English

Abdel Hernandez San Juan

The Indeterministic Truth

Popular urban markets in capitalism

Selected Essays II

Individual authorial work/theoretical writings

Free school for advanced studies in hard sciences

Western thought

Book information

Author: ©Abdel Hernandez San Juan

The author rights of this book belong to Abdel Hernandez San Juan, its author, conceiver, writer and composer

Title: The Indeterminist True

Type of Work: Literary of theoretical essays/book

Destination: Readers of writing and literary books, Books Storages and Books Libraries

Sides of Covered and Print Publications Sides: 22.5 cm x 15 cm

Number of Pages: 200, Reproduction: from 1 to 5000 exemplars, Covered Conservation and Protection Sides: 21.59 cm x 27.54 cm, Covered Lectures Sides: 21.59 cm x 27.54 cm

Contents

The indeteminist truth: Constructivism in sociology. By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

The cultural recreations of consumption: The Quids of the market. By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

Memory and repetition. By Abdel Hernandez St. John

The Market from Here: Staging and anthropology. By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

The Eclipse of Evocation. By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Etnography/diálogo con dos surrealistas

By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

Notes

Bibliography

The indeterminist true: Making Sense, Constructivism in sociology

©Por Abdel Hernandez San Juan

   Theorizing the main issues versus indeterminism and determinism in sociology and anthropology, the inquiries, questions, paradoxes and presuppositions on both sides about how best to understand a reality —indeterminism by understanding the senses the actors needs to successfully get it right inside a world of reality –and the restitutions of the actors meanings on themselves in everyday life-- and determinism by paying attention to the objective structures condition their lifes, and discussing a case example in fieldwork, myown individual one alone, (a case example in urban anthropology and sociology), this paper discuss the main theoretical conclusions of my individual research and fieldwork alone in Venezuela urban free popular Markets in the time of neoliberal capitalism, the markets poliphony in culture while offer a theoretical discussion on one of the forms the concept of inscription presents and is evolved to be considered in research method around the ideal type case in discussion.

Keywords:   Urban Sociology and Anthropology, indeterminist and determinism, realities, meanings and senses, ideal types, inscriptions

An Individual Perspective

"Which"

Jacques Derrida

In the end: Indeterminists and Determinists, the main epistemological question

  We want to know a certain reality and we have two options, or we consider the subjects that make it up as secondary with respect to objective structural conditions to which their lives are subject, analyzing these objective structures in the recurrence of data, information or collection of materials, underestimating in their you see what these subjects can express, say or communicate about themselves and their realities, or conversely we consider relevant and essential for the objectification and knowledge of that reality that we wish to know, what these subjects say about themselves or express about them and their reality, the world in which they give meaning to their things and signify them.

  Between these two contrasting extremes, paradoxes arise that relativize them. In the first option, the supposedly objective data of that reality based on structures to which these subjects are exposed, tend to reflect more the reality of the one who supplies that data and the type of relationship that they maintain with that reality that they are unaware of than with reality itself.

  These tend to make explicit another relationship with that reality that involves its colonial administration, in some cases, its governmentality, in others, or simply to make explicit different modes of an exogenous and extrinsic relationship to that reality, such as any ways in which given realities They are valued by the way in which they are disposed of and not by the way in which they are experienced in that which offers them the warp of their relationships of meaning and meaning, those to which any individual, involved in that reality, has to resort to move within it.

   If the data are provided, for example, by a priest of that reality, someone who, more than just, in one way or another, is part of it, the material he supplies supposes a type of relationship to the reality of which it forms. part as a parish priest, different, on the one hand, from that of the rest of the subjects that are part of his reality, establishing a mode of relationship between that priest and reality that is different from the type of relationship that other priests have with each other and with reality.

  It also supposes another type of relationship between that reality and another external and exogenous reality to that which is not part of it and to which the parish priest supplies the data so that in the first extreme, not even resorting to administrative, population statistics , economic or social, it really occurs with that reality more than with ways of relating to it, never with reality itself.

   The second extreme contrasts the first by the fact that it relativizes the fact that a reality, whatever it may be, can be understood, known or even objectified without finding the senses and meanings, in short, a world of reality cannot be known without giving with how that world is endowed with meanings of the world by those who live it and mean it. In this way, the only way to know a reality is by immersing yourself in it for a long time in such ways that that reality involves all the aspects that concern your own life and your own reality, making the questions of that reality your own questions, and the senses that work in it, the senses in which you have to move to move in it and achieve in it as your reality, the very meaning of your things, thus immersing yourself in the senses and meanings of that reality.

  These senses and meanings, we know, can be as infinite as life is and as life worlds themselves are, and it is naive to assume, in fact impossible, that you are going to immerse yourself in a reality, leaving your parameters as they were before. of immersing yourself in it, in reality by making those senses and meanings as those that you need to resort to to move in it and find meaning in your things, your own parameters are modified and are no longer the parameters that you brought, but well Whether it is a reality that is your own reality that draws your attention, as is not infrequently the case, or whether it is a given reality that you want to know through a given specific way of its expression, the only way is to resort to the concrete subjects and the way in which they give meaning and mean their own things, even where the subject you turn to may be ways in which you revisit your own experiences and in the first and last instance yourself.

  Faced with this fact, the first extreme contrasts several paradoxes: that individuals give meaning to their world and signify it does not at all mean that these same individuals are in a position to express those senses and meanings in ways of languages ​​that see that reality, those senses and those meanings.

  Being guided in the world through common sense and experience, giving meaning to things from their pragmatics is not the same as referring to that reality, those senses and those meanings. The individual may have a hunch about the things and the world that surrounds him or her and may not find a language to express or communicate it in the most explicit case. Rather, on the contrary, he or she may repeat stereotypes and give impoverished expressions that They do nothing other than repeat clichés of what is known and, for the same reason, they do not offer what is necessary to know that reality through its senses and meanings.

   But the recourse to clichés and stereotypes, to known ways, is not critically significant because such ways are known in themselves, whether stereotypical or chewing gum, because ultimately, the typification of the social world continually refers to and requires chewing gum and stereotypes, it becomes significant. the criticism that they are clichés or stereotypes, because if you want to find the meanings and meanings that print from within, ways of giving meaning to a reality such as these are required to be in order to move in that reality as your own reality before even You have asked yourself about it as a matter to be versed, those chewing gums and stereotypes do not serve you because in the first and last instance a world of reality that makes sense to people involved in societal courses in worlds of daily life that shape given orders of realities becoming, happening and shaping worlds, it is a world filled with rich meanings that require unloading forms that do not themselves provide the insides that establish and establish what actually makes horizons of hermeneutics and intramundane explanations around which worlds of life, lifestyles, ways of carrying things out, of experiencing them, of experiencing them and of giving them meaning, are so sufficiently so as to be themselves shapers of worlds that could not be such as worlds if they did not suppose to be nourished from within by those relations of meaning that stereotypes, gossip and known forms incommunicate and ignore.

   In turn, resorting to stereotypes and known forms may be nothing more than a way through which the first extreme, itself defined by a way of relating to that reality that ultimately involves its governance, its administration or the disposition of it, but who ignores it, they avoid the inescapable fact that, and in this again, the second extreme contrasts the first, if the individual repeats clichés and stereotypes it is because the way you have chosen to be in relationship with him, continues the same resorting to those things in relation to which, a social mode of relationship has previously been established between the relationship that you represent and the way in which, in relation to your relationship with the individual, the individual has discerned a relationship with you or with that What do you mean to him, that is, when those modes of relationship have established in his world relations of authority to which he has had to resort, such as those that may mean the parish priest who resorts to population reports or data, or such as the authorities of the world in which it operates.

   They can also be previously distributed or established ways of conversing their reality that, although they do not coincide with the intramundane and societal, everyday and daily life meanings with which that individual gives meaning to their world and their things from those intramundane horizons of societal reality, They establish parameters of authority that can either replace the way of seeing themselves and understanding their world, thus not resorting to their own societal sources of perception of themselves in everyday worlds, but to those that authority provides, replacing them with ways of seeing their world and its things referred to their life experience, and provided by those who, not knowing that reality, have nevertheless, here in a Lacanian sense, become the way of seeing it by instances that assume authority, museums that deal with aspects of that reality, books erected as authorities that deal with it, or forms that, although they do not replace his own ways of understanding it, without even becoming ways of dealing with it as reality, are presented to him in that reality as modalities of relationship that demand of themselves ways different from their own of referring to it.

  Let's look at some examples.

  We know well, and I return to my examples of the can pickers and the durofríos sellers, that a durofríos seller sees the world, gives it meaning and means it in a unique way that only by selling durofríos can it be understood. What does the world mean and how does a durofríos seller give meaning to her world and the world? How are the world and reality perceived and meant by a durofríos seller?

  The only way to understand it is to either sell durofríos or collect cans. But since this is unlikely for one since one does not have the life circumstances to give up the type of things one does to start collecting cans or selling durofríos, ultimately, also sellers of durofríos and can collectors, would have to live the life that one leads to understand how one means it and gives it meaning by doing what one does, what if you cannot avoid, once can collectors or durofrío sellers are the subject of something you want to do is avoid the question of how Do you relate to them, what do you tell them? Do you bring them an interview? Do you tell the can collector that you are making a sculpture with waste and need his help? Do you buy cans from him?

Discarded Can Collectors

  If you buy cans from him you decide to establish a type of relationship, this relationship itself as a relationship assumes meanings and meanings, so that in the very relationship that you choose there are already supposed ways of giving meaning to his world and his things as well as ways of mean it, when you buy cans, you become, like anyone else who buys them, a buyer and a customer, but given that the market for waste cans is not a usual market in terms of goods, but rather it feeds back, of a research What can sellers do at a social level about who and under what precise circumstances may need cans at any given time, you insert yourself into an unusual buyer's market that is not just anyone.

   You must appreciate that a can collector should not generally have a well-established buyer market, since a percentage of those from whom the can collector obtains benefits may be, say, the community company that collects garbage with city trucks. standardized, cannot deal with the detail of collecting discarded cans in the different private or state commercial establishments, or simply in places in the city where people leave discarded cans, thus obtains a percentage, selling their services, as additional services , to the same companies that must report the cleanliness of the city or resorting to other city entities that are interested in the cleanliness and hygiene of the city for one reason or another, likewise, some other percent of their work, is directed to obtain benefits from the benefits that recycling can bring, whether for the ecology, for the industry or for saving raw materials.

  The raw material, in turn, can be distributed for the benefit of artisans or another type of activity that requires that material for aesthetic or refunctional purposes, but clearly, it will not be the direct purchase of a already discarded can as if it were itself a first-hand commodity, a not so usual way of relating to him.

  Despite this, in the same way as it would be to relate to the can seller as an artist who approaches him explaining to him that he makes a large-format sculpture in which he needs discarded cans would, you would have to ask yourself not only how the relationship that you establish with him, buying him cans, inscribes you within a given way in which he makes sense of his things as well as his world and that for the same reason, buying him cans and being occupied with how he makes sense of his world and It means they are not things that seem to come one after the other.

  However, you could argue, in terms of ethics, that trying to figure out how can collectors make sense of their world and signify their reality, by buying cans from them, is a more ethical way of wanting something in return when, as At the very least, understanding the economic situation that afflicts and defines a can collector, it would not be fair to be busy understanding what the world means, knowing that he is busy seeing how he manages to survive in it. Suppose then that you buy cans from him as a way of relating to obtain in exchange what you want to know how he gives meaning to his world and means it. If you establish this relationship with the can collector, you are faced with the challenge of at a given moment explaining to him and making it intelligible that, unlike other can buyers, you have to aim for something more in your relationship with him than simply buying cans from him.

   Within this pragmatic possible relationship, you might consider that usually direct buyers of discarded cans might always have meant something to you in return and that what you ask for in return would not, after all, be at a disadvantage in that it would ultimately mean something to their perhaps some kind of other additional profit and not precisely, as in an ordinary exchange, a simple pragmatics of the purchase and sale of discarded cans, in this sense it could resort not only to the appeal to a sense of equity given in the wanting to know how it makes sense of the world when it comes to surviving in it, but also a form of barter that involves giving and receiving, giving something and receiving something in return, exchanging something for something, where what you ask for in exchange is not exactly more cans , but the possibility of finding out how your world gives meaning and meaning.

  This fact, which for the purposes of its convenience could devalue your position in the barter insofar as ultimately, if what it is about is surviving in that world, in no way would you be more convenient to survive in the one in which you are busy understanding how It means his world that by continuing to buy cans from him, between one thing and another you would have to manage to see how you go from being a buyer of the cans he collects to being a guy concerned with what his world means both for yourself and for him, this fact It involves an ethnographic question, in reality, the ethnographic question is involved and implicit since we begin all our deliberation on the relationship itself.

   Do you stop buying cans or do you carry both things together all the time? Do you talk and analyze your own situation with him? You tell him, more than buying cans, I want to know what it's like to live collecting cans and understand it, or do you not say anything? , you keep buying cans from him, and when you buy cans from him, you try to see how you manage to understand his world?

  You bring him an interview, you tell him, look, today I want to buy ten cans from you, but I also want to do an interview with you because I'm preparing a film about can collectors? Or I'm writing something about the city and I'm interested in your point of view as a can collector. removing the center of attention on him and the can collectors? Or do I do work on waste and ecology and I want to work on it from the perspective of the can collectors, on the secondary effects of the industry, on pollution, again, removing the center of attention from him, but instead, compensating his self-esteem with values ​​that highlight his work? If you do the latter, even if you remove the center of attention from falling on that can collector, moving him towards general topics, at the same time you arrange it around the way it makes sense of those themes.

   The artist who makes a sculpture with waste cans assumes a different relationship; he makes a work of art for which he presumably also buys cans, but while in the previous example the barter is defined between the purchase of cans and what In return, it is required to try to find out how can collectors give meaning to their things and mean their world. In the case of the artist, it is the activity carried out by the artist that appears provided with meanings or meanings for the can collector. , among other things because if an artist needs discarded cans to make a work of art, it is assumed that this artist will have meanings and meanings to give to discarded cans.

   In this sense, the relationship could present itself surrounded by other possibilities precisely with respect to meaning, since while in the first case you buy cans without making it explicit how, in buying cans, you would be participating in the very activity of giving some kind of meaning to cans. discarded, in the second a more equitable relationship would be established not only between your situation as a can buyer and his as a can collector, but now in the hermeneutical sense that you would not be trying to find so much with something that would only make sense to the but it would also have it for you and that for the same reason it would imply the relationship between two ways of giving meaning more than the relationship between a way that has not given meaning to discarded cans or whose only meaning is to find out the meaning that discarded cans have for can collectors or how they make sense of their things and see the world by collecting cans, and another who gives them meaning by collecting them.

  If the discarded cans also have meaning for you, the relationship between two ways of giving meaning to discarded cans makes the discarded cans the reason for the relationship and therefore establishes the relationship as one between ways of giving meaning to cans, and once, in the exchange about ways of giving meaning to cans, find the way in which both, the can collector and the buyer of discarded cans, give meaning to the world and signify it, establishing themselves as that which puts in relation their ways of meaning their things and their worlds, through discarded cans.

   The artist, however, although seen by the can collector, assumes this relationship is more qualified in that he assumes someone who in itself requires the cans because he gives them meanings and in plain sight perhaps or probably the one who could give them the most meanings or for whom relationships between cans and questions about meaning could have some kind of meaning for common sense, it could not be as busy or concerned with understanding how the can collector makes sense of his world and means it as much as with making sense of the cans. that the can collector simply collects, at this point, the artist's activity might not require the can collector as anything more than simply the one who provides him with the raw material he needs.

  This more common example, that the artist who makes a work with discarded cans only requires the raw material and is not interested in his view of the can collector and his world, is nevertheless attractive in terms of the fact that, precisely, Ultimately and ultimately, both the artist and the can collector give meaning to discarded cans.

  Let's suppose in fact an artist who not only wants to make a large sculpture with discarded cans but also, motivated by interdisciplinary questions of art and sociology, art and anthropology, is motivated towards the origin of his raw material and for the same reason , towards can collectors and how they give meaning to their world or signify it.

  If the artist has ultimately decided to make his work, his sculpture, with discarded cans, his relationship with can collectors, once this relationship means something to him in his search, will be given in a different way in terms of the question about their relationship. and due to the way he relates to can collectors, the artist will not have to go outside of himself and what he wants to do by resorting to extrinsic or external means to the work he wants to do, to instrumentalize them as the means he will have at his disposal to relate to can pickers, but that same material with which his work will ultimately be developed, he already relates it in terms of relationships between meaning and material, to meanings that can pickers can give to the same matter, the cans. discarded, therefore, and the meaning that both the artist and the can collectors give to them, mediate here the relationship that will exist between the interdisciplinary artist and the can collectors, we could therefore say, here in a rigorously ethnographic sense, that the engagement between the artist and the can collectors who draw his attention has occurred here through the relationship between a material and two ways of giving it meaning, that is, between discarded cans, and ways in which artists and can collectors They give meaning to discarded cans.

  But let's go back to the previous questions to our example of the artist, do you try to find the schedules of can collectors and do you sit down trying to establish a conversation with them? Do you look for can sellers through friends? Or do you better go to the archive a filmography and find out who before you has been interested in can collectors? How did they relate to them and what results did they achieve? Would you perhaps find can sellers with whom others have previously dealt before you? Or you would rather be interested in analyzing how those visual and textual ways prior to you of dealing with or dealing with can collectors approached the world of can collectors and you focus on discussing how they did it.

  Suppose you are viewing two very different films, the first is about can collectors but subordinating the interest in these to other topics, the film opens with panoramic views of a specific city and seems more occupied with general questions about the situation in the city with hygiene. , waste recycling and the way in which a city in general explicitly deals with the issue of the relationship between goods and waste, industrial products and ecological recycling, which with can collectors, the images that appear in the can collectors hardly They can be discerned in the distance in transitive shots that go from general shots of the city, to medium-shot shots of landscape locations in places in the city in which the general environments of the city can be seen, and in the distance, can collectors.

  The text or voice-over of the film talks about the general theme and the city, while highlighting the can collectors as individuals who collect waste in it as a way of returning to the general theme, having referred individuals. that in the city, they are aware of discarded cans by collecting them. At one point in the film, certain can collectors are interviewed unexpectedly, that is, they have been reached from the beginning with a camera that focuses on general aspects of the city and reaches the can collectors through their unexpected topic directly to interview them.

   Why do you collect cans, might be the question here

   Because it's my job, I make a living from it, it could be the answer

   Or conversely, suppose you are viewing a film in which a group of artists appears with the camera in the room of a can collector, in his own house where there are discarded cans everywhere which have been not only collected but also , also, recycled in the space as ways to decorate your house, to give it aesthetics, to decorate it and even to solve its constructive aspects, while on one side you can see bags of cans collected, presumably by the collector, together and then taken to the destinations. in which they are bought, also a partition wall that forms a room in their house, is made with discarded cans while on the other hand, various ornaments or symbolic artifacts that decorate their house are artistic crafts made by artisans with discarded cans.

   In the house in question there are several cameras, in one you can see the artists with the camera taking shots of these walls, these crafts and these bags, while presumably another camera that is right in the same position of the can collector takes shots of how the artists take shots inside the house. What do you think about the shots they are taking of their cans? the artist with the camera located next to the can collector might ask.

   Maybe they like these cans, or these artistic forms made with cans, he answers. Do you like what they are doing? Well I haven't seen it yet? Do you want us to show you what they are filming? Yes of course. Do you want us to leave you a copy of those shots? Yes of course. We will leave you some copies. Why do you want those shots?

   To have them. Do you want to film how they take shots of their cans? Yeah. Well, grab the camera, hold it tight here and only press this button when there's something you want to record. Shots made by the can collector enter the film.

   Scenes enter the can collector viewing a video in which the shots taken by the artists of his cans inside his house are seen. Do you like these shots? Yes, he answers, why? Because they are my cans, and that's how I stay with them, they are pretty, don't you think they have a lot of light here? Because the door was open, I better close it. and they do it again? He asks, why didn't you film this here? Because there was a lot of light, one of the artists responds, oh why did we think so, did you make this craft? The artist asks him, not this one, and What is yours here? All this is mine, but in the sense of crafts, what of these things did you make? I collect the cans, and you don't do anything with them? Yes, of course, I sell them, and nothing else. ?, well look at this wall here, I made it but it was to solve this problem here, this is my son's room, are we going to film this here?, yes of course, this wall is also here, this is mine, do you want to put the crafts In another place so that they have better light? Yes, of course, well, tell us where you want us to film them? Here, there are recordings of the can collector placing the crafts where he believes they should be filmed and shots of each craft.

  Would you like to make a film about all this here? Yeah. Well. Scenes from another day appear, the can collector has arranged an environment made of cans by himself on the outside of his house in the style of a set as if it were a set to make a film, that is, in the of a background, and he told the artists, stand there and I'm going to take some photos of you, the artists stand with their cameras in front of the background of cans that the collector has created, and the can collector takes photos of them with the help of one of the artists, which enter like static in the film, stay there, now the can collector begins to call his family, people or friends in his neighborhood to take photographs with the artists that he himself takes, they enter shots of these photos, who are these people? Anyone who sees these films will not even know what their names are, well yes, look, the can collector begins to introduce the people he is putting against the background, he introduces each one and says, you speak, what am I going to say?, one says, say anything, people begin to say improvised things one by one for the camera, some are relatives, others are friends of theirs from the neighborhood, others are the artisans who have made those crafts.

  As we distinguished in two different ways of relating to can collectors, in one the contestant clearly looks for ways to relate to can collectors starting by buying them, as soon as he establishes a relationship based on buying cans from them, the hermeneutics of the pragmatics of that Intersubjective communication has to become internal to the meaning-giving modes that make sense for the can collector in relation to what buyers of his cans have previously meant to him and therefore, this mode of relationship becomes constitutive of the conditions of possibility in which this relationship will develop, offering both its possibilities and its limitations, in the other, the contestant establishes himself in what makes relationships of meaning that he gives to discarded cans and for the same reason, the relationship will occur in what your engagement will do between two ways of giving meaning to discarded cans, in one, engagement is defined in its engagement by a hermeneutics that will have to be subordinated to how relationships between can buyers and can collectors make sense to one and on the other, in the other, two ways of giving meaning to discarded cans mediate engagement.

  The examples discussed, perhaps that of the artist a little less, could still move from interderminist parameters, giving the impression that engagement is always related to something that conditions communication and it does not necessarily have to be that way, it is necessary to know that engagement It can dissolve and work in completely free and indeterministic conditions, however, it will always maintain its specificity in the same way that experience, acerbity, significance, relevance and typifications maintain it.

  I am going to discuss and analyze some aspects of my individual author's work The Market from Here, which I developed in Caracas under neoliberal capitalist free market conditions in 1996, which I then took and mounted at Rice University in the sculpture court back yard sewall. hall between March and April 1997, which is entirely nourished, based and dedicated, made with and regarding the markets of Caracas at that time. Everything in this work, from its first room, which is based on the world of Caracas peddlers, vendors who sell on the streets in improvised places in which they sometimes also live, to the second, which refers to herbalists, sellers of medicinal herbs. and ointment lotions, is displayed and presented as in those markets, that is, as goods for sale with their prices, goods in short directly brought as ready-mades from those markets.

  When images of religiosity in Venezuela such as Christ, the Virgin Mary, José Gregorio Hernandez and Negro First are placed on the same shelf, those who confuse ethnography with religious studies tend to believe that what makes this work ethnography is a study of the religiosity of those figures of Christian and Venezuelan Christian imagery, is not like that.

  It is in fact a work in which its rooms, 1,2,3,4,5, are about the Venezuelan markets of that time, peddlers in the first, herbalists in the second, tinkerers in the fourth, (sellers of handles , bracelets, necklaces, body accessories and furniture paraphernalia), street vendors in the country such as chicheros, soup makers and carretilleros (vendors who do not sell in a fixed place but rather move continuously), myself as the author of the work , and Fernando my guest set designer, who did the work, in the third room.

