This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]

On: 17 November 2014, At: 13:46

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/retn20

Through Althusserian spectacles: Recent social

anthropology in Brazil
a
Otávio Guilherme Velho
a
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro , Brazil
Published online: 20 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Otávio Guilherme Velho (1982) Through Althusserian spectacles: Recent social anthropology in Brazil ,
Ethnos: Journal of Anthropology, 47:1-2, 133-149, DOI: 10.1080/00141844.1982.9981235

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00141844.1982.9981235

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Through Althusserian Specta-
cles: Recent Social Anthropology
in Brazil*
by Otávio Guilherme Velho
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

I
To be an anthropologist in a country which belongs to a part of the world
traditionally identified as the object of anthropology seems in a way to be a
paradox. Perhaps, in part, this is the reason why the choice of research
themes among Brazilian anthropologists has been controversial.1 All the
same, it can also be paradoxically said that for a new country Brazilian an-
thropology is not so new. By way of reference to an international public, one
can mention here Gilberto Freyre's book, Casa Grande e Senzala which dates
from 1933 (translated as The Masters and the Slaves, 1946).
The institutionalization of the profession, however, is more recent, and it
must be said that at its creation the Brazilian Anthropological Association,
in 1953, comprised a very small number of associates.
Up to the present date, there is not (with only one exception) any under-
graduate degree in anthropology in Brazil, but only courses on social and po-
litical sciences which include anthropology. Thus, in Brazil larger-scale
training of anthropologists is directly related to the development of graduate
studies which has taken place since 1968.
We have here therefore three dates which represent an important develop-
ment: 1933 (the work — although not the only one — of a "great" Author);
1953 (the small professional group), and 1968 (the community of profession-
als loses its sense of a "group of friends").
Those with a European background will no doubt be surprised at the scale
of this latter development: in 1954, 41 persons were enrolled as members of
the Brazilian Anthropological Association; in 1959, 109; in 1968, 141, and in
1979, 408.
Aiming at an impressionistic illustration of what has been said, I give here
 134 Otavio Guilherme Velho

some data (Conselho Nacional de Pesquisas 1978) referring to 1977. The fi-
gures were certainly too low, since the ten institutions referred to, although
the most representative, do not include all those dealing with anthropology.

Number of researchers and professors 101

Total number of scholarships 201
Master students 234
Doctoral degree students 44

At the beginning of 1981, the Post Graduate Program in Social Anthropolo-

gy at the National Museum, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, which was
the first to be created in the new period starting in 1968, had 63 Master stu-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

dents, 27 Doctoral degree students, and 78 theses presented (since 1970).

Toward a New Diversity

Prior to the 1960's, what prevailed in anthropology was a culturalist orienta-
tion, mostly shaped by North American and German influences (the latter
generally indirect). Among the subjects pursued were the following:

1. Studies of tribal societies, with a tradition of field work greatly influenced

by anthropologists of foreign origin and by a backlands explorers' tradi-
tion (the most impressive personality being Curt Nimuendajii, born in
Germany as Kurt Unkel). •
2. Studies of racial relations based mainly on secondary information and
linked to a unique racist ideology of racial harmony and the fusion of "the
three races" into one nation.
3. Community studies, closely linked to the Redfield tradition, and built on
a huge, although in general naive, compilation of data.

It was precisely at the beginning of the 1960's that social anthropology devel-
oped in opposition to the culturalist tradition. Most significant in this regard
was the problem of the relation between the national society and the differ-
ent tribal societies. The elusive character of the culturalist approach to the
conflicting aspects inherent in contact and to the question of the very destiny
of tribal societies was denounced (Cardoso de Oliveira 1964).
Therefore, social anthropology seemed to represent the endeavour to find
in the very field of general anthropology an orientation especially British
which was supposed to be able to pursue not only sociological, but also social
and political concerns. At the same time, together with the preoccupation of
 Recent Social Anthropology in B razil 135

maintaining "fidelity" to anthropology, it is evident that this search was in-

spired by the work of a line of sociologists greatly influenced by Marxism —
Florestan Fernandes, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Octavio Ianni among
others — who became prominent in the University of Sao Paulo from the
1950's onwards.
Thus, in a certain way, this is the "origin" of Brazilian social anthropolo-
gy. Since then, however, things have become more complex and diversified.
For example, the specific relations between theory and politics which seemed
necessary in the early 1960's are confused and show themselves as having
been rather circumstantial. In 1979, during a debate with great repercus-
sions, the "sociologically" oriented groups were accused by "culturalists" of
academicism and neglect of tribal societies and their future (Da Matta 1979
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

and Ribeiro 1979). But, in fact, these labels do not seem relevant today, serv-
ing only to stress certain group identifications and oppositions.
The truth is that social anthropology has been broadening its field of inter-
est since 1968. Here follows a list of all institution-based research projects in
progress in 1977 (Conselho Nacional de Pesquisas 1978):

