5

,
t i,
,
; ., ,'J
__I
.
ASA Monographs (Vol no 38)
Elite Cultures
Anthropological perspectives
Titles available:
24 Reason and Morality
Edited byJoanna Overing
29 Anthropology and Autobiography
Edited byJudith Oke/y and Helen Callaway
30 Contemporary Futures: Perspectives from Social
Anthropology
Edited by Sandra Wallman
Edited by Cris Shore
and Stephen Nugent
."
31 Socialism: Ideals, Ideologies, and Local Practice
Edited by C. M. Hann
32 Environmentalism:The View from Anthropology
Edited by Kay Milton
33 Questions of Consciousness
Edited byAnthony P. Cohen and Nigel Rapport
34 After Writing Culture
Edited byAllison James,Jenny Hockey and Andrew Dawson
35 Ritual, Performance, Media
Edited by Felicia Hughes-Freeland
36 The Anthropology of Power
Edited byAngela Cheater
37 An Anthropology of Indirect Communication
Edited byJoy Hendry and C.W.Watson
(.
:0't
L
-S.()
.
. .
'" ",Q.
!t-./- t,.0
0,. cl- Fran
b
\ c;
London and New York
;:.'.
,
;;'
'ltii Contributors
and long term historical change. His most recent publications have
included work on cultural memory and transmission and heritage politics
inWestAfrica.
Cris Shore is Reader in Anthropology and Head of Department at
Goldsmiths College,London. His major fieldwork was carried out among
Communist Party activistsin Italy,and EU Civil Servants in Brussels. His
current research focuses on the anthropology ofinstitutions and policies,
particularly those of the European Union. Recent publications include
Building Europe: TI,e Cultura! Politics of European Integratiol/ (2000), Anthro-
pology of Policy (co-edited with SusanWright, 1997) and Anthropology and
ClIltrlfld Studies (co-editedwithStephenNugent,1997).
Jonathan Spencer is Professor ofthe Anthropology ofSouth Asia at the
University ofEdinburgh.He is the author ofA Sinhala Village in a Time of
Tiouble (2nd edn 2000), and many articles on politics, religion and conflict
in Sri Lanka..
Elizabeth Tonkin is Professor Emerita ofSocial Anthropology at Queen's
University, Belfast.She firstwent to Africa asa teacher in Kenya and later
did fieldwork in Liberia. She isauthorofNarrating our Pasts (1992) and co-
editorofHistory lind Bthnidtv (1989)ASA27.
C.W. (Bill)Watsonisalecturerin anthropologyat the UniversityofKent at
Canterbury,Hehasbeen doingresearch in Indonesiaand Malaysiafor over
two decades on subjects ranging from modern literature to Muslim poli-
tics.His major area tf fieldwork isin Kerinci in central Sumatra.He isthe
author ofOf Self and Nation: Autobillgraplty and tile Representation of Modem
Indonesia (2000) and Multiculturalism (2000).
Chapter I
Introduction
Towards an anthropology of elites
Cris Shore
Studying elites in an anthropological context
Whatmakes an elite? Howdo elites in different societies maintain their posi-
tion ofdominance over subaltern groups? What legitimates the power and
leadership ofelites and how do they reproduce themselves over time? What
can anthropology contribute to ourunderstandingofelite formation and the
politics ofelite cultures and what can the study ofelites offer anthropology?
Thesearejustsome ofthe questions explored in this volume.I Asthe contrih-
utors suggest, the study of elites poses particular theoretical and
methodological challenges for anthropology, a discipline that has long been
concernedwithissuesofepistemology,reflexivity,representationaridpower..
..idea.ofan'anthropology ofelites' might strike some asproblen1'>'...,
ati.f__ After all, what. could. be': more. elitist" than
itself, a in'the and of
Western middle:ctass academics, most ofwhom possessdoctorates from the
most exclusive universities, and whose scholarly outputisaimed primarily for
consumption by otherWestern,middle-class intellectuals? Indeed,the history
ofanthropology is the history of'an intellectual elite, which,as historians of
thedlscipline have shown',has developed itsown p;rticular discourses, rituals
and exclusionary practices (Kuper 1996; Stocking 1992; Spencer 2000).
elitism wasmanifest historicallyin itsalmost exclusive interest
in exotic'others'and its comparative negle'c6fsoa-ariilS6111tioiisand political

proceSSeS-ln ItS"'own'soCle"ties'TSonle'CfltlcsargllEthanntl1top6IogysiincOii-
.',; SCiOUs eht1si1lms also enlhedded in its traditional paradigm of'scientific
ethnography' - a paradigm that objectified its subjects while failing to
acknowledge the discipline's own affinities with political hierarchy and
Europeancolonial rule (Grimshawand Hart 1995:.J.6-7;cf.Asad 1973).
In one sense,therefore, exploring the behaviour and everyday practices of

the rather than just those ofthe poor and powerless - or
I;. .=_may offer an important
n..'.' ......
/ anthropologyitself, although it does not re-
.ji
"
sclve the problems that such 'Them/Us'or 'up/down'
.
I


