Introduction—Uncertain Visions: Crisis,
Ambiguity, and Visual Culture in Greece
Does the Crisis Look Like Something?
O
ne thing that recurs in public representations of
the so-­called Greek crisis—a term that refers to
the recent phase of Greek history often seen as
commencing with the 2010 implementation of a bailout
program involving the European Union and the Inter-
national Monetary Fund—is the use of particular kinds
of visual evidence that render “the crisis’’1 perceivable
and tangible. Thus, alongside articles and commentar-
ies on the crisis, one also encounters photographs of
“poverty” (e.g., homelessness) and protest, most often
set amid flames and broken glass. As a sign of pho-
tography’s ambiguity and semantic indeterminacy,
often linked to anthropology’s historical hostility to the
visual (Pinney 1992:27), these images lend themselves
to different cultural investments that may include both
awe for revolutionary aesthetics and aversion to the
disorderly outcomes of a financial meltdown. Inquiry
into the aestheticization of destitution and dissent could
ponder how visual representations may partly glorify
even what they appear to disavow or how repetitive
pictures of malaise may dissolve pain and effectively
anaestheticize viewers (see Berger 1980:42–44). What
interests me the most, however, is how this common-
place use of the visual as an illustration—necessary
and yet secondary to the written argument—condenses
a stance that Pinney (2008:388), via Carlo Ginzburg,
has described as the problem of reading into the visual
things one already knows from elsewhere. In that sense,
these visuals of the crisis are treated as symbols and
metonyms of something more serious, which as early
and mid-20th-­ century British anthropology’s anti-­
visualist epistemology implied lies in invisible realms
of social structure (Morphy and Banks 1997:9). This
attitude resonates with some Greek interlocutors who,
in reiterating the base-­superstructure hierarchy and in
keeping with a quasi-­Marxist program, have told me
Visual Anthropology Review, Vol. 32, Issue 1, pp. 5–11, ISSN 1058-7187, online ISSN 1548-7458.  2016 by the American Anthropological Association. DOI: 10.1111/var.12088.
KONSTANTINOS KALANTZIS
that the crisis warrants (activist) attention to “serious
things” in economy and politics that exceed experimen-
tations with images and cameras which are, today, at
best auxiliary and at worst naïve and complicit.
But what if one analytically treats the visual as a
primary field of struggle and experience? What sort of
things would we observe and what kind of anthropo-
logical analysis would we articulate by prioritizing the
visual? These are among the questions I was interested
in addressing when organizing the dialogue of anthro-
pologists and visual practitioners on the Greek crisis
that has culminated in this special issue. By “visual”
I mean various things. Essays in this issue ponder the
possibilities of doing anthropology with visual images;
they explore “visual culture” in Svetlana Alpers’s treat-
ment of the term as “a repertoire of expectation and
potentiality” around vision (Pinney 2006:131), and they
analyze visual representations and their multiple recep-
tions and cultural productivity. These do not, of course,
exhaust the visual’s role in Greek social experiences,
but open up ways to rethink its various positions in
contemporary social imagination and practice.
Consider, for instance, the relevance of the visual in
the 2014 documentary film We Are Fucked, ­Sunshine!,
in which the filmmaker, an émigré Greek woman filming
her friends’ daily lifeworlds, keeps asking her interlocu-
tors why the crisis doesn’t show. This is partly a narra-
tive trick that elicits the viewers’ attention by setting up
an antithesis between the apparent visual normality of
urban landscapes (e.g., featuring people sitting in cof-
fee shops) and the filmmaker’s expectations of visible
crisis, reportedly formed by watching TV in Germany.