1. Tribal societies 34
2. Inter-ethnic relations (aboriginal groups) 19
3. Inter-ethnic relations (others) 18
4. Moving frontiers 5
5. Peasantry 41
6. Urban social movements 3
7. Urban labourers 28
8. National rituals and symbols 7
9. Religious groups and rituals 15
10. Social roles and representations 12
11. Medium strata (and deviant behaviour) 9
12. Historical ethnodemography 2
13. Anthropology of intellectual production 9
14. Anthropology of health 4
15. Anthropology of education 5
16. Anthropological theory 5
Total: 215

Although rather schematic, this list reflects diversification of themes that

even today meets with opposition among traditionalists. However (together
with the international trends within the development of the discipline), it is
linked to the extraordinary increase of public interest in anthropology in
 136 Otavio Guilherme Velho

Brazil during the last few years. And it is to this interest, closely identified
with the recent history of anthropology in our country, that I am now going
to refer briefly.

Politics and Professionalization

The military events of 1964 severely affected the social sciences. (It may be
relevant to recall that some sectors even came to confuse sociology with so-
cialism). Although not immune to the events of the time, anthropology was
kept relatively safe in the then existing small nuclei where it generally re-
mained identified with "exotic" subjects, concerns which did not relate to
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

everyday politics. It is evident that this situation facilitated its development,

besides allowing it to become a refuge for professionals who could later influ-
ence the course of this development, and who would, under other circum-
stances, have gone elsewhere.
At the same time, in the 1960's, the social sciences did not escape another
kind of suspicion; the suspicion that, after all, they had contributed very
little to the concrete knowledge of Brazilian "reality", generally being re-
stricted to the use of simplistic theoretical a priori patterns (in the "leftist"
version), or to a mythical faith in quantitative methods (in the "rightist" ver-
sion).
Once again, thanks to its limited influence during the previous period, an-
thropology escaped criticism, and was able to develop and in a way benefit
from the deficiencies perceived in other disciplines, making a substantial and
relatively systematic criticism of them.
Also, it should not be forgotten that in the 1960's the a priori patterns of
the Left were basically identified with Marxism, and that the sophisticated
structuralism, developed in anthropology since Levi-Strauss, appeared either
as an alternative choice (especially to the "right of the left") or as an inspira-
tion to give more vigour to Marxism itself; in the latter case, linked above all
to Louis Althusser's work. On the other hand, this renewed interest in the
French theorists was not unconnected with the political emigration, especial-
ly to the extent that this emigration was voluntary, temporary and academic,
in which case it found considerable support (mainly scholarships) from the
French Government.
At the same time, the development of anthropology, brought about inside
the country by professionals of the discipline, continued to emphasize the im-
portance of field work. This had now become more sophisticated, owing to
direct or indirect experience during university training in the United States
by a group which, although small, was very influential in some university in-
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 137

stitutions. A point was made of maintaining a distance from the speculative

free-wheeling tendencies of intellectuals who were, for the most part, outside
the universities. One of the most important silent battles in the 1960's (con-
nected with the question of the relation to "reality") was that waged by the
new affirmation of empirical research against the indifference to any connec-
tion whatever with the empirical. Unquestionably, this more "academic" po-
sition, though opposed by the more general intellectual milieu, also exerted a
great fascination, and sometimes a more speculative interest in anthropology
merely constituted the first step towards a strictly professional socialization
process.
In this sense, the 1970's witness a victory of the professionalizing trend,
obviously made easier by government support for graduate education from
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

1968 onwards, which greatly invigorated the university group and attracted a
growing number of students. 2

