Content

Erratum. – In L. Trein’s review of the book “Islam in der Moderne, Moderne im Islam. Eine Festschrift für Reinhard Schulze zum 65. Geburtstag” (ed. by F. Zemmin, J. Stephan und M. Corrado) in the third paragraph it should read as follows: in:

Anthropos, page 288 - 288

Anthropos, Volume 115 (2020), Issue 1, ISSN: 0257-9774, ISSN online: 0257-9774, https://doi.org/10.5771/0257-9774-2020-1-288

Browse Volumes and Issues: Anthropos

Bibliographic information
Throughout all these case studies, Were “prioritize[s] the role of materials as constituent elements in the for‐ mation of people’s lifeworlds in the Pacific” (176). Ad‐ vocating an “informational approach” in which materi‐ als condense social relations, Were stresses the impor‐ tance of relations between technical and social domains. Following Ingold, Were argues that material identities are continually in flux in the same way the world is con‐ tinually coming into being (52). However, while stress‐ ing this process of becoming, of things being in flux, in particular the gendered power dynamics and values that constrain, limit, and shape that process are to a large ex‐ tend ignored. For example, although Were touches upon the gender dynamics involved with materials innovation (chapters 2 and 4), he largely ignores how male authori‐ ty constrains women’s ability to design materials that cross particular gender orders and ideologies. People in the Pacific have embraced change, incorporating new institutions, technologies, designs, materials, and val‐ ues. However, as Martha Macintyre in a recent volume on resilience and resistance in the Pacific states “it is clear that one of the most enduring patterns of Melane‐ sian sociality is that of masculine authority over women and the exclusion of women from political life” (M. Macintyre, Values in Flux. Reflections on Resilience and Change in Melanesia. In: L. Dousset and M. Nayral [eds.], Pacific Realities. Changing Perspectives on Re‐ silience and Resistance; pp.151–165. New York 2019: 157). “Gender ideologies that differentiate social and economic roles, that exploit female productivity … and that permit men to physically punish women whose be‐ haviours affront them have proven remarkably resilient” (Macintyre 2019: 157). In chapter 2, Were concludes that the new baskets with their barkcloth additions can be understood as technologies that remake the local and thereby allow Nalik women “to enact new forms of in‐ dividualized agency in the world” (65). However, Were also acknowledges that these innovations could only oc‐ cur because they did not cross certain gender orders. This shows how material innovations are subject to hegemonic norms of proper masculinity and femininity. As my own research on barkcloth among the Maisin in PNG shows, innovations in barkcloth significantly in‐ creased the workload for women – who are traditionally responsible for the planting, harvesting, and transforma‐ tion of bark into eloquent pieces of painted cloth –, while relocating financial ownership of its revenues to the domain of male authority. These “negative” social consequences of material innovation, – in terms of local gender roles and relations, inequality, politics, and eco‐ nomics –, remain largely unexplored. Instead, “How Materials Matter” provides an optimistic exploration of the significance of plant materials in Pacific people’s lives, which is an exciting journey and valuable read for both students and scholars interested in design, material culture, and Pacific Studies. Anna-Karina Hermkens (anna.hermkens@my.edu.au) Erratum. – In L. Trein’s review of the book “Islam in der Moderne, Moderne im Islam. Eine Festschrift für Reinhard Schulze zum 65. Geburtstag” (ed. by F. Zem‐ min, J. Stephan und M. Corrado) in the third paragraph it should read as follows: “Frank Peter greift in seinem Beitrag (Genealogien des Religionsbegriffes und die Grenzen der Religions‐ freiheit in Europa) im Rückgriff auf Schulzes Arbeiten zur wissenschafts- und ideengeschichtlichen Verqui‐ ckung von Islam- und Religionsbegriff in Europa das Problem auf, inwieweit sich in der Rechtsprechung am Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte in Straßburg ein spezifisch europäischer Religionsbegriff spiegelt, ob also mit Blick auf genealogische Konstruk‐ tionen eines solchen Religionsbegriffes die durch die Religionswissenschaft vorausgesetzte Annahme ge‐ rechtfertigt erscheint, dass normative Vorgaben inner‐ halb von Rechtsprechung immer mit klassifizierenden und normierenden – etwa spezifisch christlichen – Zu‐ schreibungen von Religion einhergehen.” 288 Book Reviews Anthropos 115.2020

Chapter Preview

References

Abstract

Anthropos is the international journal of anthropology and linguistics, founded in 1906 by Wilhelm Schmidt, missonary and member of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD). Its main purpose is the study of human societies in their cultural dimension. In honor of Wilhelm Schmidt‘s legacy, the cultivation of anthropology, ethnology, linguistics, and religious studies remain an essential component oft he Anthropos Institute – the organizational carrier of the journal.

Zusammenfassung

Anthropos - internationale Zeitschrift für Völkerkunde wird vom Anthropos Institut St. Augustin seit 1906 zweimal jährlich herausgegeben. Ursprünglich als Sprachrohr für katholische Missionarsarbeit geplant, gilt sie heute als wichtige Fachzeitschrift der allgemeinen Ethnologie. Sie behandelt sowohl kulturelle als auch sprachliche Themen in mehreren Sprachen, mit Schwerpunkt auf den Völkern des gesamtamerikanischen und afrikanischen Kontinents.