Her questions, however, also open up much larger
issues concerning visibility, evidence, and the capacity
to make political claims. A similar question has been
invoked by some centrist-­ right informants, critics of
anti-­austerity protests, in arguing that the discourse on
the crisis inflates hardship in order to benefit political
6 VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY REVIEW Volume 32 Number 1 Spring 2016
organizations that oppose it. Other interlocutors, this
time on the anti-­austerity front, argue that the question
“Where is the crisis?” is occasionally posed by European
TV crews who focus on vibrant Greek social life to claim
that Greeks are shamelessly immune to austerity since
they are continuing a consumerist lifestyle. The anxiety
over such publicity is indicative of how the relationship
with Western political powers, which are in charge of
Greece’s monitoring in light of the bailout program, is
experienced today by many people as embodied surveil-
lance (Kalantzis 2015a:1045). I am particularly struck
by the visual’s role in these contestations. Even those
leftist interlocutors skeptical about the visual often
respond fiercely to the suggestion that the crisis “cannot
be seen” by verbally conjuring images of soup kitchens
and closed stores.
And there are also other spheres where the visual
plays implicit yet critical roles today, such as the ques-
tion of Greek migration as an escape from recession that
has recently become an object of public attention (espe-
cially in reference to middle-­class Greeks). Migration
assumes poignant meanings by tacitly conjuring par-
ticular sensory geographies involving the idea of aban-
doning warm, sunny homeland-scapes2 replete with
flavorsome food for the allegedly cold, senseless cities
of “the North” that may be simultaneously venerated
for their organization and infrastructure. This builds
on pre-­existing Greek embodied semantics around food
and the home (see Petridou 2001; Seremetakis 1994;
Sutton 2001) and, in fact, complements perceptions
of the tutelary “North” as a space of efficacious, cold
instrumentality. I was also able to observe the entangle-
ment of landscape with people’s critiques of tutelage,
while gazing at a lush lemon grove that reached the
blue sea reigned by thick white clouds on a crisp winter
day. While commenting about the richness of that place
to a middle-­aged doctor I knew, I was intrigued by her
stern retort that it is this richness that lies behind the
European (particularly German) politics of interference
that, in this view, seek to appropriate the land as real
estate (see also Knight 2012a:66; Vournelis 2016:130).
The example further reinforces approaching the visual
as a wider exploration of “embodied culture” and mate-
riality and not merely as a preoccupation with the
ocular dimension (Pinney 2002:84; Taussig 1994). The
landscape in the aforementioned scene was visual spec-
tacle, but it was also sensory experience and an object
of political engagement.
The visual’s role in negotiating today’s context
is also apparent when people stereotype their puta-
tive political opponents. Thus, a leftist interlocutor
critiqued young Greek centrists’ support of structural
reforms, which are often presented as an antidote to
corrupt party politics of both the left and the right,
through references to cyclists with a particular style of
thick-­rimmed eyeglasses (the so-­called hipster aesthetic
that supposedly characterizes the centrists). As various
Internet posts indicate, many centrist-­right commen-
tators also identify the anti-­austerity front with partic-
ular visual materialities, for example, by mocking the
nativist aesthetics of specific politicians (e.g., a thick
mustache). Metaphors of vision and appearance also
emerged in a recent argument uttered by some mem-
bers of the post-­2015 coalition government (composed
of SYRIZA and the Independent Greeks) who renounce
moral responsibility for austerity measures, by sug-
gesting that these are externally imposed against their
own will (and ethics). This conjures a certain dichot-
omy between the inside (invisible, pure) and the out-
side (imposed, tainted, visible) that is reminiscent of
Indian anticolonial nationalism’s tactic of claiming a
sovereign internal sphere against colonialism’s visible
(but allegedly inessential) effects (Chatterjee 1993:6).
The comparison is further helpful in enabling us to
think about kinship between versions of Greek anti-­
austerity rhetoric—part of which is now embodied by
the government—and anticolonial nationalism (see
Kalantzis 2015a). In fact, ideas of European tutelage as
colonization and anti-­austerity’s relations to nation-
alism have concerned several of the ethnographers
of the Greek crisis (e.g., Kalantzis 2015a:1045, 1065;
Knight 2012a:57; Theodossopoulos 2014:501).