   Christ and the Virgin Mary that is repeated as a plaster image for sale are Christian images known to everyone, Gregorio Hernandez is a Venezuelan doctor who was sanctified by the Christian religion and first a black Christian, Venezuelan saint.

  In Venezuelan culture and the markets on which my work deals, its images appear hundreds of thousands of times in the form of figures reproduced in plaster exposed for sale everywhere, not only in open-air markets, but also in hundreds of thousands of covered markets and shops of all kinds both within the city and in the shops of the interprovincial terminals, these are displayed in the work as merchandise along with other merchandise, such as, for example, the sale of carapace of cachicamo, the sale of jars of old bottles in extinction and of jars of bottles in general, the sale of gangarreas, bracelets, bracelets, necklaces, earrings, discs, all of which are included because in the markets based on which I made the work, such images were in them for sale.

  My emphasis and attention was not on the images themselves but on the markets, the ethnography here is ethnography of the markets, not those religious images that are ultimately for sale in those markets, the ethnography here focuses on discussing the point of view in the markets, the carnivalesque and polyphonic character of free markets, the inclusive and implicit relationship between the free market, here the market in its freest expression, the neoliberal capitalist where the entire society is a free market including the advertising exponentiated at all levels of daily life, and carnival in culture.

  The fact that in neoliberal capitalist free markets the point of view cannot be one, as in the carnival in culture, the point of view of the seller is not the same as the point of view of the buyer, both exchange and The market itself as a world and as a reality at a phenomenological level is defined by an exchange and barter.

  It is a form of world and reality, which does not come to your senses as a world of nature or city could come to you given to the passive memory of the senses, which brings a continuous and stable form to itself and with respect to itself. your senses, but what defines that world and that reality is that the material world and the symbolic world of images are exposed to an unlimited dynamism in which things are in continuous barter and continuous exchange.

  Like the carnival, the free market is polyphonic and carnivalesque, it is therefore an ethnography of the one hundred percent free market and its relationship, that of this one hundred percent free, neoliberal capitalist market, with the carnival, not an ethnography of religion or A study of religion, religious objects are in this work treated as commodities in the same way they are in markets.

  Rather, what matters to me in this work is not the ethnography of that religiosity but the ethnography of the relationship that sellers and buyers establish among themselves, firstly, and secondly, my own relationship with those markets as a significant level of my own. I live life and give meaning to my things, both in my career and profession, as well as in the simplest aspects of pure life, my own economy, my own economic prosperity, the way I undertake and carry out my own things economically, in which I obtain profits from this or that through my profession, in which I acquire my own goods, in which the world makes sense to me and in which its questions become my questions and from whose senses and meanings I develop my new questions, it is how reality and as a social world, a neoliberal and capitalist free market, it was later since I settled down to live in Houston Texas, but it was already since those years because I did the work in the neoliberal capitalist period of my life in Venezuela.

  Then, as field work, my own research on the real markets between sellers and buyers, the way in which in the work I communicate how those subjects whose worlds and realities in the work I evoke, give meaning to their worlds and their realities and signify them. Jesus Christ, The Virgin Mary, Gregorio Hernandez and Negro Primero are there because in the spaces where herbalists sell their medicinal herbs and ointments, where these sellers have their chinchales in Caracas, you find these plaster figures everywhere, also for sale. , because where peddlers sell their wares and generally also live, they have these figures placed there and they are also for sale.

  The main reference that I chose for this work on the markets in Caracas, where the point of view in the free markets is the center of my ethnographic attention, is a book by Aquiles Nazoa titled Caracas Physics and Spiritual in which Nazoa maintains that whoever wants to know Caracas has to think about a kaleidoscope figure with which Nazoa defines his extraordinary book about Caracas.

  In the concepts of kaleidoscope and in those of carnival and polyphony, this work focuses on free markets, which is an ethnography of the market, its self-referential room for observation in the work is itself a show casing of observation, the observer becomes vitrinized As in an anthropology museum, in this room, the same one in which the photographs of me and Fernando in the process of making it are exhibited, photographs of me writing, interspersed with photographs of both of us visiting the markets, a museographic inventory of objects optics, magnifying glasses, lenses, glasses, telescopes and tubes to look at their different parts, objects alluding to observation are inventoried at the same level as merchandise as merchandise, at the same time that they are displayed on a black shelf as if they were on display. cases, this part includes photographs of me writing in the work, photographs of me in the markets sometimes engaging with the vendors or simply in the markets as city and social scenes, a room that begins with the text chronotropes widely used by Mijail Bakhtin and that Clifford Geert refers to Levis Strauss's impressions of New York in his essay The World in a Text.

  On another level and as part of this same attention, I was interested here at an ethnographic level about how that seller and that buyer give meaning to their world and signify it, at the same time as participating as an ethnographer and artist in shaping it with the work as a whole. in the evocation of an idea of ​​world and reality that on the one hand results in my own elaboration and expression as a result of the research I have done on free markets and the point of view in them, and on the other, of the results I obtained in trying to be as aware as possible not only of how sellers and buyers give meaning to their world, but also of how I give meaning to free markets in my own world.

 As those who in the free market perform precise functions in the city locations that correspond to the type of markets that I evoke with the work and on the basis of which I develop it, I consider it in my decisions on how to compose a whole that is at the same time my point of view on the free markets in general in which I live and that of those who live in the type of market that I evoke in the work, a type of markets, moreover in which plastic is decisive because it is directly the material most used for temporary roofs and walls in this type of markets to shelter from rain, which is the only one that, in free market capitalist societies where everything is a market in every corner of the social world, can be visually delimited at the urban level like those , the markets, in a nominal sense.

 This work is nourished by a research in which I have considered at a high level the exploration of the meanings that in subjectivity, the modes of common sense and the environments, the market makes to herbalists, hardware dealers, peddlers and street vendors like that world of which and in which they live and as that world that not only makes sense to them, but to which they also give senses and meanings related to their lives as well as to locations in which their living environments come together in the daily mundane and intramundane passage. and your work.

  Also the relationships that are established in these markets between sellers and buyers as the first form of barter that defines and energizes, that gives shape objectively and spatially, visually, but also symbolically, to the free market as a form of world, is decisive. in the work.

  Ultimately, from the contemporary, modern, and ethnographic sociological point of view, the first question that I resolve to answer with this work refers directly to the question that I discussed at the beginning about the diatribes of those two ways of treating a reality and a world, the that prioritizes the objective structures to which the circumstances of the subjects are superdicted, (determinism) and that which prioritizes how people give meaning to their world and means it, (indeterminism, my individual position), I therefore offer with this work an answer mine and my own to this dilemma.

  The examples that I have discussed before regarding can collectors explain the type of issues that were at stake here and serve as a prelude to everything previously discussed and analyzed, to understand how I responded to all these diatribes with this work, the new possibilities that I developed. , the paths that I proposed, the alternatives that I explored and experimented with, the things that I innovated and renewed, the solutions that I devised either through creativity, which art itself encourages me as an author, or in the sense of a creativity nourished by experience and the way I decided to discuss research and field work with her.

  At the same time, from the interdisciplinary point of view, in alternatives to representation, evocation enters into this work both in the sense of the work as an artistic work of high art and fine arts, evoking instead of representing, as in the ethnographic, including the evocation of those worlds, with the ways that give meaning to those worlds, both mine and those that I learned from sellers and buyers in the locations that I evoke, a work of anthropology and ethnography that I conceived from the beginning as interdisciplinary .

Stereotypes of Ethnography

  The stereotypes of ethnography that exist often confuse ethnography with studies of religion, which are very different things, and above all with forms of religion that are diluted in the detail of monotheism or polytheism at the level of the icons or gods that exist. they make up a given religion. Since in turn the social and cultural expression of such beliefs acquire visual forms of material culture, such studies of religion tend to be confused with issues of cultural identity and therefore with cultural studies. In this essay I am going to contrast and deconstruct, with several examples, such stereotypes, analyzing that ethnography and religious studies are different things.

  In the social sciences, dealing with religion has its basis and beginning in the sociology of religion of Max Weber who focused on the analysis and objectification of how the ethics implicit in the modes of attachment and detachment to the world that are assumed in the forms elementals of the main world religions, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam, the origin of the types of social pragmatics that ruined the emergence of both things, the forms of the economy, the market modern capitalist and the spirit of secularization that led to the emergence of capitalism itself and the modern state, the secular separation between science, morality, art and religion into separate and distinct institutions.

  Some of the forms of this attachment or detachment to the world that Weber analyzed in his comprehensive sociology were monotheistic, others polytheistic in their beliefs, but his sociology, focused on the social world, rather than on the worldviews of a given religion, did not deal with of these worldviews and their religiosity but of how in the forms of religiosity of each one there were supposed modes of attachment or detachment to the world, sacramental communion, the oasis, ecstasy, nirvana, among others, modes of attachment or detachment to the world coming from these religions which are at the base of the pragmatic relationship to the world that later generated the forms of the economy and society, this fact distinguishes from the beginning the way in which in sociology we approach religion and beliefs, and the way religions are treated by religious studies, in sociology these are not the center of attention because of their beliefs or worldviews, but because of how in their analysis, they can find other aspects that objectify the social world. , its pragmatics and its ethics, on this lies the main difference between sociology and the study of religions, the pragmatic, relational and ethical question replaces here, in its objectives of knowledge about reality, the religious-cosmovisiba question.

   Certain forms of religious studies may have a certain affinity with ethnography by resorting to certain data that involve empirical approaches to a given culture, but while religious studies focus on the religiosity of that religion itself itself by the worldviews that shape them as ways of understanding or explaining the world, in ethnography as in sociology, it is not the study of that religion in itself, which is at the center of attention, not of Weber's attention, not mine.

  Attention to religion from sociology, also treated by Emile Durkheim in its elementary forms of religion, was developed in a more general sociology of beliefs, not just religious beliefs in the literal sense but beliefs in general in 1992 in my book Bordes y desbordes of Art: possibility of transart and is in general an issue that is implicit although not fully worked on in Pierre Bourdieu's concept of habitus as in the ways in which Parson understood beliefs at a functional level.

 With all of the above, I have defined a position from modern and contemporary sociology, incorporating the latter anthropology and ethnography to ultimately retheorize the latter two. The ethnographic questions raised here have been retheorized from phenomenological sociology.

  In this my epistemological position that comes from modern and contemporary sociology, and from hermeneutics in literature, not from traditional anthropology, thus related to certain aspects in which I have agreed and at the same time worked in my own way in Pierre Bourdieu. , Jacques Derrida, Junger Habermas and Alfred Shurtz, in the first and last instance modern philosophical anthropology, but not the tradition in anthropology that they themselves oppose, I call in a hermeneutical sense questions of anthropology and ethnography, which retheorize and redefine it, separating it from the studies of religion, ethnology, politics and any way of transferring and assigning ontology to the being in itself of any culture.

  It is, therefore, cultural relativism, as the form of knowledge that deconstructs any mode of ontological relationship between language and culture, establishing field work as the general way of being in culture while defining culture for everyone else. aspects that define culture, and less so for the ethnic-cultural and racial aspect that we consider secondary and of little significance for culture in structural terms, that is, in terms of the structures of stability through which a society in the synchronic cut of his now and his social here, is reproduced on both the objective and symbolic levels.

  The significance of these questions about modes does not lie in the investigation of these modes as if they, the modes themselves, were exposed to an observation that would allow us to simply be how things occur spontaneously in the worlds of life. everyday, but that if you don't ask yourself about the ways you can't understand what you lack or why the results you achieve lack this or that.

  Are you a participant observer? What type of participation is your participation? Implicit ethical questions about the methodological modes you choose and follow.

  You are providing me with an idea of ​​a certain reality in a film, a video, a book, an essay, what type of relationships do you maintain with that world? What relates you to it? Are they supposed subjects? What relates you to them? What has been the way in your relationship to give meaning to what you give meaning, to mean what you mean and say what you say?

  What concerns ethnography with respect to the world and reality is that for one reason or another something more important in that world and with respect to it than the simple course or passage of things, questions about that world and that reality matter and More than that, it matters under what type of puzzles, assumptions, ideologies or assumptions we ask our questions and offer interpretations, readings, points of view, senses and meanings about the world and reality.

  Ask yourself about these or those possibilities, for example, regarding the person whom you hope means your world, and you find yourself repeating gossip and stereotypes when in reality you could be left unaware of the fact that that individual could be repeating stereotypes because the way in which you have found him, he has lacked or suffered from adequate modes of relationship which would have allowed that same individual to provide a reading or interpretation much richer in senses and meanings with respect to his world and his reality.

Notes

  1-In this paper I am mainly sustaining a thesis, a reality and a world, any reality and any world may be defined as reality or as a world because we are making a sense of it, not matter if we are speaking about oneself reality as it is mostly in my books on my own everyday life experiences and environments worlds and realities or about someone reality we may know, to understand a reality the crucial point is about how things should make sense to work and to make things work adequately and successfully.        

  From this point of view, regarding the ethnomethodological dilemma Habermas clearly pointed out about how to deal with the fact of being at the same time someone who experience a reality and someone who additionally have questions about such a reality and become motivated to commit himself with moving over or beyond simply living it, to also produce a theory on it, to understand or explain it better, almost everything revolves in pragmatism. 

  Before answering this exciting series of questions we may discuss, critique and deconstruct several stereotypes that reduced and limited in the past the issue itself about how to, beyond just living a reality, also trying to understand it and create a theory on it. To this point we may clearly say out that all the discussion finally and ultimately end around a versus between two opposites, indeterminism and determinism. 

  I am myself indeterminist and all I discussed is developed from indeterminism, but I also discussed a general reconstruction on how this opposed poles affected the specific issue of this paper in question.    

  In the first part, after making distinctions between contemporary, modern sociology versus religion studies, I offered and discussed a comprehensive analysis on indeterminism (my position) and determinism as the primary epistemological contrast from which, my theory begin, the basis for a comprehension of the world of life involvement as a matter of sense, on how things make sense to people and to ourselves in everyday life, a theory that finish by proposing engagement should be theorized in everyday life around everyday life situations as it is already in society and culture before any research questions and or intervention on it, but as it is already given in mundane, quotidian, spontaneous daily life happens.

  In the second part I procedure by discussing alternatives around people whose market work economy of survival consist about colleting soft drink containers in the city to recycling it such as coke, diet coke, pepsicole, orange, limon, etc., which become the interest of research attention discussing ways to deliver my theory and how it worked at my work as single author The Market from Here. 

References

Bourdieu Pierre, Things Said, Gedisa

Habermas Junger, The Problem of Comprehension in Social Sciences, Theory of Communicative Action, Beacon Press, Boston

Habermas Junger, The Problems of Understanding in Social Sciences, Pp, 144-196, Theory of Communicative Action, Volume I, Taurus

Habermas, Junger The Theory of Rationalization in Max Weber, Pp, 197-250, Theory of Communicative Action, Taurus

Schütz Alfred, The Knowledge in the Worlds of Everyday Life, edited by Schutz's wife Ilse Heim with Thomas Luckmann

Tyler Stephen A, on the markets in India, A POINT OF ORDER, Pp 133-135, Rice University studies, 1973-1974, USA 

Cultural recreations of consumption: the Quids of the market

©Por Abdel Hernandez San Juan

This paper discusses a theory of participant observation in cultural anthropology research method concluded as result of my fieldwork in urban sociology and urban anthropology in the popular markets of Venezuela during three years. The paper discusses with my own experience in the markets out there in the streets how a phenomenological analysis of the markets based in my own body experience gaved form to an hermeneutic theory of participant observation which moved it into completely new parameters toward dissolution of the observer under a phenomenological fusions between hermeneutic and comprehension with the body full evolved in fieldwork and without external observer.  

    the paper discusses the phenomenological characteristic of the popular markets of Venezuela, the relation between verbal and nonverbal communications, the pregiven phenomenological conditions inside markets to the way of seen and being seen, the relationships between vendors and purchasers and the multiplicity of a multisensorial universe in intersubjectives relations, the market itself as a mise in scene around barters, between others things, 

    From recalling my previous usual ways to be in the markets as a simple purchaser who enjoyed it from everyday life on weekends to the idea of a silent observer of details to late seen how the position of the observer is deconstructed  since to get The quickness grasp of the Markets phenomenology and hermeneutics need to be related, when becoming immersed and submerged was a condition to compression

    the paper discusses the popular markets as a well delimited cultural tradition itself, a urban custom phenomena defined by the cultural recreations of consume and how discussing together issues of fieldwork and issues of the culture in question, helps to enrich rather than to stereotype and limit, the immersion in cultural values, like the visual imageries of carnival, about which usually this kind of markets of barters are interestingly related in terms of symbolic theory, popular urban markets are both visually and in terms of urban culture a well delimited phenomena to the body alive memory as to culture itself.                  

Keywords: the urban popular markets of Venezuela, cultural Anthropology, phenomenology and hermeneutic, participant observation

   The question of cultural recreations of consumption that will focus the whole of this essay, acquires more interest in my perspective for anthropological and theoretical research, carrying out field work for two years in its first moment before beginning to do my work of experimental ethnography The Market from Here, in urban markets which do not constitute themselves, from a physical point of view, as may be the case of towns, villages, or precise social groups, human groups linked together by kinship relations or social affiliations such as clans or tribes, but of human groups that meet in urban spaces to deploy their businesses, their bussines and their sales, I am beginning to become aware of this.

  In a society like the Venezuelan one, in the years in which I did this research, the neoliberal capitalist culture of that time was governed by the transnationalization of economics, the incorporation into the global monetary and financial system, urban markets as a form of material and visual culture expressed in barter. and transactions, reflected in the image of urban traffic, the more general traffic in which the general processes of the economy took shape.

  The aforementioned, however, does not mean that, as in finance and the credit system of abstract capital, these markets dissolve into abstractions. If something makes them attractive and unique for sociological and anthropological work, it is that they are precisely the only ways culturally tangible and visible in which the market is expressed as a form of culture with its enclaves, its sites, its locations and its forms of assimilation and deployment of social groups.

   The question that I intend to focus on in this essay, as I said, is that of cultural recreations of consumption in their relevance to theoretical anthropological research, but I will do so, however, not to refer to what these markets are in themselves, as I did in others. times, but rather to discuss the specificities that arise for the research methodology in the relationship between the forms of the epistemological cut between the subject and the object, on the one hand, as a problem of theory of knowledge, epistemology and the modes of textual construction expressed in its two forms, as forms of writing that oneself writes into text, once again what Geertz calls self-locations in the ways of solving the relationship between the textual modes of writing and the scriptural mise-en-scenes of the work of field, and as forms of textual construction in the production of hermeneutics of culture between the text of writing and that of culture, as well as the relationship between the latter, and the very problematic of the ways of elucidating well reconsidered in reflection , well taken up by their ways of occurring in the experience itself and in the direct relationship from and with the markets, the very question of field work around the question of the forms of participant observation.

   But since the markets themselves in question do not make up, in what cuts them out there and there in urban and social reality, totalities whose whole can be cut out as the set of some social formation considered in the traditional sense, that is , given that these markets, although they do make up conglomerates in urban and visual terms, are not themselves, which limits them as ways of meeting human beings in the activity of barter and the exchange of goods for money, social groups that We consider groups cohesive by links of consanguinity, lineage, race, ethnicity, or even social groups in the sense in which we define this concept in urban sociology, the traditional problem that has been posed to field work both for contemporary urban sociology and for Anthropology is in question.

  In the urban popular markets where I did field work, it is not about social groups united among themselves by relations of ethnicity, race or lineage, nor even about traditions that can be considered those of a Persian culture, but rather it is about first and foremost last instance of the market itself as a form of culture, the market as a cultural tradition, a type of market that expresses visible human beings involved in transactions of objects in its societal levels of economic barter, the most concrete visual image that we can have. and money, which at another level in the abstract market of the financial system are economic transactions.

  In order for what I want to discuss to be understood in the least complicated way possible, it will first be necessary to refresh with details what types of markets we are talking about and what types of diatribes are presented in these to participant observation.

  As I explained in another essay, these urban markets are generally of two types, either they are deployed within and around architectural buildings that are assigned to them as legal areas in which they can do so, an occasion in which generally the The seller has a cubicle or space that can be rented, purchased or owned at once, which is part of the architecture of a large building that has been emptied or arranged for that functionality, or is treated, as it begins to occur already from the very peripheries of those legal locations, of construction systems devised and created by the same vendors designed to camp in an area under the ceiling by installing tubes, usually mountable and dismountable, around which with various materials such as strong tarps, coils of double-reinforced transparent plastic and fabric, which usually, through the use of wires and other tie-down systems, provide them with roofed huts created by themselves in which they sit and display the merchandise on counters and tables.

  This type of markets built by the same vendors in the open, as I said, begins to occur in the surroundings and on the peripheries of those architectural buildings that have been assigned by the government in power as the area in which sales can be made. legally, within which the sales activity generally occurs in the form of cubicles of greater or lesser size which are either rooms or fragments of rooms belonging to those constructions reused for the purposes of the sale or They are built with sementó in relation to that architecture, many of them have a shape or appearance that recalls the image of the closets in which clothes are stored, only that they would be like a collection of many closets all open without doors next to each other inside. of each of which, with added counters, stands the seller with his merchandise displayed.

  It is around this type of markets that open markets self-built by vendors are deployed on their peripheries, which on the outskirts of these buildings start from their very doors, on the outside they cover that block but can then be deployed in their surroundings. up to almost five hundred meters around, highlighting the entrance and exit area of ​​the large market,

  This principle, which can be clearly seen in the Quinta Crespo market, is the same one that is repeated in the interprovincial terminals; in the latter, the terminal building itself is the one that has been architecturally arranged for the legal deployment of vendors in areas of the building that usually surround and form part of it, the part where passengers sit waiting for the buses and through which the latter enter to be boarded, this principle is repeated because then around the sales niches that are displayed Within the same architecture of the terminal, systems of vendors who build their own covered campsites where they sell their merchandise begin to unfold from the moment the streets begin.

  Between one thing and the other, the seller who sells inside a secluded cubicle that is part of the architecture and the seller who is deployed in its peripheries with his own roofed outdoor construction systems, then the other two types of sellers take place. , the peddlers, who take advantage of the situation to display the merchandise in an improvised way in areas they choose where they put fabrics, nylon or canvas on the floor and display the merchandise there, or the street vendors who walk with the merchandise on their bodies and hawk it. and selling it from the same places where the passengers are seated, to the areas through which consumers and buyers circulate when they buy from the sellers in the sementó cubicles or when they buy from the sellers who have their self-built and roofed markets on their peripheries. forming together the stallholder, the vendor camped in the open air, the peddler who improvises his merchandise on the ground and the street vendor, the main visual and urban configuration of an area of ​​around five hundred square meters that makes up what we call popular urban markets.

  There are, however, significant differences between these two markets just described, the Quinta Crespo market and the interprovincial terminal markets and a wholesale market such as the car market. In the latter, it is not a multi-story building with two blocks at a time. round that has been arranged in its entirety so that this type of markets can legally occur therein.

  The wholesale car market, by its very nature of being a wholesale market and above all because it is the main wholesale market in Caracas, through which all merchandise arriving from the rest of the country to the capital must necessarily pass, has very different characteristics. , the latter, which, moreover, does not occur like the others, in the very center of the city or in the terminals, but approximately fifty kilometers outside the city, consists of an area of ​​streets made up of warehouses, These large warehouses are generally each owned by a distributor. This distributor receives from the rest of the country the type of merchandise that he distributes weekly in his warehouse and on one side of the warehouse, which is usually, from the point of view of the streets through which one travels, the same side for everyone, a large warehouse mat is deployed openly, through which the interior of the warehouse with all the stored merchandise to be distributed becomes visible to the visitor.