Cosmopolitanism, Autonomy and the Theme of Nation-building

It is dear that Brazilian anthropology falls into the pattern of suffering the con-
tradictory influences of an international community of scholars and institu-
tions, on the one hand, and of "local demands", on the other. Neither of
these two poles, however, is homogeneous. It is not uncommon, for instance,
for the international presence to become personalized in certain figures who
will be considered spokesmen for Harvard, Chicago, Manchester, Paris or
whatever. At the same time, these people will have vested interest in defend-
ing the legitimacy and "purity" of their alma mater. In the process it is also
common for the image transmitted to become extremely idealized and closer
to some mythical past than to actual reality.
However, Brazilian anthropology has now progressed to a point where no
straightforward "theory of dependence" will be able to explain these complex
relationships. It is now part of its own self-image that it is capable of some
"autonomous" production.
In this sense, if to a certain extent local demands may constitute a sort of
nativistic reaction against cosmopolitanism, it may also represent a basis for
"autonomous" production. The latter spreads out into a variety of unortho-
dox themes from the point of view of traditional anthropology, giving Brazi-
lian anthropology a somewhat "avant-garde" character partially reflected in
the list of research topics shown above.
This "autonomy", however, is based on another kind of "dependence".
The price to be paid is a very direct extra-academic social control of what is
being produced. Partially as a consequence, the locus of study is strongly til-
 138 Otavio Guilherrae Velho

ted in favor of Brazilian society, (although the variety of themes is extraordi-

nary). Of the 215 research projects listed above, one can be sure that at least
176 have to do directly with Brazilian society (the exceptions -^ probably
partial — would be those listed under "tribal societies" and "anthropological
theory").
When I say that this bias towards studying Brazilian society is partially a
consequence of extra-academic social control, I am trying to point out the
possibility that Brazilian anthropology has in fact internalized this orienta-
tion towards Brazilian society to a point where any "outside" control in the
same direction is to a certain extent redundant. It has even been argued re-
cently (Peirano 1980) that overriding the immense diversity of themes and
approaches in Brazilian anthropology in fact there would be the one great
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

meta-theme of nation-building, tackled in the most diverse ways.

However shocking when contrasted with the image of classical anthropolo-
gy, this idea does not seem easy to discard. In contemporary studies the
theme of nation-building would more often than not appear in a disguised
form. This is in contrast both to our own "classics" and to the kind of theore-
tical holistic essay, recurrent in every generation of our anthropologists, that
explicitly contrasts Brazilian culture, national character, social structures,
etc., to that of other countries (particularly the United States).
Nation-building (or any equivalent label) thus may seem — whether "ex-
ternally" or "internally" caused — to represent synthetically the concretiza-
tion and specification of what "local demands" and the responses to it are
about.

The Hierarchy at Home

One issue worth looking at briefly is to what extent the institutions where an-
thropology is practised already constitute a structured network where formal
and informal codes mark everyone's position.
There are now in Brazil three centres with doctoral programs (National
Museum/Rio de Janeiro, University of Brasilia and University of Sao Paulo),
ten with M.A. programs (including the above three), about as many others
offering sometimes a pre-M.A. graduate course and several dozens of others
offering undergraduate courses. This in itself constitutes a hierarchy which
symbolizes the relative capacity to mobilize personnel, contacts and infra-
structure. One could certainly say that to a certain extent this structure re-
produces (perhaps in a "purer" and more pervasive form) centre-periphery
relations. At the same time, the leading centres are consistently the ones that
 .Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 139

maintain more regular contact with "metropolitan" centres and are recog-
nized by the international community (or at least its relevant part).
This internal centre-periphery "domination" manifests itself for instance:

1. in the importance of the central institutions' evaluation of the peri-

pheral ones for their obtaining recognition and necessary funds from
government agencies;
2. in the supply of former students of the central institution to teach and
do research in the peripheral ones;
3. in the access to journals and publishers;
4. in the creation of models of what is "good" anthropology and their dis-
semination through books, articles, teacher-student relationships, par-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

ticipation in exams, meetings, etc.

At the same time one should not exaggerate the rigidity of this structure.
Personal contacts are very important in securing funds, and the growth of
the institutions has paradoxically made them more and more dependent on
the so-called "extra-budgetary allowances" which have to be periodically ne-
gotiated anew, being subject to changing circumstances and government
priorities (see note 2). The financial and personnel situation of the different
centres can thus change drastically, with strong repercussions on their stand-
ing.
The sources of legitimacy can also vary (academia vs. government agen-
cies, "theory" vs. "application", local demands vs. international community)
so that eventually one may have, in fact, several hierarchies that combine in
different ways and that can usually be manipulated. Not to mention the im-
portance of particular individuals and relationships that cross institutional
barriers.
In spite of all this diversity, however, there seem to be some general con-
straints and possibilities conditioning Brazilian anthropology. One of them is
a factor behind the diversity itself: not being one of the original centres of an-
thropology, and having to cope with so many local demands while being sub-
ject to several "external" influences, one in a sense does benefit from certain
"privileges of underdevelopment", such as the difficult but stimulating expe-
rience of being forced to combine different metropolitan influences. In spite
of all the problems involved, I would risk suggesting that there is always at
least the possibility (sometimes realized) of combining a certain broad
European humanistic outlook with a certain American "disrespect" for es-
tablished tradition and openness towards innovation that can be very fruit-
ful.
 140 OtavioGuilhermeVelho