.' "1""
.,!-...
:<'1-.,.'" .
I
5 4,. Cris Shore
'social network') is so protean and porous that it is almost devoid of meaning.
The difficulty of defining who constitutes the elite and what powers they
exercise in periods of social unrest is highlighted in this volume by Spencer's
study of rural Sri Lanka and Watson's account of elite formation in Indonesia.
Rather than using these concepts as fixed or tangible social science categories,
Wiltsollsiigges-cswesIiOiildtreattnemasheuristic with caution -
lls1ngguauJying iiajectivessiiCfi--;is'b;';shleSS' :miIitary\'governing', 'modern-
t? ...
differentvaneb.esoteJlfe-:-Unthe"-ofherhancl, however, the word 'elite' is a
category that does render possible some sort of
cross-cultural comparison and historical parallels that transcend culturally
specific practices. To echo Marcus (1983a: 9), 'the concept suggests that the
organization of these powerful groups can be mapped and described'. As a
working definition, elites can be characterised as those who occupy the
are
incumbents: theleaders, rulers "-:rml.--d-e-cislmrnmrrl'Siilany sector of
society, or custodians of the machinery of policy making. Elites are thus
'makers and shakers': groups whose p_ositions them above
decisions
wider society. Equally import-ant;they are the that dominate what Elias
(1978,- called tile 'means of orientation': people whose ideas and interests are
hegemonic.
.ql!:ilitj.e_sof 'agency',
and an apparent separation from 'mass society" - concepts that, in different
\vays, 6bligeiiStOconsider refatecrllieines-orstratification, hierarchy, brokers
and causal agents behind events. Elites thus 'represent a way of conceiving
power in society and attributing responsibility to persons rather than to
impersonal processes' (Marcus 1983a: 10).
What then is the scope of an 'anthropology of elites' and how might the
study of elites further anthropology's power of analysis - and, conversely its
analysis of power? The case studies of elite cultures presented in this volume
address these questions in a number of ways, drawing on examples from as far
apart as Madagascar to Mexico via West Africa, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Brazil,
North America and Britain. Before turning to consider these, let me reflect
briefly on insights gained from my own anthropological studies of elites.
Encounteringelites ethnographically:
from Euro-Communists to the European
Commission
The idea for this volume began life a number of years ago with a deceptively
simple set of questions concerning the operation of power within modern
political systen-ls:In-the e-arly 1980s I was carrying out -ethnographic research
Oil the -Italian Communist Party (PCI), at that time the largest communist
Introduction
party in the Western world and arguably the most sophisticated in its develop-
ment of Marxist theory. Studying such an organisation necessarily entailed
delving into political theory, particularly that of Marx, Lenin and Gramsci, to
whom the people I was studying claimed a special kind of intellectual kinship
and historical affinity (Shore 1990, 1993). However, it also led me to read
the work of many critics of communism, particularly those like Rosa Luxem-
bourg (1961), Robert Michels (1959) and Milovan Djilas (1957) who
highlighted the apparent oligarchical tendencies inherent in the Leninist party
model. My own analysis, based on close observations of relations within the
party apparatus, seemed to confirm their pessimism.They argued that 'demo-
cratic centralism', the organising principle that structures relations of
aurhoi'ity within all communist parties, engenders not simply elitism, but
authoritarianism and abuses of power. In short, Lenin's 'organisational
weapon; designed to overthrow the tyranny of capitalism contained the
blueprint for the tyranny of Stalinism. While this argument has been
frequently extended by liberal critics to include all parties of the 'authoritarian
left' , few have commented on the fact that most private sector companies and
government bodies are organised on similarly oligarchic and auclioritarian
oases.Authoritarianism in the business world, it seems, is a normative practice
accepted without much criticism or comment. If corporations provide a
model ofgood government, as some argue, then the study ofcorporate cultures
offers an important context for examining changing ideas and"practices of
governance in general. :<. "
As with most anthropologists, my aim was to go beyond the abstract and'"
deductive models of social science in order to understand the way social
reality is constructed by the actors themselves; their conc"eptionofthe
world . to . it" as - -For' Ital1an
commtiniSfSilie--pworenl'ViIs Tio,;';: 'w"illobilise--poiiiifarsupport against the
ruling Christian Democrat elite that had dominated Italian politics and
society since 1947. If understanding the process by which a corrupt and