  The buyer in the car market is generally not a person walking but is usually trucks of very different sizes driven by their private owners, small and large trucks, small vans or vans that come to the warehouses to buy the merchandise stored by them. the distributors in those warehouses, in this sense it is a wholesale relationship between distributors, the one who stores it is a distributor owner who has bought the merchandise from the one who brings it from the rest of the country in trucks, the one who comes to buy it from him It is then a smaller distributor, not a wholesaler but a retailer, who will generally distribute that merchandise in Caracas or sell it directly.

  Now, because these warehouse gates do not generate sales and purchases to people who come directly to buy, but only sales to trucks that will redistribute the merchandise, through the back of those warehouses, which is where their owners receive the merchandise. From the rest of the country, temporary parking spaces are created by the same distributors who have brought the merchandise from the rest of the country. The latter, in addition to selling their merchandise wholesale to the owners of the warehouses during the days in which they have made the long trip, they stop their trucks or vans and prepare to sell, in this way people come from Caracas to buy directly from them and, especially on weekends, a sale and a purchase is generated that also includes the circulation of people walking, They barter and buy around which, then, and this is a main characteristic of the car market, there circulates a forklift dealer who is continually moving with forklifts full of merchandise, these forklifts, central in the visual warp of the car market and who There are thousands of them, they continuously communicate to the truck driver who arrives from the rest of the country that after selling his merchandise to the warehouse owners, he is preparing to sell the rest to direct pedestrians, to that direct buyer, to the owner of the warehouse that is selling to trucks. retailers and the latter.

  Three more types of markets must then be added to the characteristics of the quinta crespo market and the interprovincial bus terminals, on the one hand, and to the characteristics of the car market, on the other, and these three additional types of markets will be decisive if not central to the analysis and understanding of the popular urban market, it is now the culturally strongest of these markets, which is a market similar to the one that is deployed in the outskirts or peripheries that I described before, the one made up of sellers who have themselves created the market. construction system of your stall or place of sale formed by large tubes and wood that act as a structure which they cover with canvas, plastic and fabric, tying it with wire and other roofing means, but which are no longer deployed as the periphery of a defined assigned legal area by a masonry building in architecture, but now they enjoy the possibility that they can freely dispose of an entire area of ​​the city that is granted to them so that they can legally deploy.

  This area that is given to them generally makes up a large boulevard and can cover approximately two square kilometers. It includes hundreds of thousands of these vendors who can be deployed camping on the streets, in the parks and on the boulevards of that area of ​​the city, the The characteristics of this type of market, the most important at an anthropological level, are given in that its legality is defined not by a principle of urban engineering and civil architecture but by a relatively recreational and festive ceremonial principle related to cultural traditions but not, as It occurs in carnival and other forms of cultural celebration in the sense of celebrating a cultural tradition that is itself foreign to the market but in the sense of celebrating the market itself as a popular cultural tradition. Examples of this market are the Barquisimeto market in a province so called several hours from Caracas and in Caracas the Katia market that takes place in a residential area characterized by central pedestrian parks between streets but that is spread along the tangents and branches of streets for several kilometers around.

   And this is one of the main conclusions of the first stage of my field work alone, it is the same urban cultural tradition, shopping, going out to markets, meeting the community in places of purchase and sale, the small public square of the market, as in the sense in which as a tradition it is intertwined with customs, customs, folklores, lifestyles and the ordinary sense of the daily life of the people, a phenomenon that after concluding it, the investigation Regarding the fact that popular urban markets are ritual ceremonies that have barter as their basic principle, I began to investigate it not only live but also in the visual archives of the cultural memory of Caracas.

  These are contemporary forms of markets in the sense of their urban character in which a neoliberal capitalist sense of the merchandise governs, the private owner of his business and his business without any type of intervention from the state, whose sale is governed by a free monetary and economic system but it is, however, at the same time, although they are not exclusively agricultural and food markets, but include a wide array of merchandise focused on clothing, decoration and adornment of the body, the sale of artifacts for domestic setting and props and in different forms of visual symbolism of culture including bodily health and religion, of a market that is itself a cultural tradition, a ceremonial and ritual form of culture, in fact, from the point In view of their characteristics in the relationship with the type of seller, the city and the culture, they are very similar, if not almost the same, to the agricultural markets of the city of Los Angeles as I was able to know and do field work in the latter when They were deployed in the area around the Los Angeles Public Library between the months of January and February of 2003.

   I will call these last boulevard markets because it is generated around them, although that area of ​​the city is not considered a boulevard in itself, a type of pedestrian traffic of shoppers who walk through them, this is the current expression of the once a public square of the Sunday market intrinsically related to the cultural tradition of the market as a form of culture in the city which itself forms a boulevard from the moment it unfolds in the form of hundreds of thousands of these vendors who camp on both sides of the street for kilometers around, it certainly stops forming that boulevard at times of the year when the market is not deployed, but it maintains certain relations anthropologically with that other one that, before being a market, is in itself considered a boulevard on which markets are then displayed.

  Two more types of markets are added to this type of markets, which also acquire anthropological relevance for other reasons, on the one hand, in the same way that the seller who camps with his own construction system has the autonomy of his market form in The latter, which I have described and defined as the most significant for anthropological research, are very distant and not at all related as the first described, to issues of civil engineering and architecture, also the peddler or improvised salesman, who before we saw only on the peripheries of the first and second type of markets discussed, there are autonomies for their market forms and this autonomous form is then deployed in the form of high social density markets around areas of high traffic and pedestrian traffic in the city such as the entrances and the subway exits, and some pedestrian enclaves in the colonial and old part of the city such as Baral Avenue, as well as pedestrian crossings such as arcades and tunnels.

  Finally we have the rural highway market that we cannot consider an urban market since it is directly assumed by sellers who live in the towns surrounding the highways and whose main buyer is the people who travel in cars or buses between one province and another, these markets , built of wood and directly with tree trunks, as well as with thatched roofs and different types of plant leaves, are essentially cocoa, casabe and cassava markets on the avenues that connect Caracas with the eastern part in the direction of Anzoátegui. fruits, also include the sale of cooked foods based on corn such as cachapa with cheese, and on the avenues that connect Caracas with the west of the country in the direction of Mérida and the páramo pottery markets, essentially ceramics intended for household utensils such such as ceramic cups and pots, Andean and indigenous crafts and fabrics such as hammocks, blankets, bedspreads, tablecloths and other types of weaving such as basketry.

  What characterizes man in this type of circumstances according to the different types of market that I have referred to and what are the challenges of sociological, anthropological and ethnographic research of these markets both from the point of view of research and its cuts for textual and from the point of view of field work and forms of participant observation out there.

   We are not investigating a village or a town, but a clan, a tribe, or a family. In some cases, the situation may arise in which a particular cubicle belongs not to an individual owner-seller but to a couple with children or a family, but nothing guarantees that the seller who will be next to you on the left and the one who will follow on your right do not have any type of family relationship, but rather that they are sellers associated by ties of friendship or simply people who run their businesses individually, so that nothing allows what relates to these conglomerates as human groups that meet in their spaces, to be referred to questions of kinship.

  In the same way, the seller from whom you are buying may be black, but the one next to him is white, the next one after him is mestizo, the next ten cubicles are carried by whites, the next two are Indians and the next three are black. , there is no way to study these markets according to kinship or racial principles, but even if one wanted to force one's hand to study these markets in an ethnic-cultural sense, in no other place than in the markets is the human being further from the elements ethnic-cultural in that which brings together other human beings and relates them around buying, selling and bartering, rather than in a market.

  To discuss here the modes of participant observation, I have concluded, based on my direct experience, to superimpose and contrast the relationships between two ways of asking questions, for which, in a first modality I am going to assume, which happened to me with continuous frequency, that when you go to the market with the intention not only of buying as you have done before most of the time in your life, but this time also of trying to understand them and write about them, it is difficult to stop going that time too. shopping among other things because it becomes almost impossible to immerse yourself in these markets surrounded by offers and products for sale, not to feel tempted and often more than seduced in need of shopping, the question that this raises then places us for the discussion of the forms of participant observation first and foremost in the face of the relationship that this diatribe raises, that of how to resolve in one's own experience that relates and distinguishes the experience accumulated in the pure life of having gone a number of long years from its life to the markets by the sole need to go shopping without even having considered research on it, of those times when from a certain moment onwards a research project begins to aim for something more than just going shopping to do field work on them.

  This fact, which in itself brings to the foreground and validates at an anthropological level the fact that the project in question activates in one and in one's own experience to take up, revisit, go to and resume the interest that this new way of seeing one's life has. in relation to the markets, the accumulated experience that one had had before without asking research questions.

  From the first time I saw myself in one of these markets, visiting them with an additional intention to the mere fact of spending my weekend shopping as a simple necessity of life, my first question and the first thing that came to my mind was around of this diatribe that was not yet about how to relate to sellers and buyers but about how to relate in my own collection a previous accumulated experience, previously not considered in that way, but now made relevant by it, and a way of being in the markets in which the question of wanting something more about them was added, knowing them, understanding ourselves, developing a theory about them, writing a sociology and an anthropology.

  The first thing that occurred to me from the moment I was now going with something more to look for than just shopping, but at the same time it became almost impossible to avoid the fact that each time I had something more to look for, it also ceased to be and did not cease to be. never, once again also going shopping, was the theoretical problems that posed me the relationship between ways of revisiting an accumulated experience of being in the markets for many years without wanting anything more from them than spending my weekend in one way. and bring home a lot of purchased things, as a form of previously acquired knowledge about a cultural reality about which I was beginning to wonder in terms of writing a theory.

  But although that accumulated experience was itself a knowledge, having lived it without additional pretensions also meant for me a way of attending to it that I would not have paid attention to the type of things in which one begins to repair or accentuate and ask when the question begins to modify .

  In this sense, without even adding to my reasons, what I later concluded after studying the markets well for several years, about the observation and the point of view in them and about the polyphony that characterizes them, at that time it was about find out why initiating a mode of participation to which something more was added than just shopping, pretending a theory, understanding a reality, getting to know it and in some way communicating something about it to a number of readers, would have to stop being a true participation in what makes markets in everyday life.

  This fact, which I have previously referred to the theories of the late sixties to early eighties on the semiotics of extraverbal communication, when in order to thoroughly investigate the semiotics of non-verbal signs, situations were taken in which individuals did not communicate. with each other under research conditions but simply when they did it without wondering about it in the ordinary situations in which this type of communication occurs in life, he began to call for analysis, which means studying something, just as it happens when people do not pay attention to looking. I did it in a different way than what I usually do, however, I did not go beyond referring to the idea of ​​a silent observation of what was happening around me, an attentive observation, detailed in some cases, in some cases an eminently visual observation although also sound that had to attend to the details regarding how things are from a physical point of view, objects, construction systems, materials, ways of unfolding, environmental and habitation solutions, manners and customs expressed in body languages ​​and clothing of the sellers, ways of sitting or positioning oneself for the sale and during its breaks, noticing what was reiterated and made ordinary as frequent or stable for a significant number of possible situations and furthermore, separating in my attention on one side what makes up the setting in a market scene that encompasses in principle only the sellers with their constructive and merchandise displays in the visually analyzed space as something in itself, imagining taking something away from the buyers in reality possible only very early in the morning before arrival of pedestrian traffic of buyers, and then pay attention to the latter, the buyers, as the ritual or ceremony in which this staging is completed and becomes a continuous intersubjective give and take between buyer and seller of which due to The relationship between the market and recreation could not exclude the enjoyment that markets ordinarily mean for the senses.

  The latter, the fact that markets are and never cease to be, above all and first, highly sensorialized worlds in which the enjoyment and recreational component of selling as much as buying govern, certainly has not ceased to be present since those first times when I began to see them differently, until today, my sociological and anthropological theory of markets is, undoubtedly, a theory about sensory worlds until today, no matter how much the type of Things I focus on.

  But the idea of ​​an impatient and attentive silent observer who only oscillates between two variants of bodily postures in being there in the markets, simply continuing to be the usual buyer - although in his career and not infrequently in his life he has had one who, almost always, also offers their professional services for sale, what we call freelancers, but referred only to the perimeter of these formations, enclaves or conglomerates that we call popular urban markets and their culture like this is cut out in the city fabric, a body that oscillates between that which goes shopping and that which spends time on its itinerary to pay your attention and fix its observation on what is around it, if it was modified until later it completely modified.

  Remaining as a silent observer as if one were a camera that retains details of what one sees and observes is so limited and lacks understanding in the markets and of the markets that it does not go beyond communicating a relatively orderly and typified description of the types and characteristics. typologies of sellers, buyers and market forms, but it does not manage to immerse itself at all in what defines these markets as worlds nor does it understand what is actually happening around it.

  The idea of ​​the surroundings as well as the surrounding world helps to understand something that not only has a physical and descriptive sense but also begins to be nourished by a hermeneutical and interpretive sense that begins to be based on an infinite number of meanings that make markets worlds and universes. loaded with meaning, on the one hand, and in which the very problem of what happens to the observation is much more complex than a discernment between observing carefully with descriptive detail and walking distractedly without paying attention.

  In these markets, in the first place, the staging of barter is already taking place because of what shapes and makes them, an intersubjective give and take between people all of whom are in the same situation that defines them themselves in the face of diatribes of communication. , choosing a merchandise among many that you review among those that the seller offers, mediates in the markets the type of situation that peculiarizes the communication that is generated between the seller and the buyer, the latter wants the buyer to buy a certain merchandise and wants to sell it to him by convincing him of its quality, your interest and the security in your good purchase, at the best possible price as long as you want to obtain the best merchandise at the most economical price as much as possible.

  But that one-to-one relationship between each seller and each buyer in the scene that goes towards the realization of the barter has a development and an evolution as a staging. I have reintroduced the concept of staging here again. It is required to distinguish my different uses of it. I call staging in the first place the way in which the sellers deploy themselves with their construction systems in which they live and inhabit while they display their merchandise and sell.

  The latter are put into scenes not only because the seller literally exposes himself to a scene that presupposes the buyer, that is, when we analyze that display of a seller that includes the way in which each one has created the originality of his own way of solving its autonomous construction system and its way of displaying the merchandise, we see, without even putting the buyer there, in the same way that we see a book that does not yet have a reader but presupposes one, a staging for an anticipated audience,

  The buyer is not exactly an audience, although at a significant level of his itineraries he also only contemplates before deciding to buy, he is actually a client and someone who is going to purchase a merchandise for money, but the seller's deployment is the same as an implementation. scene, now, the moment of barter is also a mise-en-scène and this mise-en-scène I said has a path

  A buyer can choose a seller for a merchandise that has caught his attention without the latter realizing it, but a buyer and a seller can meet in many ways and these ways are in themselves what initiates that staging that goes from the moment they look at each other where the seller can give the potential buyer a gestural expression with his eyes or with his hands inciting him to choose it and buy in his establishment, until the moment when after many avoidance, the buyer decides to approach to a merchandise and prepare to buy, there are sellers who directly tell the pedestrian passing by something to buy from them, something that is not always an advertisement for their merchandise or referring to it, but can be a trick or a simple gesture that It is taken for granted that it is about attracting because it is pre-established for the buyer that the seller wants to attract him to his merchandise.

  This scene can occur in silence from the beginning to the end, with the entire transaction taking place without the seller and buyer exchanging words until the moment of payment, but it can also occur while the seller and the buyer talk and what they talk can refer directly to the specific event. of his own immediate relationship, talk about the merchandise, what the buyer wants, what the seller suggests, or he can digress into other topics according to which while the buyer chooses the merchandise the seller talks to him about any other topic or to the Conversely, these dialogue settings are important in themselves and I will return to them later because many times I took advantage of them and immersed myself in letting myself be carried away by those dialogues simply taking part in them.

  First, it is necessary to remember that the transaction that defines the barter scene is not situationally correlated or influenced by a one-to-one relationship between a possible buyer and a possible seller, but that the probabilities of a buyer approaching a seller and choosing him are also correlated with a competition, many sellers sell the same merchandise with different characteristics and compete with each other to be chosen and to be the ones from whom they buy, for which they follow different strategies; therefore, it is necessary to notice not only the occasional barter that begins in the exchange of glances until the buyer chooses a place but rather in a broader and earlier dynamic through which many sellers with similar merchandise are on the lookout for buyers and the latter for the best and most economical merchandise not without adding The purely economic details: the seller wants to do the best possible business by selling at the highest possible price and the buyer wants to acquire the best merchandise at the lowest possible price.

  There are then two kinesthetic and synesthetic dynamics that organize the corporal and intercorporeal modes of communication within these large human conglomerates. The first assumes that going to the market in itself is generally, and as a dominant subjectivity, a sensory activity of enjoyment and a accumulation or a considerable part of the spatial movements are relaxed by this recreation, the buyer can spend long hours just looking without buying much or not everything that the buyers would want, the seller in turn does not risk everything in one day or a single buyer but rather he takes stock of the whole of his day, his week and his month and since he spends a large part of his year there in his tent he also experiences it as an activity of enjoyment for the senses, the second dynamic that governs is the one before Having evoked the fact that the staging of barter as a moment of intersubjective give and take is preceded and regulated by a competition between many who have the same merchandise, both dynamics are interrelated.

 But as I said before, it is not just about many stagings of the barter happening all at the same time, but it is about the relationship between different forms of sales happening simultaneously, some superimposed on the others, there is a seller parked, camped with a system constructive and roofed, but also a street vendor who preaches and there is also an improvised vendor who is deployed informally. These last two, especially the street vendor, tend in turn to supply merchandise intended for needs that people have and are created for them by themselves. shopping, from having a snack, having a juice or eating something, to taking with you some type of cheaper item that, for unforeseen things, is not sold in the campsites.

 A market, as I said before, is a surrounding world and since it is, the dynamics of communications that can occur between people, although governed by this basic principle of the staging of the seller and the staging of the barter, have a wide margin of possibilities, a dialogue can be generated around a commodity that goes from being about that merchandise to being about any other topic in the life of the buyer and the seller, individual to their lives, or about culture and society, a person can be accompanied from another at the time of purchase, their partner, a friend or a child, thus not being one buyer but several who go together, and these people at the time of purchase can come to talk about any topic so that in the At the moment when one is inclined to buy, one buys while the dialogue continues and this dialogue is heard by the seller who now sees the buyer buying while talking with his friend, his partner, his son or his nephew.

  While one of them is choosing the merchandise, the seller can enter with something that he says in the dialogue that they bring and this diverts attention from the bartering scene, making the seller join in with what he says in the dialogue that they were bringing, a seller can also be in dialogue with someone else who is next to you in your place where you sell and conversely the opposite occurs, one of the people who make up the group that buys intervenes with a comment, question or observation in a dialogue that the seller brings with another person Within its construction system, or any other person around it, in the markets in fact dialogues are generated that are not always about the markets themselves and the merchandise but can also discuss mundane topics.

  He said that a market is a surrounding world in which to be able to understand at a hermeneutical level what is happening, one must immerse oneself and get involved in respect to which distanced and silent observation stops providing the necessary insides to capture the meaning and understand. What it is about, is required, because the market itself demands it in its polyphony to abandon the point of view and remove oneself from the observation which should occupy only a moment of the research and from which it is required to distance oneself, it is required in turn to immerse oneself but Diving into the market, although it is a surrounding world, has its regulations, its guidelines and its requirements.

  It is not strange for a man who is exposing himself from a staging to other men and for a staging in which a barter will take place that a surrounding world defined by many who do this while others walk around contemplating and deciding, That someone wants to take photographs because if something defines the markets, it is that in them men are continually looking at each other, in a market everyone is exposed to be seen by others and not only seen but also to go beyond the arrangement of a business,

  In this sense, the attitude of the camera that wants to capture images is not, as it could be in a church, something that stands out as strange but rather it is something that very quickly dilutes and tends to be disseminated in its occurrence by the polyphonic traffic of the market, this offers the camera a chance to play by moving quickly between situations and capturing angles, scenes, gestural moments, facial expressions, body displays in the sale, attention to construction and color details, and even relationships to its own presence as camera,

  If you approach a seller to buy merchandise and when you are close to paying or choosing the product, you tell him that you want to take some photos, he will normally react by preparing to do so in the same way if you move along the pedestrian paths where buyers pass and You take photographs of the sellers, of different scenes of bartering and of things that surround you, you go unnoticed, some body expressions may explain a first reaction of astonishment but it immediately dissolves, in the market facial communication is highly expressive and is closely related to body expression with a reflexive activity of seeing and being seen, this relationship of seeing being seen is the main warp of the market, if somewhere it stops caring about being seen and seeing, it is in the markets that they consist precisely of it and given that in the end this process is aimed at a transaction

  It is in the markets where seeing and being seen is disseminated in an economic sense governed by the same commercial logic of the market, someone who walks with a camera is also doing a business even if they accumulate another type of product and where everyone who is doing their business matters. Little does it mean that for someone their business is taking images, but the human situations that occur in a market are in turn for the camera of a very high expressive value with respect to the material that can be gathered about a culture, especially about the market as a culture.

  Now, I said that it is a surrounding but regulated world and one of the ways in which this regulation is expressed is that in that being exposed to seeing and being seen, the general dynamic that governs is presenting, contemplating, choosing, selling and buying. , a camera that is not overwhelmed in its spatial logic by this dynamic will immediately be alien and will lose the hermeneutical sense in question, in the market there is always a quickness grasp, something that must be captured and understood and a camera must surrender to that pertinent sense of quickness grasp, learning to become part of the logic of the market within its own hermeneutics, that is to say that one should not get rid of or ignore the situation but must adapt to it to find its possibilities because of the give and take of the market. It offers the same possibilities for a camera that, integrated into the logic of the market, will be able to operate hermeneutically within it, passing, as it were, unnoticed,

  obviously it is not about going unnoticed in the literal sense, someone is taking photos and possibly there are others who also do it, but in the sense that the intercorporeal mobility of the market and the ways of moving within its itineraries admit intercorporeal relationships, postures, attitudes, a way of looking at things and being looked at within them that offer the camera avenues for a specific way of experiencing the essayistic, investigative and hermeneutical possibilities of the eye and the shutter, photographic or video, the crucial thing about a camera within the market is that it is a registration resource with which you can later make an appointment or meet outside the market to observe the results and then go to the work of analyzing what was obtained, selecting and editing.

  A session of critical analysis of the results of a camera immersion can provide an interesting setting for anthropological theorizing about the market and at the same time offer guidelines to improve or enrich the subsequent forms that will be experienced in a subsequent immersion.

  It is necessary to say that most of the time I immersed myself without a camera and that it was my eye that was working on theorizing a sense of the relationship between the visual and the hermeneutic so that more than ninety percent of my work The field trip was without a camera, but because I experienced the camera on several occasions when I was able to bring with me a photographer determined to immerse myself in my field work and put his images at the service of my research, I make these observations,

 The main thing that the camera contributes in field work is that it inscribes and leaves a memory of the visual retentions of that day that later allows one to see what was seen again and organize it from a short distance, at the same time the camera although it can be diluted in the situation of the market, going unnoticed as another element in the visual and sound traffic, it does not stop getting involved in the give and take of seeing-being-seen relationships and therefore limits or circumscribes the hermeneutical scope from the moment it limits and circumscribes the radius of body action,

  With a camera you cannot enter into a dialogue or certainly not in a dialogue well diluted in a hermeneutic dynamic because no matter how diluted it is, it is always like something seen punctually, a way of being less or of being in a different way in the situation and that It limits it in its ways of becoming part, it can become part and become part, but in a way that, while offering its possibilities, also limits it.

  This concept of the possibilities between what is a potential and what is a limitation, apparently so simple, is not at all and is of importance to me in field work. For me, field work is always a relationship between inscriptions, the The inscription that one brings carries with it its possibilities and its limitations, the possibilities are themselves avenues that are understood by theorizing your inscriptions, the latter include several planes and levels, several strata since the inscriptions are also stratifications, you bring some inscriptions with you , which you bring for yourself, they enable you and limit you at the same time that they create your avenues of relationship with a culture. According to my inscriptions, a unique range of relationship possibilities with a culture opens up for me, which are impossible for you and difficult to access for you because you do not have my own inscriptions but others other than mine, but mine in turn are limitations, on the other hand, the inscriptions are not only those that one brings, but those that inscribed like you They have meant that culture before and are inscribed in its acerbs,

  We have here then that the inscription is relevant in field work in any field work but that in field work in the markets for the theorization of participant observation, the analyzes that I am developing on the impossibility of immersing oneself in the logics of meaning common and in the hermeneutics that can give quickness grasp of the market while maintaining the position of the distant and silent observer, are essential for the theorization and understanding of the specific ways that registration acquires within the markets.