II
It is common, in Brazil, to regard social scientists as underprivileged as com-
pared to scientists in general. However, what has been said already demon-
strates that it is necessary to consider certain qualifications. Moreover, at
least in one respect social scientists are paradoxically "privileged": in a coun-
try where strictly scientific and/or academic publications and periodicals are
few and poor, social scientists have the opportunity (even during the years of
greater repression and/or depression) of a more ample communication with
the general public (though obviously restricted to a minority of the popula-
tion, an elite). On the other hand, as has already been mentioned, this re-
sults in making the scientific community (notwithstanding the recent profes-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

sional and modernizing tendencies) very sensitive to "local demands".

An identification which tends to occur is that of anthropological practice
with a political position which latu sensu could be characterized as populist3.
This fact is related to the critical posture of anthropology and to the empiri-
cist influence. It is revealed in many ways, among which the most interesting
is the one I would describe as "populist Althusserism". Owing to the impor-
tance of the intellectual production to this trend of thought, and its direct or
indirect connection with other orientations in anthropology, as well as the
impossibility of making here a more comprehensive analysis of all intellectual
production, I will analyze this "populist Althusserism" at some length.
This will be done in the hope that it may help in comprehending something
of the intellectual atmosphere in which Brazilian anthropologists work, and
eventually aid in establishing a connection with other cases.

Ideologies Dominant and Dominated

In Brazil, the interest in the study of ideologies increased during the 1960's.
Louis Althusser's propositions became very influential. It is not my intention
to discuss Althusser's work in general (including his self-criticism) and his at-
titude towards ideology in particular. What interests me above all is its influ-
ence among Brazilian anthropologists, especially concerning the question of
the relation between dominant and dominated ideologies.
In this sense, and merely to have a point of reference, a quotation may to
some extent summarize the essentials of his position:
What does it mean when we positively state with Marx that the bourgeois ideology
dominates other ideologies, particularly working-class ideology? What we want to
say is that the working man's protest against exploitation is expressed within the
structure itself and consequently through the dominant bourgeois ideology, using
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 141

in great part its representations and frames of reference. / . . . / The pressure of

bourgeois ideology is such, and it is to such a degree the only one to provide ideolo-
gical raw material, patterns of thought, and reference systems, that even the work-
ing class cannot with its own means liberate itself radically from bourgeois ideolo-
gy; it can, at most, proclaim its protest and its hopes, making use for that purpose
of certain elements of bourgeois ideology, though remaining prisoner of this ideol-
ogy, and of its dominant structure. In order that spontaneous working-class ideol-
ogy may come to transform itself to the point of liberation from bourgeois ideolo-
gy, it is necessary that it be helped from the outside by science, transforming itself
under the influence of a new element, completely different from ideology, which is
precisely science. The fundamental Leninist thesis of the 'importation' into the
working-class movement of Marxist science is consequently not an arbitrary thesis
or the description of a historical 'accident': it is based on necessity, on the very na-
ture of ideology, and on the absolute limits of the natural development of the
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

'spontaneous' ideology of the working-class. (Althusser 1967:41-42)

From this are drawn Althusser's own practical and theoretical conclusions
which, in a general manner, are supposed to confirm certain Leninist theses,
surpassing their "practical state": the distinction between economic struggle
and political struggle, the notion of the party and its relation to the working
class, etc.
Here is not the place to discuss the relationship between Althusser's and
Lenin's thoughts. Nor can I deal with the broader and more complete view of
the political causes and consequences which their thoughts (or positions de-
rived from them) produced among anthropologists in Brazil. About this last
point, however, there is no doubt that, in general terms, it served to legiti-
mate the emphasis on the active (even "voluntaristic") possibilities of political
organizations, in opposition to the relatively passive and conservative charac-
ter of the spontaneous consciousness of the masses.
This perspective strengthened rather than created the tendency (whose
origins I will not discuss here) among Brazilian social scientists of taking the
state as the main subject of study, and extended it to the study of political
parties. At the same time, it had the undeniable merit of calling attention to
the importance of rigorous theoretical work (to the point of causing accusa-
tions of academicism). In this endeavour, Marxism joined forces with other
theoretical orientations, structuralism and positivism.
This position, however, did not go without contestations, which occurred
on several levels. I am concerned here with the examination of a source of
contestations that, in spite of its academic origin, attracted considerable
"outside" involvement.
 142 Otavio Guilherme Velho