Crisis Anthropology and Sanguine Polemics
Most works about the current phase of Greek history
converge on partly affirming that it constitutes a cri-
sis, often defined with reference to structural reforms
aiming at reducing the country’s deficit (Knight 2012a;
Papailias 2011a) and formalizing its economy (Rako-
poulos 2015). Works also link the crisis to recession and
to conditions disenfranchising groups already on the
margins (Alexandrakis 2013), changing one’s attach-
ment to history and place (Knight 2012b; Vournelis
2016), engendering anxiety regarding one’s position in
Europe or creating bitterness about a “present becom-
ing damaged future” (Herzfeld 2011; Kalantzis 2015a,
2015b), and securitizing daily life (Dalakoglou 2013).
These observations, in some ways, corroborate other
anthropological accounts of the dominance of debt as
a category in global socioeconomic affairs (e.g., High
2012:363). Some authors, taking a more interpretative
approach, see Western economic ontologies as anti-
thetical to Greek sensibilities about the debt as ongo-
ing negotiation where the roles of creditor and debtor
 Introduction KALANTZIS
constantly interchange (Herzfeld 2011:24) or even as
clashing with indigenous notions of time and personal
identity (­Hirschon 2012).
A corollary of recognizing the crisis as a phenom-
enon is the idea that there is something new to this
phase. The present conjuncture produces new things:
new experiences of the past as relevant to the present
(Kalantzis 2012, 2015a; Knight 2012a, 2012b; Vourne-
lis 2016), novel socialities around “informal economy”
(Rakopoulos 2015:88), new cinematic and theatrical
spectacles that disturb dominant national narration
(Papanikolaou 2011), new political discourses that deny
official affiliation to parties (Yiakoumaki 2011), new
potentials for dissent (Dalakoglou and Vradis 2011),
enhanced imaginings of colonialism and novel expe-
riences of nationhood (Herzfeld 2011; Kalantzis 2012,
2015a; Knight 2012a), and new possibilities for reclassi-
fying suicides as political acts (Davis 2015:1020; Knight
2012a:62). Many authors describe the “new” as build-
ing on preexisting attitudes, for instance regarding the
past’s reworking in the present (cf. Stewart 2012), and
yet moving toward directions that are specific to this
context. Certain works view the crisis as a tool that
legitimizes a particular “neoliberal mode of gover-
nance” (Athanasiou 2012; Kyriakopoulos 2011; Papailias
2011a), which in some accounts is presented as work-
ing in synergy with the state apparatus and extreme
right-­wing gangs so as to attack particular subjects
(e.g., migrants) (Dalakoglou 2013; cf. Athanasiou 2011).
Some describe the present through notions of exception
and emergency, ideas that have been critiqued in the
crisis literature for reproducing Eurocentric notions of
normalcy that ironically inform Greece’s classification
outside of the Western canon (Rakopoulos 2014:193).
Various authors retain a sanguine approach to the new
political formations such as the subjects emerging in the
2011 lower Syntagma Square protests (Panourgiá 2011)
and those subalterns realizing themselves as members
of a collectivity through texting each other or playing
football (Alexandrakis 2013:86, 95). The sanguinity
may also relate to a desire to counter the Orientalism
in global representations of Greece (Papailias 2011b),
though I would add here that the most poignant element
of Orientalism is often not its negativity (this is anyway
complicated on many occasions by positivity), but the
demand that people conform to particular definitions
purported by onlookers in more powerful positions (cf.
Kalantzis 2014:56). In that sense, global desires that
Greeks revolt or resist the EU can also underline forms
of Orientalism.
