Tourism has been around for centuries and continues to grow increasingly more popular year after year. Although typically considered to be a harmless or mundane getaway from one’s everyday life, the average tourist can do more harm than good when on what they believe is simply a relaxing vacation. In Anthropologist Jeremy MacClancy’s essay “Paradise Postponed,” he goes over the gritty details of tourism that many tend to overlook. Some tourists often tend to overstep their welcome when it comes to being in others’ countries, leaving a devastating effect on cultures and losing them thousands in their currency, sometimes destroying or ridiculing places or sacred ceremonies that the locals take part in (Jeremy MacClancy, 1998:422). Because of this constant trend, it’s become well known that there’s no such thing as viewing or taking part in something ‘authentic’ when visiting another country or destination. After allowing travelers to get involved in different rituals and being disappointed in the lack of care or respect they give to their culture, some events are now reserved specifically for visitors (or those willing to ‘deal’ with the visitors). For example, the Running of the Bulls was an event looked forward to each year by native citizens in Spain, but because of the tradition being overrun by tourists that sometimes have little respect for their surroundings, residents will avoid the event itself and instead have their own private events to avoid being gawked at (MacClancy, 1998:420).
Nowadays, you can constantly see rituals or ceremonies in countries being advertised as an ‘authentic experience’, when in reality, the locals are simply putting on a show for the travelers themselves to bring in money and will continue their traditions behind closed doors when no one’s around. This can be seen with events such as ‘Gol Land Diving”, an annual event used to celebrate the yam harvest. Using pieces of trees, residents create a platform where someone is to drop off down to the crowd of singing and dancing men and women, who are then expected to catch the diver in celebration. As years passed, visitors continued to discover more about this practice and slowly but surely, the chief eventually allowed those with cameras to ascend the platform as well (MacClancy, 1998:428). This became a coveted event to attend and grew in popularity to the point where despite the fact it was still practiced, locals would only take part in it to appease the tourists.
In addition to abandoning practices altogether, residents will also sell their belongings and creations to travelers in hopes of getting something out of their presence. However, things don’t always work out in their favor. This can be seen in the film Cannibal Tours when European visitors attempt to barter with the Papua New Guineans for their handcrafted goods, some of which took countless hours to make (Dennis O’Rourke, 1988:Film). After originally selling their possessions to make a little bit of money on the side, several natives escalated to making the goods solely with tourists in mind, claiming to be selling authentic pieces. With these actions occurring regularly, it’s clear that travelers who wish for something truly authentic will always leave a bit disappointed. (MacClancy, 1998:428).
While tourism can strain other cultures, it can occasionally add something of value to a country. In Basque, politicians were becoming increasingly concerned about their country’s public image and their economic status. As a result, they set to create the Museo Guggenheim Bilbao, an art museum designed to portray Basque as a “European center for service industries, modern technologies, and upmarket tourism,” (MacClancy, 1998:424). The museum was a great success and helped boost not only the country’s and locals’ self-esteem but tourism as a whole as it became a popular destination spot. It got to the point where the once barren hotels were now booked up months in advance to festival season. Thanks to the sudden flock of travelers, Basque started to become prosperous, and their economic future was no longer bleak. Of course, this meant that parts of their culture were no longer kept private, but the general consensus from the public was that the attention was exactly what their country needed in a time of crisis (MacClancy, 1998:426). Despite the fact that tourism can aid in a country’s economic status during a necessary time, travelers often tend to overlook the amount of damage they may be doing to a destination’s culture as they go about their vacation. Sometimes, the tourist considers their own amusement to be more important than respecting other’s practices, and little do they know, they could be harming their culture as a whole in the process.
2. When going about certain types of fieldwork, anthropologists have to pay special attention to the AAA Code of Ethics to ensure they aren’t crossing any crucial lines. This happens to be the case for both Nancy Scheper-Hughes and Philippe Bourgois as they respectively composed pieces on subcultures that are hidden from the average human’s daily life, such as organ trafficking and entire communities addicted to injecting heroin. Both anthropologists had to go around hurdles to determine the most appropriate way to present their findings while keeping their morals and staying as close to the truth as possible.
Scheper-Hughes’ paper “Parts Unknown” was wildly controversial amongst other anthropologists. Many critiqued that her work was too involved and claimed that it took too much of a political stand, something that was looked down upon in the community. In this form of study, anthropologists are normally expected to be as transparent to their participants as possible, telling those they’re interviewing exactly what your fieldwork is for and what you plan for the publication. In Scheper-Hughes’ case, however, she posed as a possible kidney buyer as a way to get into the hidden community. Through conducting her fieldwork, she found herself in various police morgues, emergency rooms, jails, and prisons, sometimes even watching as “living people are recruited and sometimes tricked into selling spare body parts,” (Nancy Scheper-Hughes, 2004:32). Drawing on journalism and her previous human rights work, she went undercover and practiced militant anthropology – taking an active political stance through publishing her fieldwork. Personally, I found myself intrigued by this new method and found myself getting pulled in by her stance on the topic. While I understand why anthropologists wouldn’t normally want to insert politics into their papers, Scheper-Hughes’ piece is a topic in which such a view is extremely beneficial to the essay. With her past as the founder of Organs Watch, an organization that conducted research in organ trafficking, it makes sense why she would be so adamant about her views, I found it tremendously impactful to her paper.
