvergingon these forests are futile or trivial. Similarly, in the case of the secondexampleof envi-ronmentalism ndgreen politics, the intentis not to advocate a cynically agnostic stancetoward nvironmental olitics, or to echo the unfortunate elativismof a book like DouglasandWildavsky'sRisk and Culture(1982). The purposeis to sharpen he focus on thesephenomena o as to betterstudytheirplace and effects in the contemporaryransnationalcontext.'2Verhelst'studyNo LifeWithoutRoots(1990) is anexampleof such heroization.Lookingto ThirdWorld"grass-rootscommunities"(1990:4) for a "spiritualmessage" (1990:87)for the West, he states:"Indigenouscultures contain within them the seeds necessarytogive birthto societies which differ from the standardizedand devitalized model that hasspreadover the world" (1990:24).'3Thispostcolonial relationshipwas powerfully portrayed n the fine ethnographic ilmCannibalTours(O'Rourke1987).'4Notably,not "acculturation."'5Amoredetailedstudyof European efugeesat the end of theSecond WorldWarhas beendone elsewhere(Malkki1985).'6Cf.Verant (1953:17)on the "refugeecomplex"; and also RobertNeumannon "emigr6life" as a "highly contagious" "corrosive disease" (cited in Tabori1972:398-399).'7Seealso Harrell-Bond 1989:63). Cf. furtherGodkin(1980:73-85), a study of "root-edness" and"uprootedness"amongalcoholics, which finds thatbelongingto a place fos-terspsychological well-being.'8This s discussed in Malkki(1989:57-58).'9Shawcross 1989:29) echoes this sense of the loss of culture: "the poignantvoices ofrefugeesrecall theirlost homes, theirpreciousritualsforciblyabandoned...."20Deleuze ndGuattariwrite:Unlike trees or theirroots, the rhizomeconnectsanypointto anyotherpoint, and its traitsare notnecessarily inkedto traitsof the same nature; t bringsinto play very differentregimesof signs, and even nonsign states. ... It iscomposednot of unitsbut of dimensions,or ratherdirections n motion. It has neitherbeginningnorend, butalwaysmiddle(milieu)fromwhich itgrowsand which it overspills. ... The tree is filiationbut the rhizome s alliance...the fabric of the rhizome is the conjunction, "and . . . and . .. and . . ." [1987:21, 25]2'Onthe questionof a new sociology of displacement,see Breckenridgeand Appadurai(1989:iv). On theconceptof a new nomadology, see Deleuze andGuattari 1987:23).22It s also worthconsideringwhy "to some people the very 'state of movement' is being'at home' " (MarianneForr6,cited in Tabori1972:399).


18/22


References CitedAall, Cato

1967 Refugee Problemsin SouthernAfrica. In Refugee Problemsin Africa. SvenHamrell,ed. Pp. 26-44. Uppsala, Sweden: The ScandinavianInstituteof AfricanStudies.Anderson,Benedict1983 ImaginedCommunities:Reflectionson the Originand Spreadof Nationalism.London:Verso.Appadurai,Arjun1988 PuttingHierarchy n Its Place. CulturalAnthropology3(1):36-49.1990 Disjunctureand Difference in the Global CulturalEconomy. Public Culture2(2):1-24.Appadurai,Arjun,and CarolBreckenridge1988 Why Public Culture?Public Culture. Bulletin of the Projectfor TransnationalCulturalStudies 1(1):5-9.Arendt,Hannah1973 The Originsof Totalitarianism.New York:HarcourtBrace Jovanovich.Balibar,Etienne1990 Paradoxesof Universality.In Anatomyof Racism. David T. Goldberg,ed. Pp.283-294. Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress.1991 Es Gibt Keinen Staat n Europa:Racism and Politicsin EuropeToday. New LeftReview 186:5-19.Bhabha,Homi K.1990 Introduction:Narrating he Nation. In Nation andNarration.Homi K. Bhabha,ed. Pp. 1-7. New York:Routledge.Breckenridge,Carol,andArjunAppadurai1989 OnMoving Targets.PublicCulture2(1):i-iv.Cirtautas,ClaudiusKazys1957 The Refugee:A PsychologicalStudy. Boston, Mass.: Meador.Clifford,James1988 The Predicamentof Culture:Twentieth-CenturyEthnography,Literature,andArt. Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress.Comaroff,John,and Jean Comaroff