dynastic political class had established its hegemony over Italian society posed
one set of questions for anthropology, so did explaining the extraordinary
success of the PCI in creating a communist counter-culture in the 'Red Belt'
regions of Central Italy. Was this self-styled 'mass Marxist party' an example of
the 'revolt of the masses' as Ortega y Gasset had long predicted: evidence of
the imminent decline of civilisation? Or was it yet another illustration of the
very opposite: 'the revolt of the elites', as Christopher Lasch (1993) puts it?
Italy is often characterised as a partitocrazia, a society colonised by its political
elites through their party machines. The key question is what gives these
parties their legitimacy? What is the relationship between the party elites and
their membership, and to what extent did elites and 1ll,ISSeS share the same
moral universe?
f:'-
Tackling these questions necessarily entailed tracking the way events,
persons and ideas interact with each other at various levels of analysis, local,
'S' Cris Shore
tutions had become crucibles for the construction of a new type of European
subject: a transnational technocratic elite with its own norms, ethos and iden-
tity. From an anthropological perspective a process ofidentity formation ox.pace
Grillo (1980), 'ethnicisation' seemed to be occurring among these deterritori-
alised national officials and politicians who had gone to serve the European
Union in Brussels. They were being transformed - or transforming themselves,
depending on one's interpretation - into a unified 'supranational' elite with its
own peculiar cultural practices, lifestyle and class interests. Consciousness,
cohesion and conspiracy were all conspicuously present. This introduced a new
dimension into the debate about the dynamics of European integration. The
conflict between rival visions of Europe (notably 'supranatioualisru' and 'inter-
governmentalism') that has preoccupied political scientists and EU scholars for
the past four decades appears to be, at root, a struggle between old national
elites and a new European transnational elite (Dewatripont et al, 1994: 41).
Whether this EU elite will evolve into something resembling a 'New Class' or
'Nomenklatura', as the privileges gained by European civil servants and politi-
cians are passed on to their children, remains to be seen.
My second observation concerned the relationship between theories of
cognition and European integration.As predicted, there had been a marked shift
of loyalties among staff in the European Commission; a transfer of allegiance
from their countries oforigin towards the EU and its institutions (the folk idiom
for this process was engrenage). What was being witnessed here was a striking
example of the way elite theory may itselffunction as an 'agent ofconsciousness'
and vehicle for promoting elite ideology. In this case, 'integration theory', as
developed by academics, was being used by EU officials to legitimise and
inculcate the idea that the European Commission was the embryo of a future
'government of Emope' . In Stephen George's words (1985: 23):
Encouraged by its success, the Commission appears to have come to
believe the predictions of the neofunctionalist theory, that it was
inevitable and that eventually unity would be achieved in its corner of
Europe, and that it would emerge as the future government of this new
supranational state.
Critics of classical elite theory have often observed that discourses about
the "inevitability' of, and 'necessity' for, elite rule are themselves part '"at the
technologies used to naturalise and perpetuate elite domination. What was
'equally apparent from my study of the Commission, however, was the funda-
mental lack of legitimacy that has continued to undermine the EU's project
for integration. EU institutions often proclaim themselves to be defenders of
the 'European interest', but to follow Berm's analysis, they are accountable to
no one and the peoples of Europe have no effective power to remove them
Introduction 9
the Commission - which precipitated the mass resignation of the Santel'
Commission in March 1999.
The EU's crisis of legitimacy (and 'democratic deficit'), I concluded, stems
from a cultural deficit expressed most visibly in the absence of a self-
identifying European people: a dr/11M to lend credibility to the political system
EU and its institutions, Elites by definition form parts of wider encom-
passing cultures. Like governments and bureaucracies, they require a general
public to affirm their position of superiority; a mass citizenry that belongs to
tlie same culture or imagined community - a community, moreover, that elites
help to define. 'Elites command respect. When they lose it, they are no longer
elites' (Herzfeld :WOO: 233). Similarly, without what Gellner (1983) called the
"cultural branding of its flock', a political elite Cannot acquire that respect in
