Paper short abstract:

This paper ties together three of Adam Kuper’s bugbears: culture, apartheid and the indigenous peoples’ movement. It makes comparisons between the latter two in light of anthropologists’ definitions of ‘culture’ and suggests new directions in the anthropological portrayal of ‘indigenous’ people.

Paper long abstract:

It was easy to attack 'culture' when the notion was used as a synonym for 'race': in the old South Africa a twisted anthropological notion of culture became an excuse for apartheid. It is less easy to denigrate 'culture' when that term is employed by disadvantaged people who call themselves 'indigenous', for lack of any other obvious label, as something signifying an essence in their former lifestyle that they wish to remember or to protect for their children.

Drawing on southern African ethnography, this paper ties together three of Adam Kuper's bugbears: culture, apartheid and the indigenous peoples' movement. It makes comparisons between the latter two in light of anthropologists' definitions of 'culture'. It suggests that a return to early modern understandings of 'culture' might also prove enlightening for the re-interpretation of the boundary between social and cultural traditions in anthropology. And it could be suggestive of new directions in the anthropological portrayal of 'indigenous' people.