Explore the vast range of titles available.

The following is the text of the presidential address, slightly revised and with references added, presented on November 23, 2013, at the 113th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association in Chicago, Illinois. I begin by contextualizing the development of anthropological theory in some of the social movements of the 1960s and 1970s, with particular reference to Chicago. After exploring contemporary challenges to the academy and to the discipline of anthropology, I close with a discussion of relevant research projects, new publics, and the future of anthropology. The original address, which included a PowerPoint presentation illustrating some of the ideas, is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb8yLzXPH5M. El siguiente es el texto del discurso presidencial, ligeramente revisado y con referencias añadidas, presentado el 23 de noviembre del 2013 en la 113a Reunión Anual de la Asociación Americana de Antropología en Chicago, Illinois. Empiezo por contextualizar el desarrollo de la teoría antropológica en algunos de los movimientos sociales de los 1960s y 1970s, con referencia particular a Chicago. Después de explorar retos contemporáneos a la academia y a la disciplina de la antropología, cierro con una discusión de los proyectos de investigación relevantes, nuevos públicos, y el futuro de la antropología. El discurso original, el cual incluyó una presentación en PowerPoint ilustrando algunas de las ideas, está disponible en https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb8yLzXPH5M.

After Haiti's 2010 earthquake, over half of U.S. households donated to thousands of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in that country. Yet we continue to hear stories of misery from Haiti. Why have NGOs failed at their mission?Set in Haiti during the 2004 coup and aftermath and enhanced by research conducted after the 2010 earthquake,Killing with Kindnessanalyzes the impact of official development aid on recipient NGOs and their relationships with local communities. Written like a detective story, the book offers rich enthnographic comparisons of two Haitian women's NGOs working in HIV/AIDS prevention, one with public funding (including USAID), the other with private European NGO partners. Mark Schuller looks at participation and autonomy, analyzing donor policies that inhibit these goals. He focuses on NGOs' roles as intermediaries in \"gluing\" the contemporary world system together and shows how power works within the aid system as these intermediaries impose interpretations of unclear mandates down the chain-a process Schuller calls \"trickle-down imperialism.\"

U.S. involvement in the Middle East has brought the region into the media spotlight and made it a hot topic in American college classrooms. At the same time, anthropology—a discipline committed to on-the-ground research about everyday lives and social worlds—has increasingly been criticized as \"useless\" or \"biased\" by right-wing forces. What happens when the two concerns meet, when such accusations target the researchers and research of a region so central to U.S. military interests? This book is the first academic study to shed critical light on the political and economic pressures that shape how U.S. scholars research and teach about the Middle East. Lara Deeb and Jessica Winegar show how Middle East politics and U.S. gender and race hierarchies affect scholars across their careers—from the first decisions to conduct research in the tumultuous region, to ongoing politicized pressures from colleagues, students, and outside groups, to hurdles in sharing expertise with the public. They detail how academia, even within anthropology, an assumed \"liberal\" discipline, is infused with sexism, racism, Islamophobia, and Zionist obstruction of any criticism of the Israeli state. Anthropology's Politics offers a complex portrait of how academic politics ultimately hinders the education of U.S. students and potentially limits the public's access to critical knowledge about the Middle East.

In the recent past, human biology in anthropology was typically theorized as separate from—even in tension with—culture. In contrast, by further theorizing the social, political, and ecological processes through which what I call \"cultural–biologicals\" dialectically come into being, I foreground the restlessness and site specificity of human biology. In this article, I highlight research of three junior colleagues to propose two general processes connecting culture to biology: (1) through culturally specific readings of biological variables that, in turn, have biological consequences, and (2) through systems of global and local stratification that \"get under the skin.\" Anthropology is well positioned to follow the diverse pathways through which forms of stratification such as racism, sexism, and class inequalities seep into our biological beings, influencing states of nutrition, stress, and health, as well as ecology and culture. I show that biology does not stand still. By highlighting some of the restlessness of biological processes, I hope to move anthropology to reconsider a more complex, site-specific, and dialectical approach to human biology. Rethinking biology—especially human biology—in these ways may profoundly change how anthropologists, biologists, and citizens understand biology and thereby care for human bodies. En el pasado reciente, la biología humana en antropología fue típicamente teorizada como separada—aún en tensión—con la cultura. En contraste, propongo que antropólogos reincorporen una biología humana más específica en términos de lugar y dinámica dentro de la antropología, y, además, teoricen los procesos sociales, políticos y ecológicos a través de los cuales surgió dialécticamente lo que yo llamo \"cultural-biológico\". En este artículo destaco la investigación de tres colegas de menor antigüedad para proponer dos procesos generales conectando cultura a biología: (1) a través de lecturas culturalmente específicas de variables biológicas que, a la vez, tienen consecuencias biológicas, y (2) a través de sistemas de estratificación global y local que \"producen exasperación\". La antropología esta bien posicionada para seguir los diversos caminos a través de los cuales formas de estratificación como racismo, sexismo y desigualdades de clase se filtran en nuestros seres biológicos, influenciando estados de nutrición, estrés y salud, así como ecología y cultura. Demuestro que la biología no se estanca. A través de enfatizar algunos de los siempre cambiantes procesos biológicos, espero mover la antropología a reconsiderar una aproximación más compleja, especifica del lugar, y dialéctica a la biología humana. Repensar la biología—específicamente la biología humana—en estas maneras puede profundamente cambiar cómo los antropólogos, los biólogos, y los ciudadanos entienden biología, y de este modo prestan atención a los cuerpos humanos.

Lara Deeb and Jessica Winegar argue convincingly in Anthropology's Politics that US‐based academics face harassment and threats to their careers if they publicly reject US militarism in the Middle East and criticize the Israeli state in their teaching, research, and public speaking. Their analysis of five generations of anthropologists demonstrates that knowledge production is always political, but the thematic chapter organization—graduate school, getting hired, and handling job conflicts—does not explore the historical conjunctures in which the cohorts were formed. The authors’ assertion that the American Anthropological Association's practice of issuing public statements ignores the Middle East and criticism of US policies is clear, yet the association's history of opposition to US policies globally is uneven and episodic. Anthropology's Politics is an important and well‐researched book.

This essay asks whether dead bodies have human rights, and if so, what philosophical foundations those rights have. With equal importance, it considers how these rights would operate in a real-world area of human rights practice, the forensic exhumation of mass graves. It argues that human rights for the dead are philosophically unworkable and irreconcilable with the practical limitations of forensic work; therefore, we should not think of the dead as having human rights. However, this conclusion does not end discussion about what forensic investigators do for dead bodies. Rather, it makes room for a modest but rich sense of how exhumation can restore the identity, physical location, and care that have been denied to victims of atrocity.