the first place, which makes its position extremely unstable. This explains the
shift in thinking among EU strategists since the 1980s, No longer are they just
focusing their attention on the creation of a supranational elite whose new
'European identity' will 'trickle down' to the general populace. Increasing
emphasis is now placed on cultural actions to promote feelings of solidarity
and belonging among the peoples of Europe. Europe's new technocratic elite
appears to be following the all too familiar techniques of nation-building; its
goal is to create a 'People's Europe' by inventing a 'European public' and
engendering a sense of shared European citizenship and identity.
Why an anthropology of elites?
ILt,he two case studies cited above indicate some of the issues and challenges:
for anthropology posed by.theattemptto study elites 'from within',they also'
highllgllt'the importance of studying elites in their wider social and historical
context's. When the proposal for a 'conference on 'elite cultures' was put to the
1997 annual meeting of the Association of Social Anthropologists it was
enthusiastically supported, not only because the subject of elites is important
per se, but also as a, correctiveto preoccuparionwith
textual analysis, deconstruction and symbolisril'. One of the
merits of;--foct,s' on-elites 'is that us to iss.:ieS 'of
ecoil0'mics, politics and, ..changes- by
nlodernisnl--sii'lCe--d-ie-1980s - thereby restoring a more sociological and
,. ' H ., '
The study of elites provides a useful focus for addressing a range of core
anthropological and sociological. concerns including language and power;
and authority; status and hierarchy; ideology and consciousness;
ideu"tities and boundary-maintenance: power relations, social structure
and soclaic""hallge. latter point is vividly illustrated by Raymond Williams.
In hrs book Keywords (1976: 1.12-15) Williams makes the important
\':
",
",... . ,
'..
lr;';:'-
'.\ .
from office. These two criticisms were highlighted in the Committee of observation that shifts in the meaning and uses of the term 'elite' can be
Independent Experts' Report on fraud, mismanagement and corruption in directly related to -major social and historical changes and, specifically, to the f
i
Cris Shore
by 'probing their
presentafiOilsils-HerzfeICI puss.iC!200_Q;)4ZL- we may offer up insights....that
. about what an-.elite"
,reproducethe"mse!ves.------ -----.--- ...... . .. ...... ..- . ---
anthropology made little impact
-;... c- when-ifcoines to probmgthose
. c "j, cracy-Qi-- corporate_P.ower .that--Pfay such.an influential. role=r!LliJ1aping
co"ntenlporaryliuro-American society. The anthropology ofelites has been
,li' peopieS' rulers ana-to farnifiar(and
relatively 'safe') as1ea.dership;--castes, kingdoms, 'Big
Men' and informal mechanisms ofsocial control - yet even here the ethno-
graphic pictureispartial.Thedynamics ofelite culture remain somethingofa
mystery. Thisrepresents aconsiderable shortcomingfor adiscipline thatclaims
to study all ofhumankind.Despite this there is a growing recognition within
the discipline that, to recapture its authority (Fox 1991), and relevance
(A11I11ed and Shore 1994), focus its analysismore squarely
0\1. and agents0 ofpolicy that__operate
beyond the locamy as welIas--u'p'on'ii::AsDonnan and Macfarlane (1989: 6)
p;';-t it, includes'analysing the cultures ofthe policy
professional [and] penetrating and uncovering the perceptions ofthose who
seek to make their definitions ofthe world and its problems stick'.The work
ofDell Hymes, Laura Nader and Kathlyn Gough in the 1970s --;'lth its
explicit focus on multinational corporations and 'hidden hierarchiesyofpower
- began to do this. However,the theoretical and methodological issues raised
by this call to-'study up'remain largely unexplored territory as far as anthro-
pology is concerned. Once again anthropology would seem to be in danger
ofpassing the buck,or so it mightbe argued,to sociology and culturalstudies
and otherostensiblymore'political'disciplines.
Studying elites: questions of method
Ifthe argumentfor an anthropology ofelites isrelatively straightforward,how to
study isfar moreproblematic. There isno simple'soru-
non to the methodological and ethical dilemmas'discussed above. Moreover,
the term 'anthropological fieldwork', as anyone who has been initiated into
rite ofpassage'knows onlyroo wd(lsa-giossthat
coveis;\'- array()fdifferent mos-tly-qualitative, 0
anecdotal and invariably personalandsubjective.Thatsaid, the
to this bookprovideatleast fourdistinctanswers to this question.
The first is that elites can only be meaningfully understood in their wider
\ .
, \"
historicalcontext; that is, as fluid and temporal entities whose powers and
-'
,.
status"rlse ancrraJroverl:lil1e-ancl'iil -ielatiori-to broaClereconomic 'an-a social
" t-
lrr
- Jact:'epiphe-
.>
s.alJt..
".(. .
"'_'_" o.
,'-J
J'>
',of j("
:'t