Method, Marxism, and the Anthropological Identity

The anthropology which was created after the turn of the century, as an al-
ternative to the great evolutionary schemes, was always connected with direct
and participant observation of social groups, as well as with an endeavour to
consider them in accordance with their own representations. This position,
in spite of being originally identified with functionalism, is, in a certain man-
ner, capable of being absorbed by other theoretical orientations, either as a
"method", or as an element which does not constitute in itself a "world view",
but is recognizable in different intellectual contexts which can then be
viewed as "akin" in this respect, even when they differ as regards "blood rela-
tions", so to speak.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

It was this kind of adaptation — mainly beginning during the second half
of the 1960's — which occurred among researchers of a Marxist formation. It
went so far as to raise a problem of identity among anthropologists, because
an adaptation of this kind, when combined with a great deal of ignorance of
the specific theoretical traditions of the discipline, seemed to some to be in-
adequate for being counted as a member of the professional group.
On the other hand, this "element" and this "method" could not exclude
the very identity of "Marxists"; for example leading to a stand opposite to the
tenets derived from Althusserism mentioned above. And since Althusser's
thought also represented a "revivalist" movement that, at least in part, em-
phasized some traditional Marxist positions, this meant that the opposition
did not exhaust itself with Althusser. There were other issues of conflict in re-
gard to other more conventional Marxist orientations. As a general rule, the
latter constituted the explicit targets, being more convenient adversaries
owing to the appeal and interest arising from the prestige, the theoretically
sophisticated and aggressively innovating aspect of Althusser's thought (to be
adopted in other ways, as we shall see), and concerning which silence was
kept in respect of incompatibilities. This fact certainly misled the majority of •
observers and even the protagonists themselves as regards the real connec-
tions of Althusserian thought with this practice of research.
Anyhow, since the opposition was broader, when I refer to Althusserism
here I am referring to something more than Louis Althusser's work which is
taken, however, as an important limiting case.

Identifying with Subordinate Groups

What were, then, these incompatible aspects which demarcate the limits of
free appropriation of an "anthropological outlook"? They were, so to speak,
"practical" incompatibilities, they could only be revealed in the practice of
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 143

research. This explains, in part, together with a vague empiricism, a lack of

theoretical self-consciousness.
The initial incompatibility referred to the choosing of the object itself. Evi-
dently, from an Althusserian point of view the research object with prece-
dence would have to deal- with the state, the party and bourgeois ideology.
The rest, ultimately, came as a consequence or was subordinated, not only
politically, but theoretically. This, obviously, has very little to do with the
anthropological tradition. And not only with the empirical tradition, but
with its own research instruments, which are difficult (although not strictly
impossible) to adapt to those research topics.
What is most disturbing, however, as regards the anthropological tradi-
tion is what the anthropologists describe, in its broader meaning, as "ethno-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

centrism". In other words, beneath the Althusserian formula there would be

perceived a prejudice concerning the ideology of the lower-class groups, ori-
ginating in a lack of knowledge which itself reflects the philosopher's incapa-
city to understand other "logics" besides bourgeois logic. The supposed inca-
pacity of the working classes to liberate themselves from bourgeois ideology,
in this sense, would be considered explicitly or implicitly a projection of the
philosopher's own limitations. In its turn — this would be the next step in the
analysis — it would be considered as the reflex of his reference group, of the
"intellectual field", as much as of the political one.
The "anthropological spirit" rebels against this. In the case of its
politically-minded tendency, the result was that in order not to be compro-
mised with "ethnocentrism", it seemed necessary not only to avoid the indivi-
dual mistakes of the philosopher, but to keep away from groups and "fields"
which constitute the true contaminating bearers of bourgeois ideology. An
identification should be sought, not with the "intellectual field", the "aca-
demic milieu", the scientific community, or even with the political parties,
but with the subordinate groups themselves. Finally, the connection is invert-
ed when the "intellectual field" itself is transformed into an object of study,
in relation to which (but only here) the classical anthropological attitude of
"estrangement" is maintained, the anthropologist placing himself, in this
case, as a representative of the subordinate groups, observing their observers.
As a simple illustration of the general consequences of this attitude, above
all construed (and this is typical) in reaction against other orientations, I
quote here an observation I made on the flap of a book (Leite Lopes 1976).
Among these (theoretical) results, we would emphasize the fact that, in 'translat-
ing' the worker's perspective into a 'scientific' language we approach conceptions
which in general are considered inaccessible to the consciousness of the working-
class.
 144 Otavio Guilherme Velho

