Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Race
What is “race?” “Race” is a word, like many other words, that has a variety of meanings.
Miller defines race as “a classification of people into groups on the basis of supposedly
homogeneous and biological traits such as skin color or hair characteristics” (Miller 2011:23).
The word “race” is referred to in numerous different ways and can mean countless different
things to many people. The classification and understanding of race varies culturally, socially,
and historically. Amade M’Charek and John Hartigan, authors of research ethnography, discuss
what the theoretical meaning of “race” is and how it changes among each culture and around the
world.
Practice, discussed what he believes are the two meanings of “race,” and later argues which is he
believes is more accurate. One meaning being strictly biological, the other claiming there is no
such thing as biological race. To understand biological race, it’s key to look into the a person
body. Every person is made up of a biological markers like blood group, proteins, and genes.
“[It ] is a collection of biological markers that help sort people and cluster them in natural kinds”
(M’Charek 2013). The contrast, is claiming that biological race does not even exist. M’Charek
claims that in society “race” is seen as a myth. He uses a “material semiotic” approach to
investigate the materiality of race by referring to several case scenarios (M’Charek 2013). In
each one he shows that race does not materialize in the body, but rather in relationships and
relations established between a variety of entities. These cases make clear that race cannot be
reduced to skin color, physical characteristics, or national identity. He claims that race is better
defined as something similar to ethnicity, the shared sense of identity based on heritage,
language, and culture. In conclusion, M’Charek believes that race does not inhere in skin color,
M’Charek focuses on the definition of race while in contrast John Hartigan targets how
“race” varies across different cultures, especially between the United States and Mexico.
Hartigan question how skin color is perceived and interpreted in each country. This ethnography
focuses on his efforts to work on racial situations in the United States and comparing and
examining race in Mexico. He begins to question how skin color is perceived and interpreted in
each country. Then he later moves on to consider the different philosophies about racial purity,
as well as the contrasting importance of biology and culture in defining race.The main concern
that he points out is applying race as a common analytical frame in both countries can lead to
trouble. Trying to translate between “raza” and “race” in both contexts risks losing important
distinctions and difference in each country. As well, there are key contrasts highlighted between
“race” and “raza” that should not be ignored when trying settle upon one seamless analytical
meaning in both countries. He highlights several sociological and anthropological cases that
show there are various reasons to believe that the we can not assume the word “race” implies the
What “race” truly means remains subject to intense debate. Something that is certain, and
proved by these ethnography, is what that race is recognized as changes continuously depending
Miller, Barbara
2011. Cultural Anthropology in a Globalizing World. 3rd Edition. Pearson.
Amade M’Charek
2013. “Beyond Fact or Fiction: On the Materiality of Race in Practice.” American
Anthropologist
John Hartigan
2013. “Translating “Race” and “Raza” between the United States and Mexico”
American Anthropologist