:
.i
:t
;:J

i'
F
ii,

t;

*

{
t:.
I


.:
t:
J/
Introduction 13
As Nugent remarks ofthe way local patterns ofelite formation have been
formed historically by national and supra-national financial interests seeking
to exploit its resources,'ifone islooking for Amazonian elites, one could do
worse than look outside Amazonia' (my emphasis). Nowhere is the union of
history and anthropology - or anthropology and political economy - more
necessary or more instructive. In short. elites must be viewed from a
aiachronic perspective and - like the concept of'cultures' - as dynamic
processes rather than static or bounded entities.The waxing and waning' of
national elites against the currents ofhistorical change isa theme analysed in
detail by Gledhill, Harvey,Watson, Nugent,Spencer and Tonkin,all ofwhom
are concerned with developingThirdWorld societies with long traditions of
dominationby colonialelites.
However, useful as such perspectives may be, historical and political
economy approaches by themselves provide only halfthe picture and reveal
little about what isat stake in local politics or what happens on the ground.
Understanding the external conditions and interests that promote and sustain
local.or national elites must also be matched with :111 analysis ofthe norms,
'values and shared interests that characterise or unite such elites - hence the
f6Cus6ftilisbookon elite cultures,
-'Athird answer to the question of howwe mightstudy elites anthropologi- '
cally isby analysing theirrecruitmentand thestrategies they use to reproduce .
themselves over'time. Here-dieconcepts ofsuccession and reproduction (both in
sense) are ofparamount importance.Studyinghow.
elites ensure their survival requires close attention to their kinship structures.
i1p4 networks,aswell asto the institutions for theirselectionandsocialisation, : 0 \' o
,?!,hich, asTo'ilki:n'and den19nstl-are (Chapters 8 arId 13, this volume), '.'
means .. schooling o. . \ . \ ,,', 0
The fourth approach anthropologists might adopt. is to analyse the \ ()","
langLlage'and"practices through which elites and__the o.\.- {.
they'use to One ofthe major ways in -,. 0
which elites maintain powerand authority over the present isby 'rnonumen- '
talising the past' (Herzfeld 2000: 234).'Nationalism,'saysHerzfeld (2000: 234),
'is in this sense a mass popularisation ofelite tactics'.As Rowlands and Peers
illustrate, heritage sites are fundamental (albeit contested) resources for both
established and emerging national elites. Monuments (which include every-
thing from statues and cenotaphs to museums, mausoleums and the
MillenniumDome) notonly venerate and commemorate the rulers and 'gre;lt
men'ofourage,they actively constructthosehistories by which people come
to'identify themselves. In this sense, they too become powerful technologies
forshapingsubjectivities and influencinghowsocieties remember (Connerton
1989) - or the obverse;how they choose to forget (Forty and Kuchler 1999).
From Gothic cathedrals and skyscrapers to ancestral tombs in Madagascar
(Evers, Chapter 10 in this volume), and the infamous 'opera house in the
jungle' (Nugent, Chapter 4 in this volume). monuments enshrine the status
, .
f' Ii J l '
.( .' ,' .
0
).6 Cris Shore
middle-class intelligentsia with a language for inviting the massesinto history,
as Nairn (1981) put it, some ofthe old elite also appealed to nationalist
ideology in the cynical pursuit oftheir own limited political goals.However,
nationalismonceunleashedcannotbe easilycontrolledand since the 1970shas
fuelled successive waves of traumatic anti-state and anti-elite violence.
Nationalismand violencearealsocentral themesinWatson's study ofelitesand
politics in Indonesiasince the fallofSukarno and the ascendancy to powerof
Suhartoin 1966.LikeSpencer,he usesethnographiccasestudies to explore the
linkages betweencentreand periphery,trackingthe wayindividuals and fami-
lies have moved from one sub-category of elite (military, administrative,
party-based) to another (professional, university-educated, middle-class, busi-
ness, religious). The ousting of President Suharto was achieved by an
extraordinary alliance among elite SUb-groups, but that unity was hard to
sustain, and the structures that Suharto put in place are difficult to dismantle.
Suharto's legacy isalso witnessed in the distrust and scepticism that pervades
political debates at all levels of Indonesian society. The unrest currently
sweepingthroughIndonesiaataregionallevelthus represents afurtherrealign-
mentofalliancesasthe new political elitesstruggleto keep Indonesiatogether.
Part 11, 'Elites, Hegemony and Tradition', explores inter alia the various
use <:!it.e
statusanaauthority.Central to this is .. tradition
-and 'heri'tai? theveil .oflegitjm.acy andtoactine
'the ..:tI1C!=p,oIitisal"boundaries..ofinclusion.. and exclusion. EIi'zabeth
(Chapter 8) looks at the way incorners and immigrants in two
different 'settler'societies in Kenya and Liberia adapted to their new environ-
ments. Her comparative analysis shows that the same ideologies, constraints
and preoccupations with boundedness seem to operate in both white and
non-white,non-colonial contexts- thus challengingmany ofthe assumptions
about the'tensions ofempire'implicitin recent post-colonialstudies.
Chapter9,by MichaelRowlands,alsousesethnographic comparisons from
two societies to analyse the way political elites reproduce themselves. In this
case,the focusison the tacticsused bygoverningelites in Mali and Cameroon
to forge asenseofcommunityand nationalidentityamongcitizens.Centralto
these nation-buildingprojects, asin muchofEurope,have beenthe manipula-
tion ofhistory by intellectuals and the mobilisation ofdiscourses on 'heritage'
in the construction of an imagined community of nationals. While this
approach hasbeenused quite successfullyin Mali, in Cameroon the state elite
appears to have lessofa'nationalisingambition',preferringinstead to engage
in the more traditional politics of ' divide and rule'.
The political uses of discourses about origins are further explored in
Chapter10bySandra Everswhoanalysesthe way the rulingBetsileo elite (the
self-styled 'masters ofthe land'), in the Southern Highlands ofMadagascar
maintain their hegemony through the imprimatur ofancient custom and
history.AsEvers shows, the Betsileo are themselves.recent immigrants to the