It is not fortuitously that the term "scientific" comes within inverted com-
mas. It is coherent with a supposedly marginal position in relation to the aca-
demic world, and at the same time it puts in question the radical distinction
between ideology and science.
The studies produced during the last ten years constitute an important bo-
dy of work. The wide public interest aroused by anthropology demonstrated
— especially due to a political situation in which anthropologists had almost
a monopoly among the intellectual elite in contact with lower-class groups —
that it responded to a felt need. These works also show that in spite of diver-
gencies there were some elements which gave them unity. At least in ideologi-
cal terms, if not in terms of substantive theorization, the politically-minded
trend is, in a sense, no less "anthropological" (as is sometimes assumed), but
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

even more so. This is because it pushes to the ultimate consequences certain
assumptions of anthropological practice, such as the criticism of ethnocen-
trism, the insistence on diversity and on direct contact with the groups stu-
died, the importance of representations, the mistrust of the nominalist and
mechanical classifications of the several social domains, etc.
Despite the fact that the group identity of the participants in this practice
was formed through oppositions and contrasts with other orientations, there
was never a true opposition to the presumedly Althusserian orientation.
It is symptomatic that in the preface to the book referred to above (Leite
Lopez 1976:XIV), it is attributed to Weber and to the "German neo-
Hegelian Left" — due to an assumption of "class homogeneity" as a prere-
quisite for class action — the failure
/.../ to see how a dominated class prevails in shaping its own ideology and in de-
veloping forms of social consciousness which actually stands in opposition to the
dominant ideology, unless through activities strictly defined as political by the very
state which is being questioned.
It is strange not to find here or elsewhere references to Althusser and his fol-
lowers concerning the incapacity of perceiving how "a dominated class pre-
vails in shaping its own ideology and in developing forms of social conscious-
ness which actually stand in opposition to the dominant ideology". Also, the
option in favour of an understanding of "homogeneity" in "material" and
objectivated terms is in disagreement with the general orientation of this
theoretical trend but, symptomatically, well in accordance with Althusser's
own brand of naturalism and with that of other previous naturalisms such as
those of the theoreticians of the II International.
It is as if Marx had been the object of readings generating "absurdities"
which are revealed as such in practice. These are then criticized and it is de-
nied that Marx ever said such things (which are attributed to others), and
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 145

one does not question the very basis of the readings made.
The reformulation pursued by these researchers constitutes a fundamental
contribution, coherent with the emphasis of the anthropological tradition on
diversity. This occurs also as regards the criticism made of the division be-
tween economic struggle- and political struggle, which in fact had already
been formulated by an authentic representative (in spite of his Hungarian
nationality) of the "German neo-Hegelian Left", the young Lukacs. Lukacs,
however, was also seriously concerned with the objective basis of this devia-
tion (certainly because it was not considered "external" to the structure). Ac-
cording to him, not considering this would give rise — as shown in his criti-
cism of the opportunism of German Social Democracy — to the equally per-
nicious confusion between economic struggle and political struggle, as well
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

as, in a more general sense, the absolutization of the immediate representa-

tion of the "facts" of experience.

Althusserism Inverted, Polycentric, Populist

Putting aside the implicit contradiction already discussed, what were the
other relationships — more explicit and concealing it — which have been es-
tablished in connection with Althusserism?
It is necessary to remember that during the whole of this period, anthro-
pology was deeply influenced by structuralism. In spite of differences, a
"transverse" affinity (similar to the one we spoke about when referring to the
several theoretical trends apt to adopt an anthropological outlook) between
structuralism and Althusserian thought undeniably existed.
This affinity becomes manifest in the common anti-historicism, anti-
humanism, the emphasis on structures and, more generally, in an epistemo-
logical position characterized by defining in terms of exteriority the connec-
tion between the observer and the object of knowledge, this knowledge itself
being considered external to reality.
Obviously, this should be enough to secure a happy wedlock between
Althusserism and an anthropology oriented towards structuralism. Going
back to the initial point, however, Althusserism happened to. develop favour-
ing certain objects which do not coincide with those of anthropology. The
only means of legitimating the latter in the Marxist field giving it support in
debate and political activity, consisted of a "spontaneity" which involved
(going in the opposite direction, not only of Althusserism, but also of its
"kinsman", structuralism) the exaltation of the consciousness of subordinate
groups.
 146 Otivio Guilherme Velho