1987 The Madmanand the Migrant:Work and Labor n the HistoricalConsciousnessof a SouthAfricanPeople. AmericanEthnologist14(2):191-209.Dahlburg,John-Thor, t al.1990 Hate Survivesa Holocaust:Anti-SemitismResurfaces.Los AngelesTimes, June12:H1,H7.Daniels, Stephen1988 The PoliticalIconography f Woodland n LaterGeorgianEngland.InTheIcon-ographyof Landscape.Denis CosgroveandStephenDaniels, eds. Pp. 43-82. Cam-bridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Deleuze, Gilles, and Felix Guattari

1987 A ThousandPlateaus:Capitalismand Schizophrenia.Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress.Douglas, Mary1966 PurityandDanger. An Analysis of the Conceptsof PollutionandTaboo. Lon-don:Routledge.Douglas, Mary,and AaronWildavsky1982 Risk and Culture:An Essayon the Selection of TechnologicalandEnvironmen-talDangers.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.


19/22

NATIONAL EOGRAPHIC 1

Emerson,Rupert1960 FromEmpireto Nation:The Rise to Self-Assertionof Asian and AfricanPeo-ples. Cambridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress.Foucault,Michel1979 Disciplineand Punish:The Birth of the Prison. New York:Vintage.Fustel de Coulanges,Numa Denis1980 The AncientCity:A Studyon theReligion, Laws, andInstitutions f GreeceandRome. Baltimore,Md.: JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.Geertz,Clifford1983 Local Knowledge: FurtherEssays in InterpretiveAnthropology. New York:Basic Books.

Gellner,Ernest1983 Nations and Nationalism.Ithaca,N.Y.: CornellUniversityPress.Giddens,Anthony1987 The Nation-Stateand Violence. Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress.Godkin,Michael A.1980 Identityand Place: Clinical ApplicationsBased on Notions of RootednessandUprootedness.In The HumanExperienceof Space and Place. Anne Buttimer andDavidDeamon,eds. Pp. 73-85. New York: St. Martin'sPress.Goytisolo, Juan1987 LandscapesAfter the Battle. New York: Seaver Books.Graves,Robert1966 The WhiteGoddess. New York:Farrar,Strausand Giroux.Gupta,Akhil1988 Space and Time in the Politics of Culture.Paper presentedat the 87th AnnualMeetingof the AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation, Phoenix, Arizona.Handler,Richard1988 Nationalismand the Politics of Culture n Quebec. Madison:Universityof Wis-consinPress.

Hannerz,Ulf1987 The World n Creolisation.Africa57(4):546-559.Haraway,Donna

1986 The Heartof Africa:Nations, Dreams,andApes. Inscriptions2:9-16.Harrell-Bond,Barbara1986 ImposingAid: EmergencyAssistance to Refugees. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.1989 Repatriation:UnderWhat ConditionsIs It the Most Desirable Solution for Ref-ugees?AfricanStudies Review 32(1):41-69.Hebdige,Dick1987 Cut 'n' Mix:Culture,IdentityandCaribbeanMusic. London:Methuen.Heiberg,Marianne1989 The Makingof the BasqueNation. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Heller,Agnes, andFerenc Feher1988 The PostmodernPoliticalCondition.New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Hobsbawm,Eric1990 Nations andNationalismSince 1780:Programme,Myths, Reality. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Kapferer,Bruce1988 Legendsof People, Mythsof State. Violence, Intolerance,andPoliticalCulturein SriLankaand Australia.Washington,D.C.: SmithsonianInstitutionPress.


20/22


Kismaric,Carole1989 ForcedOut:TheAgonyof theRefugeeInOurTime. New York:RandomHouse.Kristeva,Julia1991 Strangers o Ourselves.New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Lemarchand,Rend,and David Martin1974 Selective Genocide in Burundi.ReportNo. 20. London: The Minority RightsGroup.Malkki,Liisa1985 TheOriginof a Device of Power:The Refugee Campin Post-WarEurope.An-

thropologyDepartment,HarvardUniversity,unpublishedMS.1989 Purityand Exile: Transformationsn Historical-NationalConsciousnessamongHutuRefugees in Tanzania. Ph.D. dissertation,AnthropologyDepartment,HarvardUniversity.1990 Context and Consciousness:Local Conditionsfor the Productionof HistoricalandNationalThoughtamong HutuRefugees in Tanzania. In NationalistIdeologiesand the Productionof National Cultures. RichardG. Fox, ed. Pp. 32-62. AmericanEthnologicalSociety MonographSeries, 2. Washington,D.C.: American Anthro-pologicalAssociation.Marrus,Michael1985 The Unwanted:EuropeanRefugees in the TwentiethCentury.New York:Ox-fordUniversityPress.