j :<:
; :i'
f:
'
f'
I



. :f:'"
"

);.: ......
i
'.'
ti
:1;.
r.;i

if::
!
.,
:X,
J.:
; .
f
ti
;
<.
;.:

f
'f-
;
il'i;i:
,
:'"

::1%
,
I::::.
I
.
;i :

..
.
J;f;';i<1..-"
Introduction 17
territory they occupy.However,the key resource that confers legitimacy upon
them is their ownership ofancestral tombs. By successfully portraying the
status quo asa stable and timeless order- sanctioned by the authority ofthe
ancestors - theirelite status isconfirmedand accepted,albeit grudgingly,
Chapter 11,by Laura Peers,concludes the section withastudy ofchanging
elites within the NorthAmerican heritage industry, and more specifically,the
issue ofwho controls the 'Native American' museum sites are repre-
sented.Asshe demonstrates,the traditionalbureaucraticand Euroceutricsense
ofthe kind ofnarrative that public history sites should tell has been increas-
ingly challenged since the 1970s by Native American and Canadian First
Nation people. There is now a much greater degree ofinvolvement and
control by these groups in the heritage sites and a new 'heritage elite' is
emerging.However,asPeers shows,displaying ethnographicmuseum artefact,
to amulticulturalaudience isnotwithoutitstensions and difficulties.
Chapter 12,by Grant Evans,examines the curious case ofthe Communist
regime in Laos. Having successfullypresided over the fall ofthe old aristo-
cracy in 1975, the ruling Communist Party has increasingly been obliged to
selectively revive many ofthe traditional rituals ofmonarchy to shore up its
nationalist legitimacy.Takingup Cormerton's idea, about rituals, memory and
the'inertia in social structures'he points out why the Thai elite culture- and
theThaimonarchy in particular- hascometo occupysuch an importantrole
in Lao public culture. This leadshim to rel1ectmorewidely on what Billighas
termed'banal nationalism',and the continuing charm and symbolic powerof
monarchy in general. ",-c'
Part III,'Elites, Professionals and Networks',shifts the focus towards elites
in Brli:all-i- groups."In
Chap'ter''13-Jolul'"'Eadet6oKs"aflhe" declining'iilniiei-ice"of" ine-CatlJolic
Church in Englandand the changinganatomy ofCatholicism more generally.
He asks,what relevance does this somewhat invisible ethnic group- what he
describes as Britain's largest ethnic minority - have for wider debates about
elites? One answer lies in what it reveals about the relationship between
education and class. Using an ethnographic study of Catholic educational
changes over the past century,he highlights the factors that have progressively
eroded the old closed system ofCatholic education in which the Catholiclay
elite were traditionally socialised and where the 'Fortress Church'model was
reproduced. Foremost among these today are the new avenues for social
mobilitynowavailableto England's increasinglymiddleclassCatholic popula-
tion.Thechaptergoes on to discussthe way England's Catholicreligious elite,
having abandoned the fight over higher education, has.sought to defend
Catholicvaluesand teachingatthe levelofsecondaryand primaryschools.
In Chapter 14,Monica Konrad returns to the question of methods,arguing
for a focus on 'actor-networks' a, a way to study deterritorialised elites and