The intention was to act simply as a mediator and to "let the subordinate
groups speak for themselves". Paradoxically, however, the basic epistemolo-
gical position led to reducing them, such as they appeared in the (privileged)
analyses of the informant's discourses, to passive witnesses of the reproduc-
tion of structures according to "laws" merely obeyed by them. Or, in other
words, not only was scholarly knowledge regarded as ineffective, reduced to a
piece of the "intellectual field", but correspondingly the same occurred with
the knowledge and ideology of the subordinate groups, raised to the mislead-
ing heights of a similar status whose grandeur ended up by being reduced to
a conscious interpretation of impersonal "logics". This consciousness, not-
withstanding, remained paradoxically a prisoner of structures: not the domi-
nant structures but their own structures.
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

The important difference in relation to the more usual Marxist naturalism

reposed mainly in the privileging of several subordinate logics and structures
instead of the sole and exclusive "logic of capital". Thus it could be charact-
erized as (following what has already been mentioned) an inverted and poly-
centric Althusserism, or a populist Althusserism.
As an outcome of all this, the view of ideology proper would be as a simple
external although conscious reflex. And on the other hand, this conscious-
ness would make the structure transparent, its knowledge not requiring of
the observer any performance whatever for its disclosure. Moreover, a new
and important characteristic was added: the privileged structures being, in
this case, the dominated ones, it was supposed one could (or should) adopt in
practice a basically functionalist approach. This followed from the fact that
inside these structures there could be no class contradictions, which was re-
flected in the analysis of Unitarian ideologies (exemplified in studies of family
units or of the internal differentiations of subordinate groups) and in the way
by which the "reproduction" of structure was looked upon as an end in itself.
Thus, summing up, we cannot say that this orientation represents a strictly
Althusserian position, nor properly an antithesis of Althusserism. This is in-
dicated by the very fact of the mutual avoidance of settling the accounts. It
is, rather, an approximation to a kind of synthesis between Althusserism and
an anthropological populism. A synthesis which, in the final analysis, was a
failure, because it did not succeed in transcending the terms of the relation.
The contradiction expressed, which indicates a real difficulty in the analysis
of connections between the "dominant" and the "dominated", thus remains
open to other attempts at tackling it.

Ill
There is no doubt that the impact of social anthropology in Brazil has been
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 147

great. Certainly, the fact can be considered a response to a concrete "social

necessity". At the same time, however, this has also meant that anthropology
did not escape a certain ideologization of which scientism can be seen as one
component.
What are the prospects? As a hypothesis I would suggest that the very rap-
id growth of social anthropology delayed a reflection on what was being
done. Up to a certain point, this can be a sign of a substantial vitality. Not-
withstanding, the conjuncture (both "internal" and "external" to the disci-
pline) seems to change creating both the possibility and the "necessity" of this
reflection, especially since the social uses of anthropological production are
becoming more evident. In the second part of this exposition, it was my in-
tention to illustrate the ideas here exposed with one possible line of discus-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

sion, trying to demonstrate how in this process questions which up to now

were hidden can be revealed.
There is the risk of this possibility serving as a pretext for a return of the
formalistic and essayistic tendencies against which social anthropology arose.
This danger has to be faced.
At the same time, the result will be absolutely dependent upon the future
of the university institutions in Brazil. These have undergone an exceptional
growth in the last few years, which brought about an exceptional increase in
pressure on teaching at the undergraduate level. Also on the graduate level
— of more direct importance to the destiny and orientation of anthropology
— it led to a stronger dependence on extra-budgetary allowances, to which
we have already alluded.
To give an indication of the growth, it is sufficient to state that the total
graduate population in 1980 had risen approximately to the total amount of
the university population in 1960. This is one among many other features
which have occasioned radical changes in several sectors of Brazilian society,
pushing it much further than would the mere manipulation by an omnipo-
tent state or by capital, and which require a reformulation of attitudes. The
escalating growth has not merely been a quantitative fact or one strictly con-
nected to education. It has occasioned a revolution in the composition of
professional groups, their orientation and research activities. Nowadays, it is
no longer a question of heroic endeavours of isolated individual scholars or
cultivators of a mythical self-education. Here, as elsewhere, one is concerned
with the constitution of a proper scientific community on an adequate scale.
And, in the specific case of anthropology, there is the challenge of making
the craftsmanship tradition compatible with this new reality.
The thorough constitution of the above-mentioned community calls for
an endeavour towards self-knowledge. Paradoxically, the price of this action
is that in the course of its realization there will appear divergencies which
 148 Otdvio Guilherme Velho