  Firstly, the intersubjective give and take do not have the same intensity in the markets in all their settings, with the exception of the specific staging between the buyer and seller when the barter is carried out, which is the form of communication in the markets within which the intersubjective give and take acquires its densest and most climatic moment in which dialogues are generated, etc., there is a give and take of translations and intergestural and intercorporeal communications in the markets in which the communications do not manage to form dense plots, I mean. to the fact that the intelligibility that shapes the intergestural and intercorporeal relevances in the market can occur in a general sense of displacement and the relationship see being seen observer always observed that makes the market a matter of exposing oneself to others and moving between them in accordance to which we are all doing more or less the same or something similar subject to similar reasons and motives

  There are understandings in the market, but not in the sense that a wealth of accumulated culture lends itself to the interpretation of a dense content loaded with meanings, but in the sense that the generality of a situation is prefigured as what makes the dynamics of that surrounding world, in a surrounding world in which many are exposing themselves to each other, letting each other know what they want by showing themselves and showing themselves and in which some buy and others sell while not a few simply sensory enjoyment, bodily exchanges do not They often require resorting to continuous explanations.

  As I have said in other essays, I assign great hermeneutical importance to the concept of explicitation. It is a concept worked on by Habermas in the first version of his theory of communication, but certainly within the markets if we follow the plot of their dynamics immersed in them, not so many Things are required to be made explicit as before being made in some way intelligible from a generality. This could refer to my previously discussed idea of ​​a certain superficiality in the markets. This idea of ​​superficiality refers to a phenomenology of the market. Becoming intelligible is enough. In markets that adhere to the hermeneutics of their visual and interpretive logic within the meaning-making of what makes markets surrounding worlds, becoming explained is actually something that presupposes and requires a type of intersubjective give and take that is somewhat deeper or denser in regarding the pragmatics of less common communication in the markets,

  While in an unforeseen dialogue there would always be something to be made explicit as well, it will generally not be very frequent, rather it will be more frequent to make it intelligible, which can stem from a significant number of gestural and interbody exchanges in just processes of legibility relevant to the exchange of glances. and bodily expressions without necessarily requiring resorting to the spoken word.

  The latter undoubtedly intervenes but in rare situations, the above offered me the possibility of abstracting and at the same time considering these extraverbal communications as part of the field work, no longer only between me in my being there between them and the dynamics that were generated in my relationship with people in general and with the staging of the seller and the barter, but also in the sole appreciation of its own logic, extraverbal communication not only gave me a sense of the quickness grasp of the market, the how move and advance in the relationship between my research, the field work and what I was collecting from the immersion work, but also a quickness grasp on the communications between them, in the market itself the sellers communicate continuously in a gestural way using the body both around their market objectives, to sell, to buy, to attract clients, to achieve what they want, to function in the way they prefer, but also as the ruling mode of hermeneutic intelligibility in the surrounding world, which was for me The construction of that hermeneutics based on the phenomenology of the market and my possibilities in the situations, was in a certain way also something that I grasped from the governing logics in the markets despite my presence.

  The cultural recreations of consumption are then, ultimately and at the last level, the instance around which the entire meaning of the market is gathered as a staging and as a ritual ceremony that makes it a cultural tradition, beyond the immediate mise in scene. of the seller with respect to the buyer and of many at the same time with respect to many potential buyers, and beyond the mise in scene of barter that governs its logic in situ, the cultural recreations of consumption explain the overall symbolic meaning of this implementation. scene, an urban and popular market is the same a sales scene governed by the activity of consumption, but at the same time the market as a visual staging of a culture that includes material expressions, self-created constructions, ways of camping, mooring systems , uses of materials and colors, ways of positioning oneself in space and dressing, ways of arranging merchandise, types of merchandise for sale and intercorporate communications, it is in turn a cultural recreation of that consumption, the market culturally reinvents itself as a location and enclave consumption by reassimilating it culturally.

  This concept of cultural recreations of consumption explains not only the spectacular nature of its scenic nature, but also brings up a complex distinction in culture between what we consider authentic and what we consider once influenced by a consumption activity because it is The latter, governed by business and by the massiveness of people's taste and preferences, simultaneously symbolically recreated by advertising and the rhetoric of sensory seduction around products, tends to bracket the sense that objects, artifacts or Symbolic products may be something more than convenient adaptations for sale and in this move away from culturalist parameters understood in a sense that refers to the original or original form of symbols in a culture, but placing emphasis on this supposed dichotomies distances understanding of the fact that what makes the market cultural tradition is precisely that recreation and that cultures in the last analysis are always inventions of this type, there has never been in an anthropological sense a culture in which commerce did not regulate symbolic exchange and production of goods that in order to be reproduced have to be sold

  Cultural recreations of consumption in this sense deny the dichotomy and with it the idea of ​​a native point of view established in a rigid or inflexible way, in the market the symbols are recreated to adapt to consumption and therefore stop responding to a idea of ​​an original sender that does not presuppose, in what makes it cultural reproduction, that commercial activity in itself.

  An Englishman, an American, a Dutchman, can walk through these markets and see in them merchandise, objects and goods of English, American or Dutch origin and wonder if perhaps the men in the market are appropriating what, according to them, comes from their cultures. , but according to this meaning they are presupposing that the culture of that market man can be retained and referred to a number of symbolic objects or goods that would in themselves make up the authentic ones of his culture with respect to which those coming from his would then be appropriate.

  This logic is not only naive but also unaware of what makes and shapes the culture of this market man, not only does it ignore that since the goods of their cultures are on the free market they begin to be assimilated by new cultures, This, which is expressed in the market of food, clothing and first-rate goods, also occurs in intellectual and theoretical culture.

     The urban popular markets in which I did my fieldwork are, in their staging, the most complete and best-complexed expression of how this principle is the same articulator of cultural traditions, the artifacts, forms and symbolic constructs generated by the culture of these men are already their productions, cultural forms that presuppose having been themselves, in the same way that these markets, cultural recreations of consumption

  Cultural recreations of consumption alter and dislocate cultural presuppositions about the native point of view at the same time that they relativize them, show that cultures are within each other and belong to each other, transform the referents of their own cultures or well of universal issues, but what makes my field work in these markets peculiar, among many other things that give peculiarity to my field work, is that cultural recreations of consumption are not a topic or something to be versed but rather the center The same thing that I am investigating when doing field work in these markets, that is, that these recreations are themselves one of the phenomena that focus the attention of my field work.

 Notes

-For a prior analysis in the anthropology of markets, the reflections of Stephen A Tyler in his essay A Point of Order related to his book India: An Anthropological Perspective are significant. In this regard, I quote Stephen:

  On the analogy of physics we focus on transactions that signify just the objective movement of things, forgetting that exchange may also affirm the moral basis of society.         

  Transactions do not just signify~ the movement of goods, they symbolize mutual obligation. The objective movement of goods can only signify the fact of exchange, and because it thus implies nothing more than exchange, it cannot by itself reveal its meaning, cannot speak of what it symbolizes. We must distinguish then, between transactions that merely signify and those that symbolize. Thus, when an Indian farmer, from his hard-won crop, gives a traditional share of grain to the blacksmith who fashioned his implements of production, it is not just a payment for goods and services but an affirmation of a continuing relationship which recognizes the fixed pattern of statuses and symbolizes the performance of mutual duties. His act symbolizes the moral obligations of the social order. It symbolizes dharma in both of its senses as duty and order, The mutually implicated acts of the farmer and the blacksmith are simultaneously expressions of their respective duties (dharma) and affirmations of social order (dharma). 

  Significantly, economic transactions are but one of the many possible settings in which these group relations may be symbolized. The giving and taking of food, the exchange of women in marriage, precedence in ceremonies, patterns of respect and deference in speech and behavior, and performance of religious observances serve equally as appropriate settings. 

  in the Dharrna S6stras nothing is more clear than that the moral or cosmic order (dharma) dominates the economic and social orders. This view contradicts our notion that "business is business," the predominant presumption distilled out of the historical circumstances of the Western experience of the industrial revolution. 

  We first see this conception of society as a transcendent unity created by transactions between egoistic atoms in our idea of the market, and we trace this purely cognitive transformation of the idea of the market from that of a concrete locality to a transcendental abstraction in the writings of proto- economists of the eighteenth century who both effected and documented it. In its earlier concrete form the market was simply a neutral place of ex- change, the brief meeting of strangers solely for the purpose of handing over natural goods, goods which had not been culturally transformed, which had not become symbolic. 

  They were places set aside, immunized as it were, from the surrounding culture-not just secular places, but places of pure objectivity. They were concrete localities where objects of one kind came together in exchange for objects of other kinds. They were meaningless places where disparate groups could meet without incurring moral obligation, places where citizenship, persona, and soul could be forgotten. Be- cause they implied amorality it is not surprising that they should so often have been associated with carnivals. Fairs were, and anyone who has in his youth walked a midnight midway can affirm that they still are, both places of exchange and settings in which everyday morality is temporarily set aside. Fairs, and early markets too, combined exchange with the atmosphere of a carnival. 

   This leads us to ask: "What then is the basis for a metaphoric identity be- tween exchange and sacrifice?" There are several, such as for example, the giving of gifts (cf. Tyler 1973:164-165), but more importantly, both sacrifice and exchange imply something about the transformation of one thing into another, the assignment or reassignment of meaning. The root metaphor for this whole process is the idea of creation, that original formation of order out of chaos, that first transformation of the natural world which changed it into a meaningful cultural world. I am suggesting that this process of establishing order out of the disarray of natural phenomena constitutes the basis for the homology between sacrifice and exchange in general.

Stephen A Tyler, A Point of Order, Rice University studies

Bibliography

de Certaud Michael, The Practice of Every Day Life, The University of California Press, 99

Eco Umberto, Kinesics and Proxemics, The Semiotic Field, The Absent Structure

Gadamer George, Aesthetics and hermeneutics, Tecnos, metropolis collection

Habermas Junger, The Problems of Understanding in Social Sciences, Pp, 144-196, Theory of Communicative Action, Volume I, Taurus

Habermas Junger, The Problem of comprehension in social sciences, the Theory of communicative action, Beacon press, Boston

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Stratus Confines, The Presentational Linguistic, 98 Lab Books, USA

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Intramundane Horizont, Pp, The Intramudane Horizont, Complete Works, Tome VI, Book, 2017

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Intramundane Horizont, Pp, The Constelations of Common Sense, Selected Essays, Book, 2019

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Sobreordinations in everyday life, Pp, The Constelations of Common Sense, Selected Essays, Book, 2019

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Sobreordinations in everyday life, Pp, The Intramudane Horizont, Complete Works, Tome VI, Book, 2017

Schütz Alfred, The Knowledge in the Worlds of Everyday Life, edited by Schutz's wife Ilse Heim with Thomas Luckmann

Tyler Stephen A, on the markets in India, A POINT OF ORDER, Pp 133-135, Rice University studies, 1973-1974, USA

 The Market from Here: Staging and anthropology

©Por Abdel Hernandez San Juan

Discussing the current general situation with visual displays in the field of anthropology in USA usually limited to the representation of culture without possibilities to mise in scenes fieldwork, this paper proposes a research which coming from constructivism in sociology, retheorize a new balance to get together mise scene of fieldwork and ways to unfold in a more evocative form the anthropological representations of the culture we research. Focused about discussing a visual display of anthropology I conceived and composed after two years of individual fieldwork alone in and on the popular markets of Venezuela, the paper discuss how my previous fieldwork alone which can be the basis to many of my works between which such a display is just one of the possible outcomes, was the basis to compose such a visual display both introducing it at text of the catalogue written in anticipation as well as working as the script to do the display, while at the same time discuss how the display itself, The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography was committed to visually textualize three additional months of fieldwork addressed to invite two persons from the world of theater to build the physical piece in the form of a team of expertises to explore new possibilities both out there at the markets and late at the visual display of anthropology

Keywords: anthropological representation of culture, evocation, visual display of anthropology, world of theater, team of expertises

  The question that I am going to discuss in this essay is theoretical in itself although it involves issues of rhetoric and refers to the staging of field work and the elicitation of cultural anthropology in visual displays. I will therefore discuss The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography as a professional practice of ethnography; a form of cultural anthropology elicitation.

  To put fieldwork on the scene of the text, what Clifford Geert calls self-locations, referring to the strategies we follow and choose in composing textual modes that reflect, make reference to, self-refer to or represent what has been a fieldwork experience. , the usual resource has been the writing of essays and papers, on the one hand, and the writing of books on the other, as in my case it continues to be the continuous, permanent and recurring way of doing it in an incomparably higher percentage, books and papers.

  Unlike the written essay and the book, the only other known way in which the textual staging of fieldwork has been practiced has been in two modalities of what Stephen A Tyler has called displays.

  Either a curated and museographed exhibition is made in a museum of anthropology and ethnography, or a film or video is made, this is what we usually call displays. The display in general, however, be it the museum or the film, has had great limitations in anthropology in the past, these have been given for various reasons.

  When it comes to an anthropology museum, whether we are talking about an independent curator and museographer who achieves or obtains a contract to make an anthropology exhibition in a museum, or whether it is an exhibition curated by curators from the same museum, the exhibitions are They are usually forced, due to the contingencies that the museum usually has for its audiences, to refer its textual and visual forms to the properly representational fact towards a culture or society in question.

  Even when it is a public anthropology museum, such as the Berkeley Museum of Anthropology, although it still has the privilege of being relatively related, although architecturally independent, to the University of Berkeley, the above is usual and frequent.

  With great difficulty, a museum can offer anthropology as a display the freedom of experimentation that the field worker requires to make the museographic staging an opportunity aimed at deploying textual and visual ways of making references to it because this distracts the public attention towards self-disciplinary issues that refer to self-referential and meta-textual entelechys that distance themselves from the cultural references in question.

  For this reason, as much as the curator and the museographer are interested in not only museographically representing a culture or society but also in making references to the anthropologist, the work of the latter tends to be used as a basis by the curator who himself becomes the anthropologist of the sample for that museography doing second-hand work based on the material provided by the work of anthropologists who have studied that society or culture, assuming a case in which an exhibition is made empirically referred to the work of an anthropologist Precisely, references to field work tend to be relegated to a simple vehicle, a simple instrumental resource intended for the purpose of offering a certain representation of that culture and less, to say almost nothing or nothing, to put on the textual scene. and museographic visual references to field work in the form of the experimentation of a self-location as a textual strategy of the anthropologist himself, because the museum maintains a contingent relationship as a representational institution, with the cultures on which the samples are about, the possibilities Although the exhibitions become occasions to represent field work, they are minimal and at most extremely limited.

  In the same way, anthropology films, although they tend to expand the range of possibilities a little more to open the referential diameter not only to the culture in question but also to allow references to the anthropologist and field work to enter the film product, Even the possibilities are very limited because the film must, as a phenomenon that deals with or refers to a specific cultural location, offer as a textual form an interpretation, an image or a representation of that culture or society and less so or in general to subordinate it to that purpose, references to field work.

  However, with the increasingly widespread proliferation of what we have called the crisis of the representation of cultures in anthropology, what has initially been in terms of displays, museums and films, a moral prejudice and a limitation in making references to the worker field, has also extended to a growing crisis of ethnographic and anthropological authoritarianism to impose representational versions of cultures.

  In this way, although in no way does the display of the anthropology museum give up its resources to, in the face of the crisis of the representation of cultures, become spaces for the staging or representation of the anthropology worker. field and the work carried out by the anthropologist at least it is beginning to be recognized that if representing the work of the anthropologist diminishes attention to culture in favor of representing something even more instrumentalized, the ways in which the anthropologist has studied it, also using the display of the museum to offer representations of those cultures, is in doubt.

   Faced with this diatribe, exploring and experimenting with the possibilities of a new display at least allows us to pay greater attention to the fact that the textual and visual staging can free up its ways to make references not only to culture but also and to a greater extent to to become itself as a textual and visual fact a staging of fieldwork or at least to develop modalities in which strategies for staging fieldwork in textual modes and ways of offering representations of culture can go more together. and relate in richer and more interesting ways.

   Although certain obtuse methods, mostly deconstructed today, would tend to generate, in the museographic display of field work, an even more instrumentalized and debatable image of the way in which a culture was studied, epistemological explorations and the renewal of new avenues of experimentation to the practice of research and field work such as those that I carry out or have discussed in many of my essays, could on the contrary significantly help to offer better and more adequate representations or evocations of cultures to the extent that they come together with and interrelated with the staging of that research.

  The possibility to expand the experimentation of this fact, the display between the visual and the textual as one that facilitates and makes possible other possibilities to the relationship between staging of field work and representations of culture, and the relationship between both things. , was what focused, as a theoretical, research and practical approach, on my conception and elaboration of The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography.

  Firstly, as in any textual staging of field work, in the same way that an essay as a textual form and a book never exhaust and always refer to partial aspects in which everything is never collected. which has been a field work, which is enough for many books and essays, the staging of the field work in a limited physical display is even more partial and refers to only one aspect

   I have discussed the experimental ethnography in question before alone and in comparative relation to other forms of anthropology, it is my work The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography, a work of Anthropology and experimental ethnography that I conceived and composed as an author's work. in Caracas in 1996, the work itself, however, it must be said, is only one, with respect to a much broader field work and research that he developed on the markets and in the Venezuelan markets starting in 1994.

  As a work, it does not refer to, nor thematize, nor textualize, all the field research that I carried out for three years in the markets before conceiving it, but rather it refers only to a period of three months of field work which acquired a specific form. very specific aimed at that specific work.

  While before, my field work consisted of touring and visiting the markets, on the one hand, and meeting with their authorities on the other in the car market - a wholesale market that distributes goods from the rest of the country to Caracas, adjacent to the arts museum. Alejandro Otero visuals--, as well as meeting and reviewing visual material, newspaper archives, photo libraries and iconographic, literary, visual collections, on the image of markets from the 15th century to the contemporary present, when I conceived The Market from Here I did a work of specific and concrete field aimed at that work itself which focused on other markets and lasted three months.

  When I say that it is a work of anthropology and experimental ethnography, I focus from the beginning on the problem of representation and observation discussed in the paragraph cited above by Clifford Geertz in Being Here, the problem of how to find, in the face of the realist genres of naturalistic representationalism and in the face of representational ways of approaching a cultural and economic reality, other possibilities that here would be, for this work, those of evocation as a variant and possibility instead of representation.

  The center of my fieldwork and research, previously alone, in fact, had focused on how in markets there is no privileged point of view of an observer, but rather the relationship between observer and observed is changed and the market itself offers itself. as a polyphonic and multivocal reality where the dynamics of the seller and the buyer, on the one hand, and of both in the broader and continuous activity of merchandise, commerce and consumption, do not give space or possibility for a point of view to establish itself as reality of the observer.

  This conclusion led me to write an essay related to that research in which I developed and discussed it. It was an anthropological and ethnographic essay focused on deconstructing the concept of observer and observation developed in theoretical terms, but also stylistic, aesthetic and visual based on my conclusion of the markets as stagings and polyphonic rituals, that previous research then nourished the subsequent conception of The Market from Here as a new work, it was in fact that, that conclusion of the field work previous only, the one that made me, already based on Composing The Market from Here, choose the theme in anthropology and ethnography of the crisis of representational and realistic modes in favor of more evocative forms and modes of giving the result of my anthropological investigations .

  Based on this, I conceived the work as a whole as a visual staging of that textual form that I wrote so that once I had this text, the first thing I did was decide that it would function as the text that would direct the work, it would be, on the one hand , the first text that viewers would read both in the work's catalog and in its initial foyer illustrated with well-chosen photographs of the markets taken during my fieldwork.

  The text as a whole discusses the markets in the 15th century from the Sunday public square in the times of customs as they were represented by local writers, draftsmen and painters of customs in Venezuela, including the point of view on those settings given by travelers and outsiders such as those expressed in drawings of Dutch and English visitors, to the forms that that once small market square later acquired in the contemporary form of the modern and postmodern markets in the city with their neoliberal capitalist expressions in advertising and the visuality of consumption, the text , however, is not in itself a theorization of the markets, but also and at the same time, of the point of view in them, it is, as a whole, a text about the relative and dissolved position in polyphony, as in the carnival, from the point of view in free markets and with it as an essay of anthropology and ethnography a deconstruction of the observer and the relationship between observer and observed how it is we have it in the empirical field research of those markets, anthropological research that I did of very specific phenomena specific to the markets, so that it oscillates between talking about the markets in different periods in terms of their visuality, theorizing them up to the present, at the same time that it theorizes the polyphony in them and within this it discusses aspects of my field work and that deconstruction of observation in the discussion of an idea of ​​anthropology and ethnography

  For my purposes, of my own field work, the difference that the new three months of field work destined to be staged by the play made came from several things, first, on the one hand, in the years prior to those For three months I visited and toured the markets alone, while for these three months I did it with three people with me, second, my field work prior to those three months not only included tours, visits and dialogues of mine alone in the locations of the markets. markets but also included, as I said before, also meetings of mine alone both in the market with market authorities, as well as in museums and, above all, visits to collections, as well as review of visual, textual and literary material from archives, such as consultations of books, review of visual photo libraries on markets, research on the market topic in collecting, among other things.

  While before these three months my field work was defined by the relationship between my visits, tours, meetings and dialogues in the market alone and my visits, meetings and research of my own alone about collecting, archives, photo libraries and literary references to the market, field work carried out entirely alone, from these three months, my visits and visits to the market began to be with a set designer, a theater producer and a photographer, the three months therefore defined a very specific and delimited moment of the Field work.

  These three people were not and were not related to that previous work, but from the moment in which, two years later, they began to participate, the field work would change in its form and nature, to be carrying out a work that would be a concrete display of in textual and visual scene, and doing it with a set designer, a theater production company and a photographer was the main fact that modified its previous form, made my attention focused on the new moment that my field research acquired for those three months and how I could theorize, analyze and contemplate issues related to the expertise of my three guests within the new form that fieldwork would take.

  It must be said that the fact that the Market from Here includes a room in which a relatively fictionalized ethnographer is discussed, in the same way that the different rooms evoke the world of market men, does not mean that the work itself does not have its ethnographer.

  The anthropologist and ethnographer of the work is me, Abdel Hernandez San Juan, as author, as theorist, as anthropologist and as ethnographer, my own field work and my research in the markets on which, with respect to a specific period of three months, the work is about, it is not a fictional character or an invented ethnographer, going in one of the rooms to the image of a relatively fictional ethnographer, does not refer to an invented character, it refers to the ethnographer as a conceptual instance that In that part of the work it was necessary to bring it to the foreground to discuss it

  In a more abstract way, in the same way that the other rooms in the work are recreations of the living and working environments of market men in their different forms, that room should, at the same time, be self-referential to work. of the field and the physical realization of the work, that is to say to me and Fernando, to also be one in which, by abstracting into itself a work that has simultaneously discussed from its same text of catalog and vestibule, the markets and anthropology, markets and observation, markets and ethnography, the one in which a conclusion would be offered about what was happening with the concept of ethnography and the ethnographer once the proposal of ethnography and ethnographer that the work brings to completion is closed on itself, here is the effect that in addition to talking about the two of us and the work, we talked about a generic ethnographer who could give the impression of being like the market men evoked but not literal, a fictional ethnographer

  To what extent are those evoked by the other rooms fictions and not in Shurtzian terms ideal types of market men? This is a simple question, which refers to a concept by Max Weber, that is, to ideal types based on real people who each room abstracts, encloses itself what homologates the self-referential room with the other rooms on the markets,

  The other rooms in the work speak of ideal types of market men in two ways simultaneously, the first, recreating as a visual staging their sales and life environments in the market, that is, for each ideal type a room: the herbalists (their room), the tinkerers (their room), the merolicos or peddlers (their room which is also the entrance hall), the street vendors and criers (their room which is in turn the exit hall) and the second, interspersing in each of those rooms according to their ideal type, photographs of both those types of places and spaces in the market as they are in themselves, as well as photographs of me and Fernando in the field work, exchanging with them and between them in different ways. The latter, however, in each room, the photographs, is subordinated to the recreation that is made of the world of market men in each ideal type.