tracking the way, information constitutes intersecting pathways of'expert'
power and knowledge. She explores two separate but interconnected elite
J,p Cris Shore
Elias, Norbert (1978) TI,e Ci'Ji/izillg Process (vol. 1)TI,eHistory Manners, Oxford:
Blackwell.
Forty,Adrian and Kuchler,Suzanne (eds) (1999) TI,eArt ''./ Oxford:Berg.
Fox,Richard (1991) 'Introduction:workingin the present',in R.Fox,(ed.) Recapturirlg
Anthropology. TM.'rkiug ill tue Present, Santa Fe, NM: School ofAmerican Research
Press.
Friedman,Jonathan (1990) 'Being in the World: Globalization and Localization', in
M. Featherstone (ed.) , Global Culutre: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity,
London:Sage,311-28.
Gellner, Ernest (1983) Nations and Nationalism, Oxford:Blackwell.
George,Stephen (1985) Politics atld Policy in the European Community, Oxford:Oxford
UniversityPress.
Grillo, Ralph (ed.) (1980) 'Nation' and 'State' in Europe: Anthropological Perspectives,
London:Academic Press.
Grimshaw,A.and Hart,K.(1995)'TheRiseand FallofScientificAnthropology',inA.
Ahmedand C.Shore (eds),TI,e Future tifAtlthropology, London:AthlonePress,46-64.
Gupta,Akhil (1995) 'Blurred Boundaries:The Discourse ofCorruption, the Culture
ofPolitics, andthe ImaginedState',Americatl Ethnologist 22 (2):375-402.
Gusterson,Hugh (1996) Nuclear Rites: A LAboratory at the End (1' the Cold "'!"r,
Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCalifornia Press
Handelman, Don (1990) Models and Mirrors: Towards drl Atltlm'pology o] Public Events;
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Herzfeld, Michael (1992) The Social Production of Indifference: Exploring the Symbolic
Roots tiflVestern Bure'lI/lTtlcy, Oxford:Berg
Herzfeld, Michael (2000) 'Uncanny Success. Some Closing Remarks', in J.Pina-
Cabral and P. Lima (eds), Elites:Choice Leadership and Succession, Oxford:Berg.
Hobsbawm,Eric and Ranger,Terrence (1983) 'Introduction: InventingTraditions', in
E. Hobsbawm and T. Ranger (eds) The Invention tif Tiadition, Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,1-14.
Holmes, Douglas (2000) Integral Europe: Fast Capitalism, Multiculturalisni, Necfasciun,
Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.
Hymes,Dell (ed.) (1972) Retnventing Anthropolog, NewYork:VintageBooks.
Jackson,Anthony (ed.) (1987) Antllropology at Home, London: Tavistock,
Kertzer, David (1988) Ritual, Politics and Power. NewHaven and London:Yale Univer-
sityPress.
Knowles, Elizabeth (1998) TI,e Oxford Dictionary tif Tiucntieth Cellt"r)' Quotations,
Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Kuper, Adam (1996) AlltllCt'pology and Anthropologists. TI,e Modem British School,
London:Routledge.
Lasch,Christopher(1995) TIleRevolt tifthe Elites "nd the Betrayal <ifDel11ocmCJl, London
and NewYork:WWNorton.
Luxembourg, Rosa (1961) The Russian Revolution and Leninism or Marxism (ed. B.
Wolfe),Ann Arbor, MI: UniversityofMichiganPress.
-./Marcus, George (ed.) (1983) Elites: Etllll'>graphic Issues, Albuquerque, NM: University
ofNewMexicoPress.
-- (1983a) '''Elite'' as a Concept,Theory and ResearchTradition', in G. Marcus
(ed.), Elites: Ethnograpl,ic Issues, Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico
Press,7-27.


f{',.