previously were concealed or minimized. The capacity for overcoming the

ordeal resulting from this growth pain and the severance from a nebulous
and undifferentiated conception of social anthropology and to have develop-
ment in the midst of diversity and mutual influence, as well as the constitu-
tion of a new unity on a more elaborate level, is what we are struggling for.
In this sense, it is not merely a prospect, but, as a task it is in fact already pre-
sent.
In the last twenty years — ever since social anthropology affirmed itself,
later incorporating new trends such as the one analyzed in the second part of
this article — we have reacted against the straightforward ideologization
which was part of our legacy. We tended — as Nietzsche would put it in the
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

case of philosophers — to act as the bad conscience of society, even though

maintaining an overall interest in what would still be perhaps considered
"nation-building". However, this is a tricky business and eventually the bad
conscience itself seems to have shown a certain tendency to crystallize into
ideologies which themselves became (in a sociological sense) "regionally" he-
gemonic. It would seem that in order to be effectively consistent one would
have to act simultaneously as the bad conscience of society and at the same
time as the bad conscience of those who intend to represent the bad con-
science of society, including ourselves. If, broadly speaking, Brazilian, an-
thropology does have to do with bad conscience, this should be taken to its
limits and include the actual possibility of a genuine anthropology of anthro-
pology.
This constant negation — one would expect — would in the last instance
negate itself and become active. But without concealing (Genealogy of Mo-
rals, II, par. 18) that "if the contradiction had not first become conscious of
itself, if the 'ugly' had not first said to itself 'I am ugly' ", how could we main-
tain an interest in "nation-building" without becoming ideologues? What
would be "beautiful"?
This is the contradiction we have to deal with. This is the concrete form
which among us represents the internalization of the conflict between "local
demands" and anthropology as a science. Disregarding any one of these two
poles in the last instance does not seem satisfactory and would not be consid-
ered worthy of us. Not doing so, however, imposes a severe challenge.
 Recent Social Anthropology in Brazil 149

NOTES
* A first draft of this article was presented at a meeting sponsored by the Ford
Foundation and coordinated by Ruth Cardoso held in the National Museum/Rio
de Janeiro in January 1981. In May 1981 some additional ideas were discussed at a
colloquium at the Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, on the
subject of the Development of "National" Anthropologies: the Brazilian case. I am
grateful to all the colleagues who were present at those two meetings, which were
very helpful and stimulating. I am also grateful to Ulf Hannerz and Tomas
Gerholm for their comments,
1. I say "perhaps", because, supposedly faithful to a method identified with our dis-
cipline, I think it difficult to give complex explanations and establish a relation-
ship of cause and effect based on one single case. I had the confirmation of this
from a reading of the preliminary version of Ulf Hannerz' work on social anthro-
Downloaded by [Temple University Libraries] at 13:46 17 November 2014

pology in Sweden. Side by side with obvious differences, there appeared similari-
ties of intellectual outlook, difficult to explain through any special cultural coinci-
dence between Brazil and Sweden. It is my expectation, however, that the present
work may be able to supply material which will facilitate a more ambitious ulterior
endeavour.
2. The connections between University and State — close, complex, and contradicto-
ry — would certainly be worthy of a separate study.
3. Incidentally, the coincidence is very interesting — at least in general terms — be-
tween this phenomenon and what, according to Hannerz' article in this issue,
occurs in Sweden.

REFERENCES
ALTHUSSER, LOUIS. 1967. Marxismo, Ciência e Ideologia. In Marxismo segundo Al-
thusser. São Paulo: Sinai Editora e Distribuidora.
CARDOSO DE OLIVEIRA, ROBERTO. 1964. O Indio e o Mundo dos Brancos. São Paulo:
Difusão Européia do Livro.
CONSELHO NACIONAL DE PESQUISAS. 1978. Avaliação e Perspectives. Vol. VIII.
DAMATTA, ROBERTO. 1979. Carta aberta a Darcy Ribeiro. Encontros com a Civiliza-
ção Brasileira, No. 15 (Sept.)
FREYRE, GILBERTO. 1946. The Masters and the Slaves. New York: Alfred A. Knopf
(Orig. published in 1933 as Casa Grande e Senzala)
LEITE LOPES, JOSÉ SÉRGIO. 1976. O Vapor do Diabo. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Paz e
Terra.
PEIRANO, MARIZA G.S. 1980. The Anthropology of Anthropology: the Brazilian Case.
Unpublished Ph.D. thesis submitted to the Department of Anthropology, Harvard
University.
RIBEIRO, DARCY. 1979. Por uma Antropologia melhor e mais nossa, Encontros com a
Civilização Brasileira, No. 15 (Sept.).