Mauss,Marcel1969 La nationet l'interationalisme. OeuvresIII:Cohesionsociale et divisions de lasociologie. Pp. 573-639. Paris:Minuit.Moore,Sally Falk1989 The Production f CulturalPluralismas a Process. Public Culture1(2):26-48.O'Rourke,Dennis1987 CannibalTours.Canberra,Australia:O'Rourkeand Associates Filmmakers.

Orwell,George1968 As I Please: 1943-1945: The Collected Essays, Journalism,and Letters ofGeorge Orwell. Vol. Ill. Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus, eds. New York:HarcourtBraceJovanovich.Pellizzi, Francesco1988 To Seek Refuge:Nation andEthnicity n Exile. In Ethnicitiesand Nations:Pro-cesses of InterethnicRelations in Latin America, SoutheastAsia, and the Pacific.RemoGuidieri,FrancescoPellizzi, andStanleyJ. Tambiah,eds. Pp. 154-171. Aus-tin:Universityof Texas Press.Plenel, Edwy1990 "Words are Weapons" and Le Pen's Army Knows How to Pull the Trigger.ManchesterGuardianWeekly 142(21):16.Prakash,Gyan1990 WritingPost-OrientalistHistories of the ThirdWorld:PerspectivesfromIndianHistoriography.ComparativeStudies in Society andHistory32(2):383-408.Proudfoot,Malcolm1957 EuropeanRefugees: 1939-1952. London:Faberand Faber.Renan,Ernest1990 What s a Nation? n Nation and Narration.HomiK. Bhabha,ed. Pp. 8-22. NewYork:Routledge.


21/22


Robertson,Jennifer1988 Furusato apan:The Cultureand Politics of Nostalgia. Politics, Culture,andSo-ciety 1(4):494-518.Rosaldo,Renato1989 Cultureand Truth:The Remakingof Social Analysis. Boston, Mass.: BeaconPress.

Said, Edward1979 Zionism from the Standpointof Its Victims. Social Text 1:7-58.1986 Afterthe LastSky. PalestinianLives. New York:Pantheon.Sale, Kirkpatrick1990 How ParadiseWas Lost: WhatColumbusDiscovered.The Nation 251(13):444-446.Shawcross,William1989 A Touristin the Refugee World. In Forced Out:The Agony of the Refugee inOur Time. CaroleKismaric,ed. Pp. 28-30. New York: RandomHouse.Simpson,John1939 The Refugee Problem:Reportof a Survey. London:OxfordUniversityPress.Smith,Anthony1986 The EthnicOriginsof Nations. New York: Blackwell.Stoessinger,John1956 The Refugeeand the WorldCommunity. Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress.Tabori,Paul1972 The Anatomyof Exile: A Semanticand HistoricalStudy. London:Harrap.Tambiah,StanleyJ.1985 Culture,Thought, and Social Action. An AnthropologicalPerspective. Cam-bridge,Mass.: HarvardUniversityPress.Thomas,Keith1983 Man and the NaturalWorld:A Historyof the Moder Sensibility. New York:Pantheon.Torgovnick,Marianna1990 Gone Primitive:Savage Intellects, Modern Lives. Chicago, Ill.: Universityof

ChicagoPress.Trinh,T. Minh-Ha1989 Woman, Native, Other:Writing Postcolonialityand Feminism. Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.Tuan,Yi-Fu1977 Space and Place: The Perspectiveof Experience. Minneapolis: University ofMinnesotaPress.Turner,Victor1967 The Forest of Symbols. Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca,N.Y.: CornellUni-versityPress.vanBinsbergen,Wim1981 The Unitof Studyand the Interpretationf Ethnicity.Journalof SouthernAfri-canStudies8(1):51-81.Verhelst, Thierry1990 No Life WithoutRoots:CultureandDevelopment. London:Zed.Vernant,Jacques1953 The Refugee in the Post-WarWorld.London:Allen & Unwin.


22/22


Wagner,Roy1981 The Inventionof Culture.Chicago, Ill.: Universityof ChicagoPress.Weil, Simone1987[1952] The Need forRoots: Prelude o a Declarationof Duties TowardsMankind.New York:Ark.Zolberg,Aristide1983 The Formationof New States as a Refugee-GeneratingProcess. In The Global

Refugee Problem. GilburtLoescher and JohnScanlan,eds. Pp. 24-38. The Annalsof the AmericanAcademy of Political and Social Science (special issue). BeverlyHills, Calif.: Sage.

Documents

The Rooting of Peoples and the Territorialization of National Identity Among Scholars and Refugees