  In this self-referential room the accent and the foreground are reversed, far from focusing on the men in the market, it does the opposite, focusing on me and Fernando in the field work and on the work as its staging to then subordinate the references to the market from there to that objective,

  The rooms are ideal type elaborations about the different market men based on field work with real individuals and people, but they do not literalize any specific person, in the same way that through photography these type environments are related to the scenes in which we are in the market with real people, the room that evokes the world of the herbalists, for example, and photographs on the other hand of us exchanging with the herbalists and talking with them where they sell, although the room does not literalize a specific herbalist, it is obvious that it refers to the material seen in the images, this, added to the fact, that with enough precision, each of the rooms, does refer us to specific settings of the men in the market

   In the same way, the self-referential room of the work chronotropos brings together the visual, theoretical and descriptive material of me and Fernando in the field work and making the work, on the one hand, and a theoretical and visual material that I made in the that at the same time that I theorize representation and evocation, I discuss anthropology and ethnography in the form of an ideal type of ethnographer who abstracts or deduces from what the work itself has discussed, which is me, Abdel Hernandez San Juan, but it can also be any ideal type or typical idea, hence what is included in the room, given the aforementioned, is the recreation of an environment called the ethnographer's office, which is a non-fiction or non-fictional reference.

  That is to say, the work itself includes, in addition to the initial text written by me, a literary piece of anthropology and ethnography, a continuous display of photographs in which I am Abdel Hernandez San Juan, its author, in the market with the vendors, It also includes photographs of me writing inside the work while we were making it, about what I experienced while working in the field.

  It is simply a room called chronotropes in which it offered a meta-reflection of the work on the work, that is, a room self-referential to the subject of observation in which instead of offering images of culture, they were arranged as in an inventory and a museographic collection, as in the museum of anthropology and ethnography, the images of the observer, the latter, instead of an observer endowed with a continuous, fixed and distant position according to which the subject of the observation could be distinguished here , there its observed objects, became showcased and transformed into objects of attention.

  It is therefore my concept of the observed observer that I had concluded from the analysis of what happens with any observer in the markets, but applied this time to the form of participant observation practiced by me and Fernando in the field work, it is for This is why in that part of the work, which was otherwise where my paragraphs on the concepts of representation and evocation were deployed, the staging of a kind of setting of an ethnographer's concept such as the concept of the ethnographer remained after this criticism or according to what happened to the concept of ethnography and the ethnographer once discussed with The Market from Here.

  It was not fictionalizing the ethnographer, it was simply, as Geertz does when he dedicates extensive pages to reflecting on what the ethnographer should be like, who at that moment can be the same but can be anyone when speaking, for example, discussing ethnographic writing about how to sound like the time as a pilgrim and a cartographer, or how to deal with something that has to be at the same time biography, literature and science, in that way it was about dedicating a part of the work to imagining what the ethnographer or the idea of ​​ethnography would be like. which resulted from a critique such as the one that, around the theme of markets, The Market from Here proposed as staging and experimental ethnography.

  The very problem of the observer's criticism and its dissolution in the carnivalesque polyphony of the market had been the result of the conclusions of my previous field work, only which was included in the catalog and introductory text of the work, but that work The previous field is not the one that would be visually staged in the work, so it is only its catalog and its introduction, it would have served because I was myself in a new moment of a previous investigation and its conclusions made The Market from Here possible. , but the field work that would be textualized within The Market from Here on a visual level would be a new and specific one carried out exclusively for The Market from Here that, as I said, consisted of three months of visits and tours of the markets which I began at the same time that he began to compose the work in the outdoor spaces of the fifth sheep fountain with Elaiza and Fernando.

  It is therefore this new moment of field work carried out by me with Elaiza and Fernando that resulted in the environments that we explore in the work around different types or forms of life of market men regarding which the concept that best What is related is, as I said before, the concept of the ideal type in the way it is given in Alfred Shurt, initially coming from Max Weber, that is, if we found these four modalities of the market man or market men, it is precisely because in some way they can be considered ideal types of market men and this would be the most significant result of those three months of field work.

  One might wonder if there were, in addition to these four ideal types of market men, one or more ideal types not discussed in the work, but if there were, which there surely are and a few more, it would be a new field work that would have to be done, these four would remain forever as ideal types of men in the market, perhaps others could be added or nuances discovered between them, but these four are main

  These settings of the new field work are included in the work as a whole at a theoretical level of anthropology and ethnography, by the Conclusions of my previous field work collected not only in the catalog of the work and its spatial introduction, but also displayed as its museographic textual circuit present in the form of white on black texts mounted on wood and printed in computer fonts from its entry to its exit

 Usually both the set designer and the theater producer receive a text called a libretto or script that is provided by the director on the basis of which they obtain the objects, materials, costumes, production elements, resources, etc., needed to make the scenographic staging. costumes, makeup and lighting.

  This time the text they received, as it was not a play, but a work of anthropology and ethnography, was my essay that I have discussed before about markets from the 15th century to the present, their visuality, the point of view in them, the criticism of the observation resulting from that research and about anthropology with everything that the text advanced and nourished with respect to the markets themselves, but far from simply taking this text mechanically to the visual, the challenge was that the In a visual scene guided by that text, I would have to stage a new field work which would develop at the same time and simultaneously as we composed the work, a staging in which the scenographic and theatrical production work would not be alone but related to and intrinsically intertwined with elements of museography, installation and photography.

  The fact that Elaiza, Theater Producer, and Fernando, Set Designer for the theater and interior designer, were with me on the one hand visiting the markets and on the other doing the play, gave those three months a new characteristic: theorizing how to read anthropologically both a theater producer and a set designer, it was not something I needed to do just because they were both this time in the field work with me, but also because in terms of the same problem of how to experience the cultural and ethnographic representation of the markets and their culture, the work was now carried out in the conjunction of our expertise

   For this reason, Fernando's set design expertise was one of the tools we had at our disposal to resolve the diatribe of how to evoke instead of represent or how to represent in a more evocative way given the fact that The work not only offered a vision of the markets and their culture but also at the same time of the ethnography in them.

  From the above it was derived that I began to analyze how to understand and see anthropologically and ethnographically a set design while analyzing the way in which a set designer and a theater production company usually work gave a new characteristic to the way we interacted in the markets.

  The above does not mean that it is not of interest in itself once brought to the foreground the fact that a set design can be read and understood anthropologically not only in terms of the concrete physical set design but also in the research and collection work that the set designer has to do. do and that in this sense it was not implicit in the work that Fernando carried out before working with me on this work, that anthropological dimension, the texts written by Fernando show that it is an assertive conclusion, I am referring to the first ones that I cite in my essay on the eye as an omitted paradigm of the postmodern work when I discussed the interrelation of installation and scenography in the work and cited long paragraphs from Fernando talking about his scenography for the theater,

   But if Fernando began to immerse himself with me in that possible anthropological dimension of the scenographic experience, it was largely because the teamwork during the process of discussing what the play would be like and its theoretical aspects was a way of participating in an investigation that I brought and from that moment on he began to be part of that research and to reflect on which aspects of it were of greatest interest to define his own interests and where he would go from the work he did participating in my research towards the definition of which aspects would then give specificity to his, his most recent text on scenography as ethnography, is a well-achieved example of the form that that part of him focused on an autobiographical voice has been acquiring due to the significance that these Venezuelan markets had in his life since he was little.

  It is my own conception of field work that transforms, on the one hand, the reading of the work of the set designer and the theater producer in an anthropological sense, as well as that which then allows, given their expertise in the field work-play relationship, to be discussed. their expertise in terms of anthropology

  On the other hand, the Market from Here as a practice of anthropology was posing an innovation to the question of the previous ways in which stocking displays had been experienced in anthropology, the use of film, video or photography in anthropology, on the one hand, and on the other, the anthropological and ethnographic museographies in the museum of anthropology and ethnography, with The Market from Here; Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography was proposing that this staging, as in the anthropology museum, be developed in the form of a staging that is exhibited outside the museum which, moreover, also given its field work and its research problems. the markets, would be, in the relationship between me as the anthropologist and the markets, a visual and spatial form of both a museum outside the place, the museum outside the museum, and a market outside the place, the market outside the market, fact that in terms of media, defined it as a new modality that combined the visual resources of the installation with scenography, theatrical production and photography, a work that in the end in generic terms within anthropology and ethnography would be in any variant never more than a form of monograph due to the monographic nature of its subject.

  Now, the above requires again, as occurs in the catalog and in the introduction or vestibule, to return to my previous field work since the museum-market relationship corresponded with my previous research only prior to the Market from Here which did not It was properly the one that was thematized with the work but which again, like the main text, made it possible and from it in some way the work was born. That is to say, the very problem of how to theorize the relationship between the museum and the market, worked on by me throughout several essays that I had written since 1994, one of the decisive themes in my previous field work, was also crucial to conceive The Market. from Here

  In this way, the main anthropological procedure of The Market from Here as experimental ethnography is explained as follows

My writing of an anthropological and ethnographic essay resulting from my previous and previous field work alone

Disposition of this ethnographic essay on my previous field work only as the main text that would guide the theoretical and conceptual problematic on point of view, on observation, on polyphony in markets, on which the Market from Here would then be based.

Based on this text, I begin the composition The Market from Here as a staging and a visual composition through the invitation of a set designer and a theater production company to work with me on its realization

Beginning of the realization of this new visual staging of a new period of three months in which Fernando and Elaiza, with the intention of composing the work, would go with me to the markets, thereby forming a new period of field work in the that now we would be three, which in itself would make up visits and tours of the markets, dialogues and exchanges with sellers, collections of objects and artifacts, and which would be on a visual level what would be textualized and put on stage in the Marker from Here. visually

Composition of the compositional whole of the visual mise-en-scene as a theoretically and literary mise-en-scene based on the anthropological writing of my ethnographic essay about my previous fieldwork alone, but which would textualize and visually stage the new period of fieldwork developed between the three of us since we began to carry out the work.

The conclusion of the three months of field work for the market from here is then the following, which I will expand on later.

Market men in ideal types

The peddler or merolico: characteristics of the peddler or merolico

El Hierbatero or Seller of medicinal herbs and body lotions and religious stamps, ointments and substances: characteristics of El Hierbatero or Seller of medicinal herbs

The tinkerer, seller of items for the body or around the body and furniture: characteristics of the tinkerer

The street vendor and crier: characteristics of the street vendor

In addition to being Venezuelans and their life experiences in the markets as part of their own biographies since childhood, something explicit in Fernando's text, the expertise of both, Fernando and Elaiza, combined with me there in the markets, in the way to relate to the sellers, in the ways of engagements, while before in my field work I was only meeting with directors of the wholesale market, visiting and touring the markets alone and I spent my time from museum to museum looking for visual material in collections, reviewing newspaper archives, reviewing photo libraries, consulting literature books on the markets, etc., now I found myself talking to sellers not only so that they could tell me about the market, but so that they would give me (us) a table or explain to me (us) how they had done it. an object, or because we had to make a setting about them and their lives in the market and we needed their help or suggestions, or because we wanted certain jars, bottles or images and we would want theirs, or we would want to make a piece of furniture similar to theirs, new elements of theatrical production, obtaining a piece of furniture of a certain type for a visual staging on the market, collecting a certain type of stamps for a set, collecting certain plaster figures, now mediated the mode of direct relationship there in the markets. .

  It should also not be forgotten that there is an instance that, although new in this period of three months, was located between my previous field work and the new one, since it in itself illustrates my text of the previous field work alone at the same time that it also It unfolds towards the settings of the field work with Fernando and Elaiza, which is here the way I did and conceived the photographic work on the markets to enter into the work.

  I carried out this photographic work, under my theoretical direction of anthropology and under my direction as a composer and author, listening to my explanations about what I wanted, reading my ethnographic anthropological essay about my previous field work that would guide the work, participating as a listener in the dialogues between me, Fernando and Elaiza, and participating on the other hand, in this new period of tours through the markets with me, Fernando and Elaiza, ebel González, a photographer who had worked with me many years before on a work about punks and who living At that time in Venezuela he was ready to offer his camera to me exclusively in the markets we visited.

  In fact, this syntax, which at the level of the logical order of the composition as a whole, connects what is properly photographic as an instance that would move between my initial text related to the previous field work alone and the staging and visual textualization of the work. of the field that we began with The market from Here, is made explicit not only in that the catalog essay text is illustrated with photographs also in the lobby but that throughout it, also, its museographic text, that is, the text that throughout the circuit of entry and exit of the work, it kept running as its only and main one, with the exception of the texts in the chronotropes room, a textual form deployed in continuous relationship first with the photographs to which it was already related from the entrance and then, as a text put into scene, with the visual settings or small stagings in which as environments the Market from here then textualized its new field scene, also with photographs

The room over the herbalists, sellers of medicinal herbs, was not only a combination of museography, installation and scenography, I also included, as I said, photographs that we took among them, the room of the hardware workers, sellers of handcuffs and body items, not only was a conjunction of museography, installation and scenography, I also include photographs that we took between them, the room or hall of the street vendors, who sell while moving was not only a conjunction of museography, installation and scenography, I also include photographs that we took between them, and The initial room or hall of the vendors called peddlers or merolicos, who are spread out on the floor in settings in which they sometimes sleep, was not only a conjunction of museography, installation and scenography, it also included photographs that we took between them,

without forgetting with this the chronotropes room that I discussed before visually stages and textualizes the process in which we made the work in fifth sheep source, the one that included us with them in the markets and the one that then included the ethnographic museography of the observer, vitrinization of optical objects, a place to look through different telescopes from there to different points of the work, showcases, the display of my theoretical texts on representation and evocation, and the conceptual setting on ethnography or the ethnographer that this room as a whole thematizes in reference to me and Fernando, but also to any ethnographer or to the very idea of ​​the ethnographer.

  I had written some essays on the semiotics of scenography during several visits that I had made with Elaiza to the El Paraíso theater to discuss calzadilla scenography in those essays. This previous effort involved an investigation into the ideology of scenography expertise that I had been developing for at least a year before inviting them to work on that work.

  The research on ideology of scenography on which my attention was focused in those essays was similar to other research of mine on relationships between what is considered high art or fine arts and what are considered minor arts or secondary arts or subordinate arts, The objective of those texts was to theorize a scenography as something in itself, removing it from or separating it as much as possible from that specific play for which it had served as a visual or visual scenic vehicle.

  Although in those initial essays the emphasis was not yet placed on discussing how a set design seen as something in itself separate from the theatrical work in which it is staged and to which it is subordinated and subordinated, can be analyzed anthropologically, if they were the basis for Then, analyzing his specific way of participating with me in the field work, I analyzed how scenography and theatrical production could be understood anthropologically, hence I conceived my concept of understanding scenographic work in the anthropological sense that I discussed in my essay, the scenographer as a written ethnographer. in Houston in 1998, in the same way, analyze and theorize how the work of a theater producer should be understood anthropologically.

  From these theorizations about how to discuss and understand the expertise of my guests anthropologically, I decided that when conceiving this specific display I would relate my anthropological concept of staging fieldwork, which refers exclusively to what Clifford Geertz calls self-locations of the field. field work in the work of anthropology as textual composition, concept of anthropological staging, its unique relationship to the phenomenon of bringing experience to the text, of inscribing what has been experienced, of textualizing field work and one's relationship with culture , with the concept of staging as understood in the theater.

  Given that I had to position myself regarding these three months of fieldwork in the anthropological staging that I would create with the textual mode that I would explore, this time unlike writing, the essay or the book, a visual and spatial display, I would make that textual staging of the field work of those three months in conjunction with a set designer who usually stages not his own field work but the text or script provided by the director of a play, usually a fictional text in which the play consists of and with respect to which the set designer has to be guided in order to decide how to make the set, how to design the costumes and how to decide the lighting, and I would do this staging of my field work in conjunction with a theater production company who Usually, just like the set designer, he works for staging theatrical scenes for which he must supply the utensils, objects, materials of the material and spatial location related to the costumes, the setting, the interior design and the lighting of the theatrical work.

  When relating the concept of staging of field work with that concept of staging as it is usually understood in the theater, two concepts of staging were found in my experimentation, one anthropological, mine, which refers to to stage a real investigation in culture and reality in a text that refers to real life not to theater and its fiction, another is that of Fernando and Elaiza, which, theatrical, usually refers to the staging of a fictional text.

  This fact was extremely interesting to me for experimentation, how to relate two concepts of staging, one anthropological and the other theatrical.

   Both concepts have a fundamental element in common, both refer to the relationship between a text and its staging.

   In the first the staging is done in the text, that is, the text of which the work of anthropology consists is the same as the staging of the field work in a textual form, in the second the work is done in reverse. There is a written text which is brought to the scene in the sense that it is translated into its visual and spatial expression.

  In the first, it is about putting the fieldwork scene in the scene of the text as a discursive and textual strategy, there is a relationship between two textual forms, texts that are written during the fieldwork that are part of that or material collected from the same one that inscribes it or in which the field work acquires inscribed expressions, and the work of anthropology that is carried out regarding it, which consists of a text, the only one in which it is then placed on the scene of the writing or in the scene of that text-display the field work, in the second, the theatrical, there is a text that usually functions as a script or as a script which will be the theatrical work once it is made which will consist in bringing that written text to visual and spatial expression.

  Now, the set designer and theater producer were not here with me touring the markets and then going to put on the scene of a set a play for which I provided them with a fictional text, which is what they had to put on stage, but that both were with me touring markets as a form of field work in respect to which the display we created, the work of anthropology in question, would be their form of textual mise-en-scène.

   The set designer and the theater producer did not have here the script of a work of fiction that would be brought to the stage in the theater for which they would make the scenery and the production of its visual expression, an objective for which they would go to the markets to gather objects, utensils and elements destined for the fiction of a play, but the same sites and places that we visited looking for objects, furniture, ways of making things, costumes, environments, lighting, types of icons, stamps, bottles, They were the target of attention in both forms as field work and then because the work would focus on them and the markets as a display of an evoked cultural representation.

  It is the relationship between these two concepts of staging, the second diluted to the purpose of the first but at the same time for that same reason returning for that specific work to the set designer and the theater producer as participants in my field work, starting both like this to be field workers with me for that work, which I later called in the title of my display work The Market from Here: its subtitle of Mise in Scene and experimental Ethnography.

  This has two theoretical and empirical implications, from my point of view when I find myself experiencing three months of a new moment within a previous and broader field work, working with the expertise of the set designer and the theater producer has interesting consequences in the fieldwork theorizing

   I not only conceived the concept of staging here by relating staging understood as self-location of myself as I usually do in my theoretical writing books in the sense that Geertz referred to the textual strategies of written discourse, with the relationship between the text and its staging in the theater, but I would also experience a third meaning also related to my previous field work only because as a result of that I had theorized not only that the markets were polyphonic and carnivalesque forms from whose research came my theory of a deconstruction of the observer-observed relationship as I investigate and study how this occurs in market exchanges, not only the question of the relationship between the museum and the market, but also that the markets are themselves ceremonial stagings and rituals and this third meaning is central to understanding how and why in The Market from Here; Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography I propose a relationship between the museum display outside the museum and the market displays understood as staging outside the market because in a significant sense the Market from Here would be a mise in scene of field work precisely because This, because it was about staging a field work relating three concepts of staging that transformed the staging of the work itself into the continuity of an unlimited field work theoretical concept that I proposed and discussed in my essay. theoretical anthropology and ethnography The Eclipse of Evocation.

  Although this third meaning continues to be a work about markets to a certain extent, it is still representational about its research theme in the specific work and although the world of men in the market is evoked by the work without assuming that the sellers or the men of the market are in it, the relationship between the three concepts of staging, the anthropological, the theatrical and finally that which discusses the markets themselves as staging, does make the moment of presentation of the display an elicitation. itself anthropological-cultural which then becomes itself in continuity of field work, this idea of ​​continuity of field work, however, does not in any way mean that the field work of The Market from here exceeds its physical limits since it is necessary to add As I have said elsewhere, that just as in the display of the museum within the museum and just as in the display of the film, this also has a physical limitation limited to the physical limits of the work,

  Despite this, in the dimension of their evocation, that museum outside the museum and that market outside the market, they do evoke and suggest the possibility of a cultural anthropological elicitation of field work, the market as staging to the extent that that, as I said elsewhere, central to the field work that I had done before was the relationship between a market here and a market there, one here and one there, the relativization of these relationships and the questions regarding Whether there are two markets or a single market, although suggested by the evocation and limited to the physical display of that work, it is still a specificity of the way in which it occurs in the discussion of that work as a physical display. field work.

  We must also say that we have here in the work in only one room, that of the herbalists, although we exhibited the image of the Virgin Mary twice more, one at the entrance to the chronotropos room and the other in the peddler's environment, one conjunction in which we put together the things typical of the seller of herbs, decoctions, ointments, etc., with things typical for the sale of stamps and religious images when these two types of sellers are not always together in the market, although they are usually in a nearby or nearby area, and although it is sometimes the case that some herbalists tend to also sell religious images, it does not happen all the time.

  It is therefore necessary to note here with respect to this ideal type of the market man that the typical image of the herbalist can oscillate between the pharmaceutical seller more related to a medical vision, the image of the seller of medicinal plants such as teas and decoctions related to a slang wisdom. popular tradition typical of local traditions about the effects of certain substances for purely physical and bodily good, where their accompaniment with religious images such as stamps and plaster figures is related to what is popularly recognized as home remedies, a sense of spiritual in religious terms.

  This relationship, then, in some herbalists between bodily healing and religious spirituality can suggest the image of the body that we have in India and Asia, in the Japanese and Eastern vision of the body, for example, and could relate physical and religious healing, suggesting the image of the healer. , but in the Venezuelan markets, at least in the urban ones where we did field work, none of those herb sellers can properly be considered healers, none of them practice spiritual counseling or divination through some oracle or procedure established in a religion. primitive or form of magic,

  This phenomenon, which I have studied in my previous field work, did not occur in this way in the men in the Venezuelan market who sell things for the body; these, who are sellers, refer the clients and buyers of their products to a Christian religiosity in its generality sell images of the Virgin Mary, Christ and Venezuelan syncretic imagery alongside and at the same time that in the same establishment they sell ointments for the body, decoctions and liquid preparations, medicinal herbs, bottles with essences, these imagery Syncretics do not come to form polytheistic gods, as in African religion, but rather function as saints subject to Christian monotheism.

  I have discussed the question of the relationship between monotheism and polytheism before on several occasions; in African religions the appropriation of images from the Christian religion tends to venerate an African polytheic god within the same image of a Christian monotheic god, the polytheic god. African is under another name accepted by Christianity, as a saint of the Christian monotheic god according to the church authorizes that saint under which Afro-Christians then manage to reconcile venerating their god belonging to their polytheic worldview by venerating the Christian monotheic but in their origin that God is part of an African pantheon in which there are many gods, that is, a polytheistic pantheon.

