Uncommon Futures

41Citations
Citations of this article
97Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, Munn (1992) argued that anthropology had neglected the future as a temporal focus. This concern continues to be echoed by anthropologists, even as a review of post-Cold War anthropology reveals that the future has become a recurrent, dominant temporality in the field. Reviewing texts from the past quarter-century that provide a diagnostic at the intersection of the anthropology of futurity and the future of anthropology, we argue that the urgency for an anthropology of the future-and concern over its neglect-presumes some continuity prior to the challenges of an uncertain "now" under constant transformation and, simultaneously, a desire for a common and open future world. Deriving this insight from the work of Black and Indigenous scholars, we suggest that an anthropology attuned to futures is most fruitful when it foregrounds decolonizing perspectives on commonality, continuity, and openness and problematizes them as the implicit grounds of anthropological futurity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Valentine, D., & Hassoun, A. (2019, October 21). Uncommon Futures. Annual Review of Anthropology. Annual Reviews Inc. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-Anthro-102218-011435

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free