I;
..

..
I

".
',.
" :.
.},/


';;i
<
'J;
...-.,'

Introduction 21
-- (1986) 'Appendix:Work in Progress',in G.Marcus and M. Fischer (eds),Antl/f(l-
pology"s Cnltural Critique, Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress, 169-77.
Marger, M. (1987) Blites and Masses: An lntroduaion tv Political S,'e;"log)', Blemond,CA:
Wadsworth.
Michels, Robert (1959) Political Partir": A Soci"logie,,1 Study '!fthe Oligo1ld,ie," Tendencies
<ifl...lodcrn DeU/l'crclC)', NewYork:Dover.
Monbiot, George (2000) Captive State. The G'/1,omte T.,ke"I'CC '!{Britain, London:
Macmillan.
Nader, Laura (1972) 'Up the Anrhropologisr', in D. Hymes (cd.), .4",1".,,-
pology, NewYork.VintageBooks,284-311.
Nagle,John (1992) 'RecruitmentofElites',iu M. Hawkesworth and M. Kogan (eds),
EnCJ1dopedia ''./ Government ,md Politics, London:Routledge.4R6-503.
Nairn.Torn (1981) TI,e Break-Up '!(Britain:Crisis and Nco-uatioualism, London:NLB.
-- (1988) TI,e Enchanted Glass: Britain and it.' ll{,,,,,m'h)', London: Hutchinson
Radius.
Nelson,Brent and Stubb,Alex (1998) The Ellff'pr"" UII;"". Rem/illgs "II tlu: Tltcorv 'lIId
Practice <ifEuropean lutcgmtiou, London: Macmillan.
Paxman.jeremy(1999) Friends ill High Places, Harmondsworth:Penguin.
Pels,Peter (1999) 'Professions ofDuplicity:A Prehistory ofEthical Codes in Anthro-
pology',Current Alltlln'p"log)' 40 (2): April: 10l-36.
vPina-Cabral,joao de and Lima,Antonio Pedrosa de (eds) (2000) Elites: Choice Leader-
ship and Succession, Oxford:Berg.
Sampson,Anthony (1965) Allato",)' o.{ Britain Today, London:Hodderand Stoughton.
Shore, Cris (1990) Italian Communism: TI,c Escape In'''' Leninism: All
Perspective, London:Pluto.
-- (1993) 'Erhnicity as Revolutionary Strategy: Communist Identity Constructio';1'ot
in Italy', in S.MacDonald (ed.), Inside Elm,pe,m Identities, Oxford:Berg, 27-53
-- (2000) BllildillgEurope: TI,e Cultural Politics '1' Ellropellll Illtegmtioll, London:Rout-
ledge.
Shore, Cris and Wright,Susan (eds) (1997) Alllltmpo"'.!:)' dPolicy: Critical Perspectives Oil
GOJlen,ance and Po,,'cr, London:Routledge.
Spencer, Jonathan (2000) 'British Social Anthropology: A Retrospective', Annual
Review ofAntlm'polog)' 29: 1-24.
Stanton,G. (1997) 'In Defence ofSm'age Civilisation: Tom Harrisson,Cultural Studies
and Anthropology', in S. Nugent and C. Shore (eds), alld Cultural
Studies. London:PlutoPress, 11-23.
Stocking, GeorgeW (1992) TIle Magicand Otl"'r Essavs in the Historv 4
Allthropology, Madison, WI:UniversityofWisconsinPress.
Strathern, Marilyn (ed.) (2000) Audit Cultures: Antlm'pologicill Studies inAaountabilitv,
Ethics and theAcademy, London:Routledge.
Thompson, Edward P. (1968) TI,e Makillg dtlt f/',rbllg Class, Harmonds-
worth:Penguin.
Williams,Raymond (1976) Key,,\'rds, Glasgow: Fontana.
Wright, Susan (1994) 'Culture in Anthropology and Organisational Studies', in S.
Wright (ed.), Antltr0po"'--l!Y o.{ Orgtllli.'oJtioIlS, London:Routledge,1-31.
WrightMills,C. (1956) TI,e p"lI'erElit<" NewYork:OxfordUniversity Press.