  It is the first case analyzed what occurs in the men of the market, they sell images of the Christian religion through which certain images of popular religiosity have been assumed as saints within the Christian religion although, it must be said regarding To the two cases included in The Market from Here, neither Negro Primero nor José Gregorio Hernandez are official, as Maria Teresa of Calcutta could be, both are only widely venerated and widely recognized in Venezuelan popular culture, and although in Venezuela we have strong Indian traditions such as those of the paramo in which the Andean culture resonates expressed in rich basketry, rich and very elaborate beautiful ceramics and a wide variety of fabrics, we must accept that the richness of the Andean culture and its markets, which were of my individual attention in my field work only prior, as it was also towards the Freeway markets in which cocoa and casabe are displayed, the highway markets between Caracas and Anzoátegui and between Caracas and Mérida, I was not present in the urban markets to which we dedicate The Market from Here in the iconographic and visual form of objects, reproduced prints or elaborations more than by the fact that the multiethnic composition of the people who meet in the markets as sellers and buyers could assume some aspects of these syncretisms at the level of Venezuelan culture in general

  In addition to the Andean culture mentioned above with its markets and the Freeway markets, Venezuela has a wide and very rich indigenous culture that reaches its most tribal form in the culture of the Yanomami Indians in the area of ​​the great savanna and the Amazon. The Yanomami are one of the most current and alive indigenous tribes and tribal cultures that can be known in the visual and current memory of a modern and contemporary country like Venezuela, cosmopolitan and incorporated at that time with its markets into the global financial system of the economy and the cutting-edge transnational technologies by which I mean the fact that Venezuela does not see its indigenous tribes as separate from the country's culture, it is not, like the aborigines in the Caribbean or like the ancient cultures of Mexico and Peru, the Mayans and the Incas, or as in the archaic past represented by archeology museums about the pre-Columbian and Mesoamerican world of extinct cultures of which only residues or vestiges remain in the current culture of Mexicans, it is about the rituals, ceremonies and forms of bodily and environmental habitation of a current tribe that inhabits with its independent and autonomous communities the savannahs adjacent to the Amazon jungle

  Venezuela is and lives, and was like this throughout the neoliberal capitalist period, proud of its Yanomami tribes which are continually visited through documentaries and films by the mass media and at the same time about which there are continually catalogs and visual material, these tribes that live a certain amount of their time in the spaces of their communities semi-naked - which predominates in the images of their bodies and their habitat - and another part dressed because they practice weaving and basket weaving, characterized above all because they practice a ritual painting of the body and face, very elaborate and sophisticated in color and visual motifs, that is, they live with their faces and torsos painted, they are strong communities very well established in beautiful and large natural areas defined as semi-jungle savannahs, that is, close to the jungle but not interned in those with housing systems and amahacas which could stop living like that if they wanted to and are not seen, felt or lived like others or as primitive savages, but as autonomous and independent communities that are free and very strong. self-centered people who are in fact part of Venezuelan culture, who lead that style and way of life because they want it that way and for which they are deeply respected and admired.

  The presence of these springs of indigenous culture is much more obvious in the Freeway markets where casabe and cachapa, which are indigenous foods, are sold or in the páramo where indigenous Andean crafts, ceramics and textiles are sold directly, however, It is not explicit in iconographic and visual terms in these urban markets, being only referred to in relation to the names of certain things in which indigenous words and nomenclatures survive or are present such as, for example, carapacho de cachicamo, the word cachicamo is a indigenous way of saying to the turtle, when in fact we found them in the markets and we included it in the work in the herbalists' room, or the word chimo which is an indigenous meaning for tobacco which we also included in the work,

  In this sense, it is more related to the name of certain objects and certain foods whose writing and phonology is directly indigenous in some cases, or whose origin is indigenous, such as, for example, foods made with corn such as cachapa and casabe, which We can say that, within a work, whose images of religion are, like representations of the market in which Christianity predominates, Christian or syncretic iconography aspiring to be sanctified by Christianity, we have references to the Venezuelan indigenous world.

  The levels of religiosity present in those urban markets visually textualized in The Market from Here certainly do not include visual and iconographic references referring to the imagery and visual discourse of costumes, basket weaving, pottery, and fabrics of the indigenous cultures of the Andean paramo or of the Yanomami. in a direct way, but the presence of those seems rather diluted as in the rest of Venezuela to a syncretism expressed in the phonetic and scriptural nomenclature of the name of certain ointments, objects and elements, something that is part of any form of culture. general of the country, a country that includes deserts, plains, mountains, savannahs and the Amazon jungle, it is rather the iconographic references of Christianity that are recurrent in these markets,

  How this herbalist appears in the markets certainly refers in something, as I said, to suigeneris conjunctions between the pharmacist, the herbal doctor dedicated to home-made and popular remedies for the body and a Christian religious mysticism in which they are combined as in India and certain Asia. idea of ​​bodily health with a certain idea of ​​spiritual health in the religious sense of a Christianity that progressively gives rise to certain syncretic expressions

  José Gregorio Hernandez, since those same types of salesmen become a type of white doctor that popular culture wants to sanctify, his image is that of a holy black doctor, first he becomes the image of the possibility of a black saint, this holy black man, by the way he is not a mulatto or a mestizo, he is not a creolized expression of a conjunction of Indian with white or black with white or a type of mulatto, he is a coal black like the jet black Haitian blacks but whose image It has come to form a bust and image of a saint that popular culture wants the Christian church to recognize and accept as accepted into the official Christian pantheon of the church, Maria Teresa of Calcutta.

  It is for this reason that I have explained several times that The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography is a work that remains within the parameters of a cultural anthropology of the market and that at most if it were seen in the sense of the anthropology of religion, would be no more than an anthropology of Christianity as we have it, for example, in Max Weber. In addition, the references to religious liturgies within the work do not go beyond referring solely and exclusively to Venezuelan culture and within From this to its urban expressions in the markets, that is, as part of and in relation to the men of the market and the goods for sale, it is a cultural anthropology of the market and at most of Christianity as expressed in the cultural anthropology of the market.

Notes

-My theoretical-ethnographic essay on urban anthropology to which I make references From Modern to postmodern is at the same time the catalog text, it is also the text that introduces the work in its first room illustrated with 15 photographs, the same one that is later distributed as a guide text for the museum room along the entry and exit route of the work and which was at the same time the text that includes my previous field work research prior to the beginning of the realization and conception of the market from here used in The mode of the script or libretto as a text to be placed on the visual scene in the mode of cinema or theater was published as a catalog text that we distributed at the inauguration of the work.

  -The work includes in its self-representational room 4 about the field work and the process of doing it, along with photographs of it, three theoretical paragraphs of my authorship on the concept of evocation and three theoretical paragraphs of my authorship on the concept of representation . In the center of the work I quote two paragraphs on the concept of evocation as discussed by Stephen A Tyler in his essay The Postmodern Ethnography I Read and I quote from Carlos Reynoso's compendium The Advent of Postmodern Anthropology published in Gedisa, 1994,

 While I am currently getting ready to extend my fieldwork research to do papers on Andino Imageries including waves and ceramics as well as to write on several other issues in Venezuela traditions, I am also currently on the way committed to complexion an upcoming book of ethnography on Venezuelan Amerindians, wayues, yuxpas, zulia amerindians and Yanomanis, this book based in many years living in Caracas seen films and videos on Yanomamis as well as television programs of several Venezuela private channels as on my direct knowledge on the echoes and impact of amerindians communicates in Venezuela as a country, including visualizations of books and catalogues made in Venezuela by several private organizations, will discuss visual materials such as films, videos, televisions programs, online sites and printings with discussions of previous books and papers on Yanomamis and a future expedition travel I am currently preparing as a research fieldwork of six months 

Bibliography

Habermas Junger, Max Weber Theory of rationalization, the Theory of communicative action, Beacon Press

Guiner, Salvador Javier Muguenza and José Maria Maraval, Max Weber, Contemporary Sociological Theory, Tecnos

Tyler Stephen A, Presenter (Dis)Play, published at L'Esprit Créateur 31.1 (1991): 122-130

Tyler Stephen A, On Evocation, Pp, Postmodern Ethnography, Ed Carlos Reynoso, The Advent of postmodern anthropology, Gedisa

Tyler. Stephen A, On Evocation, Pp, “Post-Modern Ethnography.” The Unspeakable, Discourse, Rhetoric and Dialogue in the Posmodern World, Wisconsin University Press

Tyler Stephen A, Evocation; The Unwrtieable, A Response to Abdel Hernandez San Juan, Sept 9, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA, 1997

The Eclipse of Evocation

By Abdel Hernandez San Juan

 (Anthropology Faculty at Rice University, Houston, Texas, EUA, 1997-1998)

Dear Stephen Tyler

Prohibited

   We know that the journey to evocation takes us along a labyrinthine path. This is the first break in our journey, wanting to talk about things that are difficult to talk about. We agree to dialogue using correspondences, but we know, as Bakhtin said, that there is no dialogue if there are no replies involved in the formation of the sentences. This is our second breakup, wanting to talk and instead seeing ourselves led to write. In short, we have here a double eclipse between what and how. Since there are no predetermined guidelines to follow when talking about evocation, I am going to begin with my eyes closed, without an idea of ​​the beginning or the end, listening to that music of shadows that creates the eclipse of evocation. There, in that place of transit, where everything is done in folds and shadows, I listen to a subtle monologue written by Mark Twain. From that place, I will talk to you about my vision of ethnography.

   “I am almost a day old. My arrival dates back to yesterday, at least this is what I believe, and it must undoubtedly be so since if it occurred a day before yesterday I did not notice the event. Let me take notes and I hope this helps me stay vigilant. I will be doubly vigilant so that if a day before yesterday happens again it will not go unnoticed. I think that the best method is to write it down immediately, thus avoiding all confusion, a secret instinct tells me that these details are going to be very important in the future for the historian. I am an experimental fact. No one like me can experience this feeling of being a simple experiment more deeply. Feeling leads me to a deep conviction, so I affirm, I am an experimental fact and nothing more than that."

Mark Twain

Eve's Monologue

Criticism of the text

  My ideas about ethnographic evocation are in tension with writing. In this notion of writing I include the alphabetic phonetic system that tries to represent both voice and speaking, language and its inscriptions in writing as well as inscription in general which questions the notion of writing itself as a representation for putting out what Derrida calls “gramma” and “difference”.

  In the end, both are writings, the first represents an original word in each presence or absence of spelling, and the second denies that transparency between writing and orality, putting in the place of the latter that differentiated inscription that writing forms which seems not having an outside. Both scriptures, among which many other scriptures appear in their polarities, cease to interest me in this debate from the moment they form a text.

   The field that writing criticism has opened is vast and discontinuous. Bakhtin's significant ideas on polyphony and bivocality would not have been possible, just to cite one example, if he had not defended the derived and dependent character of writing with respect to the living utterance. On the other hand, without the opacity that Derrida finds in writing as a stroke disconnected from any original representation, his reflections on logocentrism and scriptural logistics did not advance sufficiently. Also, as Foucault tried to prove in Words and Things, seeing discourses as spatialized grammars, as topographies of the senses, as scriptural enunciations, helps us ourselves understand how language creates and names things.

   Critically important here are cognitive studies on written versus audible languages. To cite an example, the research of Havelock (1963-82), Goody (1977), Ong (1982) and Olson (1977-96), on writing and orality, although at the time loaded with speculative historicism, brought light on the issue of the contextualization that is characteristic of speaking versus the decontextualization that is characteristic of writing, as well as the relationships between writing, speaking, and the generation of states of consciousness.

    While some have defended the dominance of writing over speaking in highly differentiated cultures, others have argued in favor of the situational fecundity of speaking by referring to the mnemonically intricate deixticality of certain cultures. On the margins of these theoretical determinations, we are continually surprised by the increasingly better studied phenomenon of the grammar of consciousness. Many pedagogical episodes about the process of learning to write and speak are enigmatic here.

   Let us recall that example of ST Augustine when he said that reading is a form of oral recitation in an audible voice, while later, he himself was surprised to discover that reading can also be practiced in silence. In any case, given that the field is very broad, when I talk about a critique of writing, I prefer to keep out of further expansion for the moment the ontological definitions about what writing is and what it is not, how it is and how it is not. is.

    Now, I think that a critique of writing in ethnography must be a critique of writing as an institution, as Bakhtin suggested in his references to the medieval view of the upside-down world. Writing, whether in its form of representation or in its form of difference in relation to language, is itself the first form of the institution. It is the place where institutions are formed. Writing forms the institution from its most primary forms that precede textualization since it intervenes in meta-oral or extraverbal modes, simulating that it fixes what is said in the language itself.

   As I suggest here, writing forms the institution not because it guarantees an inscribed memory, but because it makes visible through the linear effects of its inscribed geography, as if it could resolve the defects of memory. The power of writing is given not in its capacity to archive or store the unfixed data that are specific to memory, but in its power to invent an idea of ​​memory as something cumulative and textual. Far from archiving data, writing invents the institution in contrast to the non-linear nature of memory. And it is at this intersection between the discontinuity of memory and the textuality of writing that evocation is situated for ethnography.

    As you know, the notion of text is broad since it reflects very different meanings in its passages from pragmatics, semiotics, to interpretation, hermeneutics. However, in my understanding of evocation in tension with writing understood as text, I am referring to what constitutes a text in writing, that semiotic operation of writing that leads us to understand and know its most repressive history. . I speak of the text from the most general perspective of an economy of language, the text understood here as a prosthetic image, as a prosthesis of memory, as a regulator of the remnants, the text as accumulation, as that pedestal or mausoleon to which many productions aspire, the text understood as an institution.

    A critique of writing in ethnography, in my opinion, must be a critique of the event and the events through which, between the discontinuity that is characteristic of living memory and the linearity that is characteristic of the text, writing turned into text invents the institution. But this must extend beyond a simple criticism because we are not calling this sense here with the intention of improving or perfecting the representations, quite the contrary, to reject at all costs with it the textuality that the representation implies. When we do ethnography we must precisely follow this plot, this warp and meticulously recognize that instance or moment in which alphabetic writing disconnects from living performance and creates a text which forms an institution of the textuality that this text supposes.

   Then and there, we find that to write we are devoid of our relationships with others and our relationships with ourselves. We are immersed, we relate things through the spatial indicatives of grammar. There we discover that writing is a memory of the language that the language is never purer than when we remember it in writing. We must recognize how writing initiates this first form of language memory.

    Writing is an activity that discriminates the meanings of discourses and their contexts even when we write simple descriptions. To write we are obliged to discriminate a wide variety of meanings that cannot, do not admit and do not allow themselves to be textualized, these omitted and excluded meanings are then projected towards the peripheries of the textual forms, only the meanings that the institution can textualize form the text. In the act of writing we remember the language and make it present, in contrast, in speaking, we use the language and make it change, we transgress the language with multiple meanings that renew it and that are continually renewed as meanings even though let us forget this reality.

    We must find that subtle sense through which, in its obsessive activity of remembering language, writing forgets the subject. I would even say that the subject is doubly forgotten in writing, and that we must remain attentive to this. When we write we feel that by writing we reflect better because we silently hear our own thoughts in a faint recitation.

   But when we distance ourselves from this relationship between writing and thinking and look towards that written text that writing forms, writing seems to sleep in its own materiality, in itself and ask for something more. If looking at the writing and the text that it forms, we do not listen to what it is asking of us, an impression of request that comes to us through ourselves, from the memory of the language that the writing itself assumes understood as a text, if We do not listen to where she is asking us to take her and instead we remain folded inward trying only to express our thoughts, the writing stops, it stops.

   We must observe in this subtle fact how the scripture wants to think for us. The dilemma begins here at this point, when the subject, recognizing that his place is omitted by writing, invents himself in it. We know that the subject always invents itself, even when we want to forget this reality, but we must know how the subject invents itself as an institution in writing because it is precisely in the invention of the subject by writing, that we perceive in that demand that through the mediation of ourselves, writing understood as textual memory of the language asks us to carry it, as we discover that the subject has been omitted from its place and has been invented.

    I am saying that at a point through us writing wants to reflect for us, the subject recognizes that he is omitted from his place and that in turn he is invented, but at the same time he discovers that it is not himself that he invents, when The subject is projected outward, once displaced, towards the exteriority of writing, forming the first spatial images of memory. I think that this spatial image of memory, which is in itself the text, helps the subject resolve the dilemma of the impossibility of remembering himself in temporary memory, substituting it in its place for the possibility of being remembered in memory. space.

   The moment in which this occurs is difficult to reconstruct but we must remain very attentive to this moment. I am referring here to a function secretly linked to a particular idea of ​​memory that is invented by writing as text. I do not see an identity between temporary memory and its transition to writing, I do not see an identity in the transition from writing to text as spatial memory, I do not believe that this memory invented by the text has a relationship of identity or necessity with the living memory from which it comes, I think that this textual and spatial memory, which displaces all the omitted meanings to be text, invents an idea of ​​memory and subject that is not that memory and that subject.

   There is no relationship of necessity or causality in this sequence that goes from the discontinuity of memory with its living and corporeal character, to the linearity and spatiality of the memory that the text invents, and this is the reason why institutions They seem alienated to us, the institutions are alienated because in them and with them, that subject who once tried to be in relationship with himself and with others to write, has been replaced by a subject who no longer maintains a relationship either with himself or with others. with the others.

    In fact, I think that institutions are born from this rupture between the temporal event and the temporal as a spatial representation. A critique of writing in ethnography must recognize this primitive break between the discontinuity of temporal memory and the invention of memory by text. In the act of writing we have the impression that writing fixes, like a film, what we have remembered or said.

  We experience writing as if in it we could retain events and things as they occur in temporary memory. But in the sensation that we retain the temporal comes in turn the way in which we are thrown by writing and the text towards the spatial without remembering how we were thrown to that exteriority. We have fallen into space, where bodies are exchanged, where the economy of signs takes place, we have passed over a surface of light and falling into the text we have fallen into space, the text then appears close to the body, like the first material that feeds power and capital.

    That text that writing forms returns to us fortified. It returns fortified because the text brings to its peripheries all the accumulations that writing has had to displace. We must remain attentive to this in the ethnographic process, because once the writing forms a text, the fact becomes irreversible. Everything begins to be positioned around that text, naming everything else from the textuality that it has created, periphery. From the moment the text is made or from the moment it is manifested, then we understand that everything is trapped, the self, the others, the data, the experience, everything stops being what it is to be its textualization, here textualizing converts saying into As has been said, this conversion is the arrival of the first allegory of the flight of time.

   I think that there can be no ethnographic evocation where writing understood as text plays a central role in its insertion from field work, regulating all the relationships between interpretation and experience, domesticating all the ways of understanding our experiences with others according to the We edit as happens with the ghosts of the reader or an imagined audience when it becomes an anticipated imagined audience inclusive of each decisive act and experience in our relationship with others. There can be no ethnographic evocation where text writing plays a final role through the manipulation of documents, testimonial evidence or other data to form with them a dramatic climax, a purpose of the entire ethnographic process.

    Evocation, on the contrary, makes us think of ethnographies of decentering in which the peripheries, all the lateral remnants that were repressed and dammed by the text, all the uncertainties that the text collapsed, return with all the possible relationships. between the subject and the object, the subject and the subject involved in it. Now, from the moment we take the notion of text beyond a simple relationship between the verbal and the non-verbal, the peripheries of the texts do not consist solely of gestures through a non-verbal world of corporalities, the opposite to the text, and this will be one of my main ideas, it is not only the non-textual, it also encompasses and above all temporality, when we see it thus distended in temporality, the opposite of the text supposes everything that is irreducible to the concentration that the work of textualization involves.

    A critique of writing as an institution implies the relocation of ethnographic writing close to or similar to the ephemeral. We can recognize ephemeral writings as those that, since they are created and inserted, are not made to persist or last, even when they persist, as in the example of Eve who takes notes of whether there was or opened a next day before yesterday in her daily life, or to use a metaphor, as in certain forms of shamanic writing where it is common and usual to write in the air, or as in the case of Yoruba writings originating in southern Nigeria.

   I carefully observed highly developed forms of ephemeral writing in Venezuelan urban markets, also although less so in rural ones, in which writing plays the role of listing products, writing prices, adding characteristics or elements to their more or less sales. less embellishing but continually changing according to fluctuations in prices and the agreement with customers in the relations of supply and demand, where sellers also use ephemeral materials and crayons of all kinds, such as ink and other means, to leave their spontaneous forms of writing. . I understood that one can acquire rich, highly contextualized modes of rapport from the moment there are no pretensions to textualize in order to represent or endure. When ethnography defines itself in the ephemeral, it does not transform fieldwork into writing, but rather reestablishes continuous and ongoing fieldwork in multiple sites and temporalities. The creation of ethnographic interfaces based on performativity allows us to explore various possibilities of writing and books as individual authors through which we manage to at least reduce or decrease the impact of the text.

  Far from the sole assumption of the work understood as the exnihilo deposit, a transtextual ethnography contrary to the text/process duality should be founded as a continuous poiesis, an open process that includes many creative processes that do not have or will never have a definitive closure. Such an ethnography does not go out in search of instruments as if it were embarking on a trip to collect funds, because it would be as much a philosophy of science as it is of art. We then have three things to emphasize, first, the criticism of the textual in writing allows ethnography to define itself in temporal eclipse. Second, the question about how and why this ethnography speaks about cultures is answered by this eclipse of temporality. Third, in the same way as in the description, report or documentation in textual ethnographies, a notion of the other specific to the ways that made them primarily textualizations was elaborated, in transtextual ethnography ethics cannot be asked and answered. in the same way, from the moment in which the triggers of transtextuality generate their own questions.

Evocation

    For me, evocation is a transtextual ethnography. However, to talk about it it is necessary to show why evocation develops in tension with writing. In my idea of ​​ethnography, when I think about evocation there is no ethnographer who writes. The evocation cannot be written, it cannot be spoken. Saying, for example, evoke by evoking as if we were trying to control the effects of the evocation is the same as saying run, run or talk while speaking, the verb loses its force of gravity due to the redundancy of the gerund, the verb loses that characteristic of being in the center and below, as Foucault suggested when he explained that all forms of language form strata in front of and around the verb. The verb evoke does not finish defining an action, the evoke, for example, is not as clear as the dream, dreaming dreaming is more graphic than evoke evoking since at least one can imagine that the one who dreams sounds like he is dreaming. , but we cannot say that the one who evokes evokes that he is evoking.

    The play on words becomes useless.

    Now, if evocation cannot be written and cannot be spoken given the fact that there is no place for it in speech or writing, what is its place? Some think of writing when they hear evocation, in a text of multiple interpretations or poetic effects. A trope can be evocative, but evocation in itself is not a trope, tropes are rules and derive from rules, we know the rules to create a metaphor, a metonymy or an allegory and their differences, because these tropes as figurative languages They are figures of rhetoric, ways of producing effects of speech or writing, they can be evocative, but none of them is evocation in itself, evocation itself is not a trope and does not itself form a trope in figurative language.

    Evocation is not a genre either, according to Bakhtin genres originally come from forms of situational enunciations such as greetings, farewells, replies, which become regularized and progressively form figures of writing. Writing is itself an imitation. In its simplicity of visual signs it imitates the sounds, pauses, spaces, breaks and articulations that it obtains from orality, in its most complex mode of grammar it develops and evolves genres that initially come from discursive modes, evocation It is not a form that is first reiterated in speech acts and that then evolves or is transformed reiterated to another level at the discursive, grammatical and writing levels, there is no genre that best corresponds to it, it can occur in genres. and the forms, but it is not reduced to or originates from any of them. Looking towards evocation in ethnography through choosing genres is like the fetishist who seeks sexual pleasure through the skin of Russian boots or collecting certain types of mushrooms.

    Evocation is not a language game either. If, in addition to the genres of speaking, there are also language games in writing, we do not find evocation there either. According to Lyotard, the language games that end up in writing initially come from the ways in which time is exchanged differently in the different forms of language and social communication, artists, economists, etc., think that evocation corresponds only to art because in art we have a lot of time to evoke, it is to ignore that aesthetics in general also comes from a lot of time contemplated and not used, in contrast evocation also seems to occur in modalities that suppose excess time used on things, I don't I am arguing that there is no evocation in aesthetics, there is evocation in aesthetics, in the same way that there is also aesthetics in the relations of supply and demand in the field of economics or in that of ethnography.