Philippe Bourgois, on the other hand, didn’t dive into the political side of the spectrum. Instead, he focused heavily on the facts while still befriending a few of his participants, taking on a more active role as he assisted them in their daily life, assisting them when they had to attend various appointments or simply making conversation with them when they have free time. Bourgois made it a point to explain his view on the code of ethics anthropologists have to face, explaining that “anthropological fieldwork ethics do not need to be in substantial contradiction with commonsensical, spontaneous, human ethics,” (Philippe Bourgois, 2010:4). The emotional connections he shared with this participants were crucial in his form of study, as he was able to gain valuable insight into their everyday lives. These also offered a different perspective specifically to the War on Drugs, as many addicts believed it to be more abusive than helpful, claiming that the public is imprisoning those that are addicted to things they can’t control (Bourgois, 2010:7). Through black and white photographs of the conditions the addicts live in, Bourgois wished to show the human cost of these movements by showing the individual life stories of the people they affect. As a ‘public anthropologist’ – or someone who “communicates to a wider public without dumbing down…an uncomfortable analysis,” (Bourgois, 2010:8) – Bourgois is able to give the readers the gritty details that accentuate the struggles heroin users face throughout their addiction, offering them the attention and support from the general public they usually never receive.
The topics of both organ trafficking and heroin addiction are often pushed to the side in our day to day life, making the essays by both Bourgois and Scheper-Hughes’ extremely valuable and impactful. They give readers insight to what’s really going on in the world around them and allow them to empathize with the addicts and victims of both respective fields, increasing their awareness and thus achieving a common goal in each paper.
3. In Elizabeth Chin’s essay “Ethnically Correct Dolls – Toying with the Race Industry,” Chin depicts the many ways the toy industry attempted to create more “ethnically correct toys” for young children to play with and boost their self-esteem. Chin based her research in New Haven, Connecticut, in a neighborhood where money was tight and the majority of the residents were working-class citizens. Interviewing young black girls under the age of 12 specifically, Chin sought to understand their view on toys that represent their cultures and ethnicities. Despite the fact that toy companies are actively producing and distributing several new models of toys with darker skin and different facial features, Chin discovered that the majority of young black girls instead gravitated towards white Barbies and other dolls that often didn’t look like themselves. Instead, the girls would give them hairstyles that were typically considered to be “black” and often result to “queering” Barbie, which can be found in two different forms – racially queering Barbie, and the public transgressing Mattel. Consumer activism became increasingly more popular with adults as years passed by, with groups such as the Barbie Liberation Organization becoming big in the public eye. When it came to racially queering Barbie, however, this was more often than not seen in the hands of little girls.
Toy manufacturers would sometimes claim that children are passive consumers, meaning they don’t think much about the meaning of the toys and simply prefer to play with their figurines and not consider any deeper explanations. Chin found that wasn’t always true, and discovered that many residents in New Haven would be confused as to why their dolls weren’t pregnant or abused, as this was their norm. Some of Chin’s participants even went as far as to say that Barbie is “like a stereotype. Barbie is a stereotype. When you think of Barbie you don't think of fat Barbie. . . you don't think of pregnant Barbie. You never, ever . . . think of an abused Barbie,” (Elizabeth Chin, 1999:305). Because toy companies wouldn’t produce such figures, they’d instead use their imagination or adjust the figure to fit the scenarios that they’re more familiar with. To them, it didn’t matter what color the doll’s skin was, as long as they could tell their story through it.
Toy companies such as Mattel began to create more and more dolls of different ethnicities after seeing the desire grow. Their logic was seemingly straightforward – if children play with figures that look like them, it will help raise their self-esteem (Chin, 1999:309). Dolls such as Shani slowly began to pop up, claiming to have a more “racially black” body type, such as larger thighs and a bigger bust. However, when compared to the original white dolls by the same companies, it was apparent that this change was simply an illusion and both dolls had the same dimensions and figure. Regardless, these new products became wildly produced throughout the United States and rapidly grew in popularity, promising little girls of different ethnicities a figure that looked just like them.
While new figurines like Shani were extremely well-received, working-class families often couldn’t afford these dolls. Although some young girls desired and possibly preferred to play with a figurine that looks like themselves, they’d settle for a white figure instead and alter it to fit their lifestyle, continuing in the trend of racially queering the doll and going against toy manufacturers’ logic. They’d make them reflect their worlds and sometimes ignore the subject of race altogether and prefer to focus simply on play. Other girls, however, can see race as something that’s imaginarily reconstructive. In this sense, Barbie can be seen as a site of resistance amongst young girls. Despite being “pre-packaged” with a certain background or particular expectations, little kids can put themselves in the doll’s shoes and transport the “white dolls” into their “black” world (Chin, 1999:318). This challenges both manufacturer’ views and societal norms all at once, forcing companies to rethink their logic altogether.