   Evocation is not a sum of signs and signifiers, it is not what we call significant or significant writing, it does not form an entity in some territory of language, it is not collected around something, it is not preceded or succeeded by something, it is not , as in speech or enunciation, a ghost without maps that leaves its traces in the sentences. It is not something that is before and outside language making something possible and bringing it to form. In another sense, it is not within the language forming links between signs, it is not an outside after nor being formed by a sum, it is not an effect of accumulation of meaning that remains in an outside and in an after of the territory of language or inside this territory trying to emerge from it.

   When I think of a transtextual ethnography, I do not imagine only the poetic on the other side; there can be no evocation when the ethnographer, avoiding referring to experience or believing that he or she can evoke, refers everything only to a poetic game. Let me show why it is not a writing of the signifier because when some become tired of theory then they can later use built-in theories to object without understanding. The writing of the signifier is characterized by the way in which it breaks the transparency of writing in the face of the world of speech, and in its place establishes another non-transparency, this time claiming that in writing, once understood as disconnected from the acts of speaks, the sign does not refer to itself. Not possessing an outside or an exterior, writing then appears as a logographic trace.

   According to Derrida, this serves to deconstruct the forms of logocentrism as they appear trapped in writing, while in its place, Derrida imagines a writing referred to an eternal metaphor that has no closure, the poetic game, the writing of the signifier takes us us to a type of erotic tropology. When Derrida tries to capture the logos in writing by trying to free writing from its logographies, I ask what do the signifiers do with each other when they do not receive their light from speech acts? What do these signifiers do among themselves when they only refract each other as in a house of mirrors? I think what they do is recreate themselves in language.

   For example, in some passages of fiction, when a character remembers, his memories are evoked, but doesn't this also evoke the memory? We can say that the memory evokes what is remembered as a way of saying that the memory remembers, but the evocation is not itself a memory. I would even say that if it is only a memory of what was remembered, it would not properly be an evocation, for it to be an evocation, the remembering itself would have to be evocative, that is, what would be evocative would be the action of remembering itself, we see the character remembering and It is evocative to us that his remembering remembers, no matter whether he remembers or not what was remembered in that memory, it is the relationship between his action of remembering in the situation in which he finds himself and what he remembered that can ultimately make that relationship between him evocative. remember and what is remembered.

   But evocation is not a faculty of memory or recollection, the faculty of remembering, like memory itself and what is remembered in it, refers to a past and evocation does not emerge in relation to or with a past. On the other hand, for remembering to be evocative we need another person who is outside the story, such as the viewer of the film or the reader of a book, who can see or read the fictional images or narratives of that story. character who remembers, a spectator or reader who has lived a similar experience or who can imagine what it could be like by resorting to fragments of other experiences, for whom the relationship between the remembering and what the character remembers is evocative. In another sense, outside of works of art such as films or novels, evocation can also occur when a relationship has existed between two subjects and one of them is absent.

    In ethnography, more precisely, the evocation is for those who have participated in the fieldwork, but it itself is not the simple memory or the simple remembering of that engagement. Here we are again faced with the issue of memory, this time understood as a temporal issue, the evocation is not in the past, it is not in the present, it is not in the future, but it seems formed by the eclipse of these three temporal propositions. . And this brings me back to the fact that I am remembering now that I forgot to explain Mar Twain's epigraph that trigered this essay in which Eva in her same monologue addresses this temporal eclipse that forms the evocation.

     In her monologue Eva has arrived but she does not remember the event. Perhaps God constitutes here in Eve's monologue an ethnographic evocation, perhaps this relationship between the presentiment that there was a day before yesterday which, however, is not remembered by Eve, is in itself an ethnographic evocation of God. Eva admits that she is one day old and informs us that her arrival dates back yesterday, at this point she tells us with some doubt that she believes that and therefore affirms it, since she has at the same time both the certainty like the doubt of having arrived yesterday, but not remembering precisely if yesterday was actually a day while promising to take notes immediately so that another day before yesterday does not go unnoticed again.

    We could say that Eve, the creature, and the situation in which she finds herself in the immediacy of a continuous present in which she has both the certainty and the presentiment that there was a day yesterday, as well as the doubt that plagues her. to note so that another day before yesterday does not go unnoticed, defines in itself this relationship that I am proposing to the temporality between evocation and ethnography because evidently here Eva herself is this dilemma, the situation in which she finds herself and where the writing is in relation to the situation is what I want to highlight with Twain's monologue. Eva herself is an ethnography and her sense of being a continuous experiment, of having the certainty that she can be just that, a constant experiment, will therefore, as Eva maintains, be permanent. At least this is what Eva believes, because if it was a day before yesterday she didn't really notice the event.

    In any case, Eva is an experimental ethnography and only she can be experimental because if someone outside of Eva observed the event, who was it? God? Twain, the others? . With this monologue Mark Twain makes a critical parable about the observer, placing Eve at the crucial moment of the relationship between memory and temporality, from the moment in which if another person is in a relative position with respect to Eve, who would he be, God? , the historical men? Any possibility that Eve has of remembering whether there was a day before yesterday would be remembering God, therefore, God could be observed by his creatures, which would be something that could very seriously speak against him. Mark Twain places us here with this monologue at the crucial moment of awareness about the immediate function of the text, what Eva writes can be a diary, a report, anything, but the writing situation is what is important here. This constitutes a very strong irony in the monologue. If Eve stops writing from her situation it would not be possible to evoke God, it would also not be possible for Eve herself to be evoked by writing, of course, God could exist, but not observed by Eve, while being observed by Eve God himself He could not be evoked nor Eve evoked by writing, God could exist but only after practicing hermeneutics or textualizing his own creation, God could, for example, make a poetic of his character by making Eve say what would be improbable for Eve.

   The evocation begins in field work and itself as a situation eclipses the writings. Eva's feeling of being an experiment will thus be continuous and permanent, she will have to write forever from her situation because otherwise God could not be evoked, and this evocation requires that Eva not remember the event and always requires taking it again. notes so that if a next event, a next yesterday or the day before yesterday happens again it does not go unnoticed.

    With these ideas I certainly seem to place ethnography back in the axis of cognitive studies, when we invoke the temporality of memory in everyday life in this way it seems that we revoke the cognitive sciences as Geertz in fact suggested, when defending his idea of that meanings and culture belong to the public sphere I question Ward Goodenough and compare him to you Stephen A Tyler in his essay The Dense Description (1973). This allusion is still to be expected today. In order to diminish the textuality that writing tends to create, ethnography like Eva becomes trapped in the temporal eclipse of the three propositions of time that we saw before.

   The ethnographic situation comes to the foreground above any modality of its textualization, writing can only be its eclipse, the lived experiences and the data that represent that lived experience can never be confined to or by textual forms, the genre of the Writing can be anything, report, diary, essay, book, but that which relates writing to the writing situation is always above the temporality that relates writing to the writing situation. Writing is subordinated to fieldwork but not because of the text that it forms, but because of its relationship to a temporality that surpasses it. Writings here are, as Derrida argued, disseminations, evocation, what is evocation?

   Evocation is the allegory of how the text is removed from writing making inscription impossible; it is the performance through which, like Eva, the ethnographer and the ethnographic situation are evoked by the discontinuity of memory. This does not necessarily mean a praise of memory understood as a place charged with a kind of primitive power that precedes language or as if we held that language and thought occupy parallel series. Quite the contrary, an ethnography that works in this gap moves away from memory understood as an archive, accumulation, warehouse or textual memory, and seeks the incorporeal.

    This ethnography is not interested in the event as a thing or as remembered facts, because the power of remembering events as if they were facts is an invention of the text. Structural, hermeneutic and historical poetics is a form of pychosis, the observer in it is more omnipresent than even in positivism, in positivism we are faced with a neurosis, an obsessive delirium of classifying, dissecting and finding facts, yes We would try to negotiate Eve's monologue with empiricism. The empiricist would try to prove above the situation that defines Eve between a premonition, a certainty and a doubt, if there really was a yesterday or a before yesterday, the empiricist looks for facts. , describes them, classifies them and tries to intervene in things without being affected by them.

    In poetics, the observer, although as involved as the positivist or the empiricist, like Eve, in the nature that is proper to the situation of an indeterminate present, acts as if he or she could buy time for the situation, they are non-participatory, they do not intervene in things nor do they allow themselves to be intervened by them, as observers, let's imagine him or her in the position of Eve, they would pretend to be first outside and then outside the event, to manipulate from this position a simulacrum of time through a parasitic position, or parasite that allows them to proclaim this is just an interpretation. It is as if Eva, immersed in temporality, tried to get out of the situation and instead of defining herself as a continuous experiment, she tried to represent herself better.

    Structural poetics, empiricism and positivism are an exodus of time. Pretending to be first outside and then outside without allowing themselves to be permeated, without being permeated and without participatively permeating things, they try to find what is said in the saying and the text in the processes, reducing the latter to the former. In this ethnography of continuous processes, texts can only be disseminations; it is the processes and field work that eclipse the writings. A crucial passage comes to mind here from the interpretation of cultures in which Clifford Geertz, adapting Pierre Ricouer in the ethnographic field, argued that the ethnographer inscribes social discourses, writes them down, in doing this the ethnographer moves from a passing event which exists only at its moment of occurrence. The ethnographer is then forced to relate events only through his inscriptions of those events. Geert subsequently asks, quoting Ricoeur, what writing fixes, to which he responds, not properly the event of speaking where what we understand. by the saying of what is spoken, the intentional externalization that constitutes the basis of the discourse thanks to which the saying wants to become what is said, the enunciation in what is stated, is therefore the meaning of speaking, not speaking as an event in itself. (Geertz, “Thick Description”, 1973).

   When Geertz discovers what is said in speaking, he asks, which is what the ethnographer does, and responds, he inscribes, immediately Geertz questions the reality that the ethnographer observes or records or analyzes, to conclude in the certainty of the work of field in this way: the situation is even more delicate because, as I have noted, what we inscribe or try to inscribe is not properly social discourse, because except in a very marginal or very special way, we are not actors, we do not have access directly but only a small part and our informants. These ideas were undoubtedly important for interpretationism in anthropology, a position that from a symbolic point of view I share, the fact that ultimately we develop interpretations of cultures that are a result of our relationship also to our own writings, but I do not have to say Well, it becomes obvious that I distance myself from Geertz, his vision of the ethnographer as someone who inscribes, who does not have access or is not an actor is very distant from mine, Geertz, whether he likes it or not, cannot escape catastrophic time, his way of Understanding this only requires or asks for inscribed textualizations of things, if we are actors, if we participate and if we are permeated and permeate the things we experience.

    I suggest that in order to think about evocation we need to locate ourselves in the temporal situation in which Eve finds herself, so let us return to Ricouer but this time precisely to discuss the temporal question. Ricoeur begins in Time and Narration (1985) with the classic question about the ontology of time and asks how the present can be if the past is no longer, the future is not yet and the present is not always. His answer is that

It is impossible to define the present by itself, since it has no permanence or extension in time, it is rather in the passage itself, in the transition where one must simultaneously search for that multiplicity of the present, then, Through memory, attention and expectation, which are involved in the subjective certainty of the passage of time, the present is established as Saint Augustine would say that the spirit distends itself to the same extent as it extends, if If we replace the notion of present with the notion of transition or passage, we will find that there is no future time, there is no past time nor a present time, but a triple present, a present of future things, a present of past things, and a present of present things. Augustine left it to us to understand and investigate the most primitive temporal structure of action. Pierre Ricoeur, Time and Narration, 1985

At the same time, Ricoeur's thesis on mimesis constitutes one of the best stories told by the writer in the land of fantasies, the first mimesis is given in that the work always embodies, (enbody, incorporates, becomes a body) a primitive connection with culture, the second mimesis consists of the fact that the writer, through these embodied narratives, writes the work, but the work itself maintains its correlation of experience because its configuration is temporal and therefore forms a plot. The third mimesis consists of the fact that in the work, the reader finally confirms what has been anticipated since then, thus reaching a happy ending, the public interprets what had previously been interpreted by the author. Memory, attention and expectation as the three forms of subjective certainty of the passage of time to which Ricoeur refers, were data and experience in the anthropology that preceded Geertz.

For them, the experience was referred to a series of events to which facts corresponded, which was then translated as time for the ethnographer to record, observe and analyze. But although memory, attention and expectation are moments of rigor, they can also result in naive constructs. The ethnographer sees the time spent in fieldwork as encounters with events, the duration of a shared experience, the extension of a learning process, the intensity of contacts. In reality, in ethnography, time and memory are much more intense and much less controllable matters, as made explicit in the example of Eva, which does not lead us to events realized as facts or realized as texts, but instead leads us to leads to defining ethnography itself as an event, or as the event, to use Eva's terms, as an experimental fact in itself and as the event of this experimentality.

Far from representing cultures, ethnography located in this axis and crucial moment of temporality does not try to resolve or explain it, it does not try to gain time from situations, rather ethnography itself leaves itself to the situation, letting this eclipse of the triple present in the present continuous returns through ethnography and transforms it into a continuous performance with all the ethnographic relationships in that performance involved. An ethnography that discusses the text in writing, a transtextual ethnography that seeks the break between the discontinuity of memory and the linearity of the text must itself be an event. Events are not things that precede language trapped in memory and then manipulated by the ethnographer as if he or she held them like a film away from fieldwork. Nor are events traces that leave their inscriptions in language in ways that the ethnographer can or should textualize.

Rather, it is the challenge of ethnography to find the event, the performance that can make ethnography itself a performance-event, it is the challenge of ethnography to perform that performance event in a similar way, to use an example/metaphor, to that in which Lewis Carroll asked the reader if he had constructed the Gardeners' Lyrics according to the events or if he had instead constructed the events according to the Gardeners' Lyrics, ethnography must assume this not to prove that the events live in language, we already know that, but to evoke the incorporeal and indefinite event. This event that corresponds to the work of the ethnographer is radically different from the events understood as facts or as produced texts, it would rather be the event of the absolutely singular, something similar although perhaps not as aristocratic as when Deleuze said

We must find the events on the surfaces in that incorporeal vapor that escapes from the bodies, and if there is nothing to look for behind the curtain it is precisely because everything visible and all possible science is found precisely on the surface of that curtain, that is Following the edges that we can move from bodies to the incorporeal, events are like crystals, they become one and the same event that awaits or receives all other events, thus becoming the unlimited event that transforms into an ideational event. , the incorporeal event. (Deleuze, The Logic of Sense).

Contextualizing ethnography in this eclipse may mean erasing field work, but not to avoid the temporal, thus gaining time for writing or text, but rather in the sense of accumulating the greatest amount of time possible, such as the time that passes, which is given, so that for so long we do not want to remember, since time is nothing but simply becoming, this ethnography will always occur, it was even happening before our arrival, we do not find correspondence between language and the world, between the identity and the difference, between what is represented and its representation, because we are never in the same place when we ask the question, becoming comes to ethnography or ethnography comes to becoming, but this is not the becoming that can be integrated into a representational narrative or a representation, it is not so much the existence of becoming, it is not so much what exists in becoming as what insists on becoming.

Ethnography here has to do with the fourth dimension which is the dimension of meaning, it does not deal with meanings, therefore, the self and the others, the us and them, the observer and the observed, the before and the after, the beginning and the end, all of this disappears in this ethnography, but not because it is replaced by a textual representation but because we discover ourselves evoked as Eve or as god in a contextualized performance. In this eclipse, ethnography is revitalized in the performance. There are no others, neither in the unconscious, as Lacan would think, nor in the real, because both the unconscious and the real are part of the same monophonic series. The work of ethnography is not about others, not by others, not for them, instead, ethnography itself allows itself to be reported by time as if it itself were the eclipse. The situation of ethnographic climaxes speaks for the participants of ethnography through performance, we must find the means to make field work experimental, a field work expanded in its correlations with situations of audiences and book readers, publics, that They eclipse like performances that eclipse the writings. When I think about evocation I see fieldwork as a creative and living research, as a different process and in critical tension with the texts, fieldwork is the place where the performance develops, a non-empirical multisensory event, multitemporal, from the we ask about the notions of body, place, discourse, course of discourse, memory and language.

From this vantage point I am interested in returning to Eva's monologue, this monologue has offered us the parable of the discontinuity of memory and its irreducibility to the linearity of the text, Eva's scattered or dispersed writings lead us to to a redefinition of the status of observation, Eva's example also illustrates the openness of the works. In this type of ethnography, the material obtained from processes at one moment in time can be reconsidered and edited at other moments in the process, since a report in this type of ethnography is always a performance. Eva invents herself day by day, which is what Eva does, we could say that Eva makes a diary, a chronicle, a report, but none of these genres can encompass the situation in which Eva finds herself, Eva in reality she makes a performance, since she is evoked by the eclipse of time, becoming herself as an always and continuous experiment. These performances can be books by individual authors, they can be museum practices, they can be multimedia, exhibitions, staging, films.

   A book in this ethnography refers us to that beautiful passage when Deleuze said, a book is not an image of the world, and even less a meaning of the world, in a book there is not much to mean or interpret, but there is much to experience, not so much to understand, as much to use, the book must make a machine with something like a small instrument for something that is outside of it. (Deleuze, Foucault, 1986)

A book among us must always be a place for performance, ethnography invents its identity as an eclipse of experiences. And it is here in this fold formed by forgetting where we must stop, it is not, of course, literal forgetting in the sense of amnesia or not remembering, it is not forgetting in that sense of something not retained, erased or replaced, It is much more subtle than this, it is not an forgetfulness that looks towards the past, it is rather an forgetfulness between ourselves, between us and things, between us and others. In order to find this other meaning of forgetting we should simply say let it be, let it be, let it happen, it is not a defect in memory that leads us to forget, it is instead a lack of need for repetition, a non-identity between the elements of a sequence. If we make the mistake of stopping too much at this point, and try to see everything through the relationship between identity and difference, we fall too quickly and too deep, we fall into the relationship between being and nothingness. Forgetting in this sense is not something we must do, it is something that was happening at once, it is not not remembering but simply letting things be and happen, letting the future happen.

  Some of us would call this simply learning, because certainly as Bateson said, we really learn when we learn to learn. and I think that this was the noblest sense that guided the best anthropologists. It is what survives and keeps us perplexed before Malinowski's The Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922). However, I do not want to abandon with this idea of ​​forgetting what is most important in this ethnography, the break between the discontinuity of memory and the linearity of the text.

  I conceived, wrote, composed and created this essay in Spanish in Houston, this is the same essay revised for publication, (note: Abdel Hernandez San Juan)

  notes 

   I written this paper-letter to Stephen A Tyler since I get am inspired in some paragraphs on evocation I choiced from Stephen A Tyler paper published at the Adveniment of posmodern anthropology edited by Carlos Reynoso which I quoted and included inside my work The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography. The discussion on evocation versus representation and or as alternatives of representation was first discussed by Clifford Geertz at Being Here, the Anthropology as author, while not quoted or included inside the work, based however  in that discussion in anthropology, I written several paragraphs of my authorship on both concepts representation and evocation I then included it at the show case of the market from here at the cronotropes room self-representational room of photography’s of myself and Calzadilla in the markets and a few meters from the cronotropes room in the middle of the work I quoted over a transparent surface pending from the sealing Stephen paragraphs on evocation as  my choice of affinity on how to understand evocation and specially on how to understand it inside a posmodern discourse of anthropology on ethnography 

Bibliography

Bakhtin M. M. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (University of Texas Press Slavic Series), 1983

Deleuze, Gilles Logic of Sense I and II, Columbia University Press, New York, 1990

Derrida, Jacques, Differaance, Margin of Philosophy, The University of Chicago Press, USA 

Derrida Jacques, Differance, Margins of Philosophy, Cathedra, 1989

Havelock (1963-82), Goody (1977), Ong (1982) and Olson (1977-96), Writing and orality, Compendium, Canada

Ricoeur Pierre, Time & Narrative, books 1, 2 and 3) University of Chicago Press; 1 edition (September 15, 1990)

Tyler Stephen.  “Post-Modern Ethnography, Pp, The Unspeakable, Discourse, Rhetoric and Dialogue in the Posmodern World, Wisconsin University Press

Tyler, Stephen A. Evocation, A Response to Abdel Hernandez San Juan, Sept 9, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA, 1997

Twain Mark. Eve's Diary. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1906

Memory and repetition

©Por Abdel Hernandez San Juan

   Memory by itself, as an aptitude, capacity and resource, is not so much what focuses my attention here, although in the past I have dedicated efforts to the analysis of it in the relationship between writing and orality, its relationship to memory and evocation, the areas that I want to discuss this time move towards phenomena which lack a literature dedicated to addressing them.

  Through these areas, memory is presented not as a phenomenon internal to consciousness and subjective flow, but as something objective referred to the forms through which experience, experiences, the world and works are repeated, superordinated, superadded, simultaneous, counted, remembered, preserved, retained, accumulated, collected, inscribed, transported, conveyed, mediated and intermediated.

  Attention to these phenomena is significant for the analysis of memory in the worlds of mundane discourse, the world of life, ways in which these areas participate in the everyday dimension, in writing, in the production of spiritual and material culture, in the media, in inventories, collections, museums and archives.

  As a global whole within the dynamics of daily life, social and cultural life, this area of ​​memory and repetition refers, from its miniaturized dimension, to a relationship that on another scale is that between avant-garde, innovation, on the one hand, and conservatives or conservation, on the other. Experience, heritage and typification continually resort to processes of accumulation and repetition that are forms of memorization through which knowledge, values ​​and traditions, while being reproduced, are also preserved.

  Experience is an accumulation that forms a continuous relationship between memory and repetition, the collection is a type of memory that requires repetition and also typification, while paradoxically Relevance and Significance, especially the latter, require it less.

  We will then distinguish first, that experience, acquiescence and typification are objective forms of memory and repetition, second, that the superordinate and superadded activities to the mundane passing suppose a second and more complex relationship between memory and repetition.

  When we go beyond simply recounting experiences lived in person, by telephone or email, or in photographs and films of everyday life, as in the oldest mnemonics such as transcripts, diaries and dated letters, we have memory, repetition and registration.

  I have wondered whether any form of repeating, including modern flash memory despite all the newness it brings to file and transport speeds and capabilities, could be memory-free, and I have concluded that all repeating It supposes memory.

  Despite this, not all forms of repetition that take shape in memory processes are exactly repetitions in the sense of identical, although we always have repetition in memory, some of the forms of this repetition are not identical. That memory is like a cognitive activity, a procedure that requires repeating in images or coding systems such as the word, the verb and writing, something prior to being remembered to be memorized there is no doubt, but when we move away from internal cognitive processing to subjectivity, and we observe the objective forms of memorization that occur through technological devices and media, the phenomenon is modified quite a bit, in photography and film, memorization does not require memory, but rather inscription in what the recording refers to. and reproduction.

  In them, however, on the one hand, the ontology or the being itself of what is repeated in the inscribed, recorded or reproduced dimension, is different from the ontology of that which its repetition retains and reiterates. The reality of the images of a recorded and reproduced experience is different in its being itself as well as in its consistency with what it refers to.

  In reality, by the way, it ceases to be, as what is referred to, a being in itself or an existence, but in its dimension involves a phenomenon of objective reproduction of society and the culture of knowledge, values, images, customs and traditions. traditions in them, what is repeated in this way is also preserved and reproduced as much or more than in the written and oral activities of simple narration or telling, so there would be a good reason here in favor of the fact that all forms of repetition requires and supposes a difference because despite the fact that at first glance, what is repeated in technological reproduction, such as the copies of the files that go to the flash memory, or the photograph printed the same infinite number of times, seems identical, it is only as an impression, an appearance, if it is repeated it is memorized and from that moment a social and cultural repetition is added to a physical repetition and already at this superordinate level it is not identical, it generates something new.

  There is certainly reproduction in the relationship of continuity between the technological device and culture because exactly what relates memory and culture at the objective level is reproduction, the social and cultural reproduction of the objective structures of a society and a culture require the memory and despite what has been said, that some technological devices such as current flash memory or external disks, like screen printing and other forms of reproduction in the past, maintain a certain identity between the repeated motif and the objective result that refers to it, many other forms of memory that inhabit the smallest dimensions of fractality, work on once again non-identical principles. When memory in repetition is and when it is not identical is a question that refers to the relationships between technology and mnemonics, between technological serial reproduction and cultural and social reproduction.

  The question of the identical versus the non-identical appears here, a significant percentage of what is repeated in memory processes does not do so according to a principle of identity, many of the memory repetitions assume that what is repeated is not identical to what is repeated, as the ontological or being in itself of what we retain in memory as repeated is memorized, it is no longer so in the terms of the first identity, the form, the being in itself, the consistency and initial objectivity of what is memorized.

 What has been said before does not refer to the fact that memory does not retain it or does not remember it well, but to the fact that the repetition that memory makes occupies another space, another consistency and another ontology with respect to the referent or the motive that in We code its memorized conformation as reiterated.

  This non-identity of what is repeated, which is repeated but not repeated, or which is repeated but in memory, acquires relevance not only and less so with respect to memory as a form of memory, but becomes decisive in objective forms of memory that do not refer to memory as a reflex activity of images, a concept of memory that moves away from our usual meanings of memory as a memory made up of associations of images.

  Despite this, some phenomena that are also external to the subjective flow of memory understood as an activity related to memory, do require theoretical knowledge about some aspects of that memory, for example to analyze forms of this other memory that focuses my attention as They are the reconstructive forms developed through films and photographs from performance in art when it must account through photographs or film or cinematic sequences of what that performance has consisted of, also to analyze the forms of documentation because when the The objective of what is repeated not only seeks to preserve it but also to reconstruct it, the form that the documented takes is subject to what has been experienced and its memory in the experiential memory and the body.

  However, there are forms of memory in whose repetition the memorizing or memorizing text itself becomes transformed into the identity of the event, as occurs specifically in certain forms of art when a work forms itself as a result or product of work with the cinema of a documentation that at the same time work under the principle of referring or reconstructing a previous process given that it is in itself irreproducible, the cinema that forms the document becomes itself the shaper of what is stated in the work. as the shaping of the very nature of contentment

adicional Aknowledgements expressions and details

   I want to take this opportunity to thank in a very special way my friends and colleagues who supported me with their sponsors both with my laboratory in 1998 and later with my trips to Chicago and Florida, especially Cristina Jadic and Mike Jadick for their support as sponsors in my laboratory. first and on my trip to Chicago later, To Stephen A Tyler for his support in the development of my laboratory in the anthropology faculty at Rice in 1998, to Quetzil of course, for his support and continued presence at Rice during the development of my laboratory as well as for his invitation and coordination of my trips to Chicago and Florida from Texas, as well as before for inviting me to the panel on the equinox.

  Likewise, it is the occasion to express my gratitude to people whose support the beginning of the research was related to, to Fina Weiss and Peran Hermini for their attention and kindness during my anthropology seminar at the Petare art museum for six months, to Vasco Zinetar, vice president, and to Tahia Rivero, president of the Alejandro Otero Visual Arts Museum, without whom I would not have been able to start or develop it. I owe them both for choosing me as curator at the museum for the market theme and infinite gratitude for having started it. Tahia Rivero, an excellent curator of Venezuelan contemporary art, who had previously lived in the United States, and Basque Zinetar, an extraordinary photographer, had from the beginning the intuition that choosing me was once and for all betting on a very theoretical option, on a on the other hand, and, on the other hand, very determined in anthropology and sociology, which is not usual in the museum of high art, despite this I made a great effort during those years to satisfy the expectations of both and of the museum in relation to the attention to my responsibilities as a curator with the topic of contemporary Venezuelan art to which I devoted significant efforts both in conferences and in publications since that same year as a curator at the museum.

Finally, I would also like to thank Surpic Angelini in a very special way, not only for the encouragement he gave me when he met me at the Alejandro Otero Museum of Visual Arts in 1995 and for showing that he was attracted by some of my theoretical writings from that time on the topic of the market and my project at respect but above all because later he was the person who knew me closely to what extent I was immersed and submerged in my individual research and only as much about the market and in the popular markets of Venezuela as later when I made The Market from Here, without His encouragement and support first in Caracas and then in Houston, I would not have done The Market from Here nor would I have continued my research and field work in the United States.

Notes

-For some significant previous reflections on the markets see Stephen Tyler's analyzes on the markets in India

On the analogy of physics we focus on transactions that signify just the objective movement of things, forgetting that exchange may also affirm the moral basis of society.         

  Transactions do not just signify~ the movement of goods, they symbolize mutual obligation. The objective movement of goods can only signify the fact of exchange, and because it thus implies nothing more than exchange, it cannot by itself reveal its meaning, cannot speak of what it symbolizes. We must distinguish then, between transactions that merely signify and those that symbolize. Thus, when an Indian farmer, from his hard-won crop, gives a traditional share of grain to the blacksmith who fashioned his implements of production, it is not just a payment for goods and services but an affirmation of a continuing relationship which recognizes the fixed pattern of statuses and symbolizes the performance of mutual duties. His act symbolizes the moral obligations of the social order. It symbolizes dharma in both of its senses as duty and order, The mutually implicated acts of the farmer and the blacksmith are simultaneously ex- pressions of their respective duties (dharma) and affirmations of social order (dharma). 

  Significantly, economic transactions are but one of the many possible settings in which these group relations may be symbolized. The giving and taking of food, the exchange of women in marriage, precedence in cere- monies, patterns of respect and deference in speech and behavior, and performance of religious observances serve equally as appropriate settings. 

  in the Dharrna S6stras nothing is more clear than that the moral or cosmic order (dharma) dominates the economic and social orders. This view contradicts our notion that "business is business," the predominant presumption distilled out of the historical circumstances of the Western experience of the industrial revolution. 

  We first see this conception of society as a transcendent unity created by transactions between egoistic atoms in our idea of the market, and we trace this purely cognitive transformation of the idea of the market from that of a concrete locality to a transcendental abstraction in the writings of proto- economists of the eighteenth century who both effected and documented it. In its earlier concrete form the market was simply a neutral place of ex- change, the brief meeting of strangers solely for the purpose of handing over natural goods, goods which had not been culturally transformed, which had not become symbolic. 

  They were places set aside, immunized as it were, from the surrounding culture-not just secular places, but places of pure objectiviry. They were concrete localities where objects of one kind came together in exchange for objects of other kinds. They were meaningless places where disparate groups could meet without incurring moral obligation, places where citizenship, persona, and soul could be forgotten. Because they implied amorality it is not surprising that they should so often have been associated with carnivals. Fairs were, and anyone who has in his youth walked a midnight midway can affirm that they still are, both places of exchange and settings in which everyday morality is temporarily set aside. Fairs, and early markets too, combined exchange with the atmosphere of a carnival. 

   This leads us to ask: "What then is the basis for a metaphoric identity be- tween exchange and sacrifice?" There are several, such as for example, the giving of gifts (cf. Tyler 1973:164-165), but more importantly, both sacrifice and exchange imply something about the transformation of one thing into another, the assignment or reassignment of meaning. The root metaphor for this whole process is the idea of creation, that original formation of order out of chaos, that first transformation of the natural world which changed it into a meaningful cultural world. I am suggesting that this process of establishing order out of the disarray of natural phenomena constitutes the basis for the homology between sacrifice and exchange in general.

Stephen A Tyler, A Point of Order, Rice University studies

-My theoretical-ethnographic essay on urban anthropology to which I make references From Modern to postmodern is at the same time the catalog text, it is also the text that introduces the work in its first room illustrated with 15 photographs, the same one that is later distributed as a guide text for the museum room throughout the entry and exit route of the work and which was at the same time the text that includes my previous field work research prior to the beginning of the realization and conception of the market from here used in The mode of the script or libretto as a text to be placed on the visual scene in the mode of cinema or theater was published as a catalog text that we distributed at the inauguration of the work.

 The urban popular markets in which I did my fieldwork are, in their staging, the most complete and best-complexed expression of how this principle is the same articulator of cultural traditions, the artifacts, forms and symbolic constructs generated by the culture of these men are already their productions, cultural forms that presuppose having been themselves, in the same way that these markets, cultural recreations of consumption

but the work with Fernando and Elaiza introduced a new element previously undiscussed, which was dramatization and theatricalization in a way that subsequently moved away from what was previously theorized both in this essay and in others about how I individually practiced and conducted my own work of field alone.

   This new dramatic and theatrical component became progressively more predominant since Elaiza and Fernando began working with me, which extended to three months in which we moved away from my previously theorized logic alone and leaned towards Elaiza's logic of which began a learning process due to my few previous experiences with theater and I will now explain. Instead of, as I explained before, adapting to the logic of the market, Elaiza proposed the opposite, transgressing them with a theatrical and dramatic posture, what consequences did this have?

      Fernando and Elaiza, men from the world of theater trained for many years in working for theatrical productions and at the same time Venezuelans accustomed to these markets all their lives, generally had pre-established preferential relationships with certain vendors, that is, they went less to the market to deploy in a shopping spree with an unforeseen horizon and more directly to what they already had preselected, they in a certain way already had their sellers chosen knowing which ones sold the merchandise they required and this gave a peculiarity to That period, since not infrequently we went directly to see and talk to certain sellers that they already knew before, which did generate longer dialogues around certain things that were of great attraction to me.

      With the above I do not mean that in my fieldwork only certain dialogues were not relevant, but these always occurred in the end as dialogues diluted in daily life and not as dialogues that began to be with Elaiza and Fernando in which from the beginning I told the seller what we wanted and why and why we wanted it, I have talked about this elsewhere, when Fernando, for example, was making the herbalist's table for our room, about the herbalists we went several times to talk to one because Fernando wanted us to I explained to him how he had made the table on which he prepared the medicinal herbs that he sold and certainly on that occasion we spent about an hour or two listening to what he had to tell us.

   In this same way, through Fernando and Elaiza we managed to collect certain types of objects and materials.

   There is something theatrical very intrinsically related to Elaiza's work as a theater producer, for Elaiza it was important to know what the dramaturgy of something that Fernando and I wanted to do in the play was and from this perspective she very much like the way she does it for her theatrical productions, he went to the markets directly in search of the best options with a well-dramatized accent in his way of approaching these people. By this I mean that in Elaiza there was a certain imagining of the seller in dramatic and theatrical terms as a figure theatricalized by the same perspective that gave to the fact that we were doing a work that, although it was not properly theater for her, could not in any case fail to be seen as it is usually seen in the theater.

    In this, although less, Fernando followed her a lot in the sense that he shared with her a similar vision, that is, there was a way in both of them of seeing the seller as the main character of the work that we were going to do and in that sense they came to already to the sellers with an intense dramatic or dramatized vision, regarding this my experience was that of learning, that is, I did not get very involved in it nor did I characterize my own way of doing field work as I had been doing it alone, but Yes, I opened myself up to this new stage beginning and to things once working with Elaiza and Fernando starting to be like this while at the same time paying attention and beginning to analyze it. In fact, I not infrequently told Elaiza that I felt fascinated with her way. theatrical and dramatized addressing the vendors

     She approached them directly and head-on, speaking to them, communicating to them a way of seeing their world in some sublimated way, she approached them making them feel that we were fascinated with them because there was something important in them before which we were dazzled, she theatricalized and dramatized the take. and daca intensely drawing attention in a theatrical way to the products, to the merchandise and to them, what they knew, their lives and the interest they had for us, Fernando did second best in this because in a certain way he also saw it So although she tried to stay somewhere in the middle by not getting so deeply into the way Elaiza did because she realized that I experienced it differently, Elaiza's way was as if at the time she I was talking to a seller at that moment the scene went dark right there and as in Fellini's films everything was transformed in the same spaces of the market into a theatrical scene, it was as if a point light in the middle of the darkness illuminated that person. seller with her anatomical features, the color of her skin, the characteristics of her clothing, the color of her chair, the wood with which her table was made, the way she placed her merchandise, she gave a dramatized accent to a merchandise like If the curtain opened and closed around a complete product at the very moment of talking to the seller about where he got that product, he would be praised, it would make him feel that he was the best seller in all those surroundings and that for that reason we We wanted something more than just buying her, we wanted her to reveal her enigmas to us, this was central to the way we worked with Elaiza, she introduced a dramatic and theatrical component, suddenly she transgressed the space that separated seller and buyer, she entered the cubicle and asked her but For the love of God, explain to me how you made this mooring and he stood next to the construction system and told him this is the best mooring I have never seen, explain to me how you achieved it and the exalted salesman was proud of his mooring and explained how he had built his mooring. camping.

    I am right now remembering a scene of field work with Elaiza, this time it was a chair because before she had gone for a table since Fernando, after finishing his paintings of the plaster icons and the elaborations of the virgins, was immersed in making the table from the herbalist, but that time Elaiza stood in front of the seller and said, but my son, for the love of God, but this chair is wonderful, please don't even move, she told the seller, let me see that chair, it was simply the banquetica ordinary and humble in which the seller sat but it was weathered by time, it had a certain wood, and Elaiza said I love it, and the seller asked her but how come you want my chair, it is not for sale, it is only where I sit down, I sell these merchandise here, and Elaiza said yes, but what I want is your chair, sell it to me for as much as I can, I can't sell it to you, the seller told her, so explain to me how you made it, she saw something insurmountable in that drumstick. , nothing and no one could achieve or obtain with an effect the purity and authenticity of that ordinary and humble bench, she was in the market and she was already seeing it illuminated on the theatrical scene only that what was illuminated this time was that an object outside the most authentic way he was in the real life of the salesmen, explain to me how you made that chair, I want it, sell it to me, I'll give you a hundred dollars, if you let me have it, and by the way, sometimes I manage to get things that way . These things, of course, we photographed some of them and not infrequently they became relevant given that Elaiza managed to meet with the sellers in another world, a sublimated world absorbed by the subjectivity of the theatrical scene.

      Elaiza's theatrical drama was central in many aspects with regard to the object and scenographic aspects of what we were doing in Quinta Fuente Ovejuna and also acquired or gave it there in the markets a unique characteristic to that stage of field work, Now moving away from everything I explained before about my way of experiencing, living and theorizing, my own fieldwork was only experiencing something in which the moment of intersubjective give and take was governed by a relationship that moved away from the logic of the market to superimpose a dramatic and theatrical logic on it, I opened myself to it and explained several times to Elaiza that I was also fascinated with how she did it and that I was very interested in the way she brought those theater techniques and even in analyzing how she did it. Before, when I only produced theatrical works, about which we began to talk and dialogue many times, here began an interesting stage of dialogue between my conception and theory and the experience that their expertise provided.

    There is also a component that was fascinating for me in Elaiza and Fernando which I have discussed in another essay, they both have a lifestyle in which, as if the week itself were a restaurant, they have a menu of what they are going to do. to have breakfast, snack, lunch and dinner during the week and for that objective they have a diet that requires a very orderly way of doing their markets each week. This diet or weekly menu was itself an expression of the fact that both had already had a very close relationship before. punctuated with the market in the sense of having reached in their lives a high selectivity of their sellers, in a few words they were already going directly to their chosen ones who, moreover, certainly had the exclusivity of providing them with the type of products that already They bought, this fact also interested me and it transformed the tours and visits to the market each time into a more exclusive activity until at one point our visits to the markets were very selective.

      While my perspective was eminently sensoryized and abstract, more focused on the hermeneutics of that immersion and the ways of understanding in it the relationships between the visual and the interpretive, between what it means to be there among them and what it is beyond just observing to capture the quickness grasp of what makes markets first a surrounding world and then a ceremonial and ritual form of culture in a broad sense, while the mode of my field work wanted to receive from the analysis of the logic of markets a theory about observation , on participant observation and on everything previously discussed theorized according to the markets, apprehending their logic and meanings from within, which I have called the polyphony of the markets, Elaiza's point of view proposed transgressing it with a theatrical performance aimed at defining the seller. as the main character of that dramatization.

    In fact, while my perspective presupposed a vision, as is made obvious in my catalog essay and introduction as well as in the things I deal with within the work, more focused on markets as polyphonic and carnivalesque conglomerates as they are in its generality cultural traditions and which in turn presuppose a highly sensorialized world of observed observers in which the points of view and the idea of ​​a fixed and privileged observer are disseminated, Elaiza's perspective was oriented more towards the dramatized punctuation of the human being. and more specifically of the seller and his world, the latter became with Elaiza not only the main character of the work, but also the main character of the culture and the markets, her accent was on that man from the market and on everything What thanks to him could be known about a culture of which only he is an exponent and of which only he knows its enigmas, this meant transgressing the logic of the market with the reasons why we were there telling him from the beginning, that is That is, by telling them that we were making a play about the markets as a way of relating, she began a scene of give and take that transgressed the staging of barter to immerse herself in the world of the seller and make him the center of attention, which led to telling him what we did, from ways like those explained before in which without even telling them she expressed herself dazzled by anything that caught her attention, a tie, a chair, an object, to later telling them and asking them. And it is true that without Elaiza's logic we would probably never have been able to finish the work and that from a certain moment since we began to make it on the physical level, Elaiza's logic began to govern until we finished it.

    The Market from Here: Mise in Scene and Experimental Ethnography is therefore, as a whole, the conjunction, both in relation to fieldwork and then its composition, of my perspective on my fieldwork and my research in and of the markets. started two years before, the continuity of my perspective when I began working with them and the perspective that they brought, arriving as we did to conceive it as a two-person work to which I would like to add beyond the acknowledgments and mentions of credits that we made in the catalog and other materials to Elaiza's production and Ebel's photography, that Elaiza's production method was crucial if not definitive in terms of the physical form that the work acquired as well as whether its complexion was objectively possible.

Bibliography

Bourdieu Pierre, Things Said, Gedisa

Deleuze Gilles, Empiricism and subjectivity, An Essay on Hume Theory of human nature, Columbia university press

Deleuze, Gilles Logic of Sense I and II, Columbia University Press, New York, 1990

de Certaud Michael, The Practice of Every Day Life, The University of California Press, 99

Eco Umberto, Kinesics and Proxemics, The Semiotic Field, The Absent Structure

Gadamer George, Aesthetics and hermeneutics, Tecnos, metropolis collection

Derrida Jacques, Genesis and Structure: Of Phenomenology, Anthropos

Derrida Jacques, Ousia and Gramme: Notes on Sein and Zeit, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA 

Derrida Jacques, Ousia and Gramme, Margins of Philosophy, Cathedra, 1989

Derrida Jacques, Form and the Wishes to Say, Notes on the Phenomenology of Language. Margins of Philosophy, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA 

Derrida Jacques, Form and Meaning, Notes on the Phenomenology of Language, Margins of Philosophy, Cathedra, 1989

Derrida Jacques, Communication on Austin, Margins of Philosophy, The University of Chicago Press 

Derrida Jacques, Differance, Margins of Philosophy, Cathedra, 1989

Eugenio Quetzil, letter to Abdel Hernandez San Juan as transart foundation artistic director, Lake Forest College, Faculty of Sociology and anthropology, Lake Forest College, Illinois, USA, 1999

Eugenio Quetzil, et al., eds. 1999. Ah Dzib Pízté’ Modern Maya Art in Ancient Traditions. Exhibition Catalog. Lake Forest: Lake Forest College

Eugenio, Quetzil, The Invisible theater of Ethnography: Performative Principles of Fieldwork, The Open School of Anthropology and Ethnography, Anthropological Quarterly 79 (I)75-104, USA, 

Eugenio Quetzil, The Past as Transcultural Space: Using Ethnographic Installation in the study of Archaeology, the Open School of anthropology and Ethnography, and The University of Indiana, Public Archaeology: Archaeological Ethnographies, Vol.8 No, 2-3, 2009, 262-282, USA

Geertz Clifford, (1973). Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture, en The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, Basic Books, New York, pp 3–30. [Geertz 1973a]

Geertz Clifford, The Dense Description, The Interpretation of Cultures, Barcelona, ​​Gedisa, 1987

Guiner, Salvador Javier Muguenza and José Maria Maraval, Max Weber, Contemporary Sociological Theory, Tecnos

Habermas Junger, The Theory of Communicative Action, Beacon Press, Boston

Habermas Junger, The Problems of Understanding in Social Sciences, Pp, 144-196, Theory of Communicative Action, Taurus

Habermas Junger, The Self and the Social: The Change of Paradigms, Theory of Communicative Action, Taurus

Habermas Junger, The Theory of Rationalization in Max Weber, Pp, 197-250, Theory of Communicative Action, Taurus

Habermas Junger, First Interlude, Social Action, Teleological Activity and Communication, Pp 350-441, Theory of Communicative Action, Volume I, Taurus

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, From modern to posmodern markets: The Market from Here, essays of the catalogue published at the opening of the market from here, illustrate with urban markets photography’s, back yard sewall hall, rice university, Houston, Texas, usa, 1997

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Rethinking Urban Anthropology, Complete works, Tome VII

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Anthropology of Archaeology: A Perspective from Ethnometodology and Cultural Anthropology, Selected Essays, Book

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Intramundane Horizont, Complete Works, Tome VI, Book, 2017

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Self and Acerbo: The self and the social Between writing, research and culture, complete works, tome VIII

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Presentational Linguistic, Complete works, tome III, Book, 2005

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Being and Monad, Complete works, tome IV, Book, 2006

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Given and the Ungiven, Complete works, tome V, book, 2007

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Intangible, The Presentational Linguistic, Complete Works, Tome III

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Intangible, the intangible, selected essays

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, The Exegesis of the Texts of Culture, in Pp, Self and Acerbo: The Self and the Social Between Writing, Research and Culture, Complete Works, Tome IX

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, the constellation of common Sense, sociology of common sense and Anthropology ResearchTheory, selected essays

Hernandez San Juan Abdel, Thinking Science: New Horizonts of Phenomenological sociology, book

Hernandez San Juan abdel, Rethinking Symbolism, Book

Hegel, Science of Logic, Logic of being, Logic of Essence, Logic of the Concept, Axete

Hegel Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Science of Logic London: George Allen & Unwin, 1929, translated by W. H. Johnston and L. G. Struthers, translated by Henry S. Macran (Hegel's Logic of World and Idea) (Bk III Pts II, III only). Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1929  translated by A. V. Miller; Foreword by J. N. Findlay. London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1969, Prometheus; Later Printing edition (December 1, 1991), Humanity books, translated by George di Giovanni, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010

Marcus George, rethinking the longstanding forms of anthropological research and practices. By George E. Marcus, Edited by Abdel Hernandez San Juan in Houston, Texas, Abdel Hernandez San Juan mail Box, Anthropology Faculty, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA, 2001

Muguenza Javier, Salvador Guiner, Jose Maria Maraval, Contemporary Sociological Theory, Technos

Pierre Ricoeur, Time & Narrative, books 1, 2 and 3) University of Chicago Press; 1 edition (September 15, 1990)

Schütz Alfred, The Knowledge in the Worlds of Everyday Life, edited by Schutz's wife Ilse Heim with Thomas Luckmann

Tyler Stephen A, on the markets in India, A POINT OF ORDER, Pp 133-135, Rice University studies, 1973-1974, USA 

Tyler Stephen A, Presenter (Dis)Play, published at L'Esprit Créateur 31.1 (1991): 122-130

Tyler. Stephen A, On Evocation, Pp, “Post-Modern Ethnography.” The Unspeakable, Discourse, Rhetoric and Dialogue in the Posmodern World, Wisconsin University Press

Tyler Stephen A, Evocation; The Unwriteable, A Response to Abdel Hernandez San Juan, Sept 9, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA, 1997

Tyler Stephen A, Presentation, Re-presentation, Mediation-Remediation, Terapon, Pp, Prolegomena to the next linguistic, in Pp, Alternative Linguistics. Descriptive and Theoretical modes, edited by Philip W. David, John Benjamin’s publishing company, Rice University, Houston, Texas. 1995

Tyler A Stephen, emails to Abdel Hernandez San Juan, 2013-2014