Some ethnographers—even those otherwise sym-
pathetic with popular negotiations of austerity—­
recognize vexing things in anti-­austerity politics, such
7
as reproductions of Eurocentric-­nationalist ideas (The-
odossopoulos 2014:501), discontent against foreigners
(Herzfeld 2011:23), the reinscription of particular gen-
der dichotomies, and the enhancement of the shame
attributed to suicides that do not acquire a public pro-
file (Davis 2015:1023). In fact, the incorrectness of some
anti-­austerity performances is key to the ambivalent
delight these offer to middle-­class subjects (Kalantzis
2015a:1065). A discernible element in the crisis liter-
ature is that it often frames the topic within a power
versus resistance geography. The idea here is that peo-
ple devise ways to cope with difficulties that are beyond
their control. Thus, people draw on historical compari-
sons and evoke moments from the past (Knight 2012a,
2012b; Vournelis 2016), undertake critiques of the pow-
erful that often attribute blame to outsiders (Knight
2012a:63; Theodossopoulos 2013:208), or, in more
celebratory accounts, they rebel with unpredictable
results (Dalakoglou and Vradis 2011). These strategies,
the argument goes, afford a sense of empowerment,
convey that the crisis is overcome-­ able, or simply
offer tools to classify things within familiar categories
(e.g., Knight 2012a:69; Theodossopoulos 2013:208,209).
Some accounts claim to avoid the term and problem-
atic of “resistance” by looking at social experience in
terms of pleasure (Kalantzis 2015a:1065) or by predict-
ing that even practices that appear to be resisting for-
malization may gradually constitute another formality
(­Rakopoulos 2015:97).
Both the newness of the crisis as well as the
anthropological sympathy for the Greeks-­as-­subalterns
prompt wider debates. One is reminded of Roitman’s
(2012, 2014) cautionary remarks against unproblemat-
ically employing the term crisis as an ultimate diag-
nostic of the present with its own normative ideas (e.g.,
its implicit comparison to a noncrisis) that authorizes
particular kinds of questions while foreclosing others.
This critique points to serious issues that emerge from
embracing the crisis as an Ur-­category. Consider, for
example, the danger of reading all malaise and author-
itarianism as symptoms of the present and losing sight
of their historical embeddedness, as in suicides that,
in Davis’s account, have been part of immanent soci-
alities in Greece way before the crisis (2015:1028). A
reply to Roitman’s just critique is partly provided by
the fact that in doing ethnography in contemporary
Greece, one faces people’s invocation of the crisis as a
theme, a modality, and a problem. To dismiss the crisis
as a category would partly mean then to erase these
interlocutors’ statements (notably some informants
relativize the crisis’s omnipresence), something obvi-
ously contrary to ethnographic precepts. Yet, we should
simultaneously clarify what we (and our interlocutors)
8 VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY REVIEW Volume 32 Number 1 Spring 2016
mean by the crisis and examine the things that are
often squeezed inside the term (e.g., unemployment,
bitterness about tutelage, and so on). The unavoidabil-
ity of engaging the crisis in light of its persistence in
ethnographic encounters also responds in some ways
to the complaint uttered by some commentators that
the crisis constitutes an industry and a fad (cf. Roit-
man 2012). What can be fruitfully developed from that
point, however, is an exploration of particular forces in
academia (e.g., the demand that one publishes current-­
hot themes), with which especially younger academics
must constantly struggle. One is also led to think here
of the obvious, but poignant, irony of the fact that crit-
ical accounts of current economics (or of neoliberalism,
a term that like crisis requires rigorous elucidation) may
become visible exactly because market dynamics prior-
itize these accounts’ place in a hierarchy of academic
value.
Finally, the activist sympathy for the Greeks in-­
crisis relates to other preexisting discussions in anthro-
pology. One could think of a question raised in the
margins of the so-­called indigenous media debate, over
the extent to which anthropologists should get involved
in dissenting (internal or other) politics and what that
means for one’s ethnography (Faris 1993:13). Another
issue has been grasped by Kulick’s (2006:942) critical
description of anthropological identifications with the
powerless, through the Freudian scope on masochism,
as repressing the desire for recognition in capitalism
and atoning for its guilt. Regardless of its validity, that
perspective is useful for examining the ethnographic
identification with the oppressed beyond mere positiv-
ity and in reference to complex desires and the disci-
pline’s embeddedness in power structures. Further, the
attribution of subalternity to “the Greeks” carves out
particular positions for Greek anthropologists globally
and complicates the emotional dynamics and position-
alities of native anthropology, including possibilities
of becoming a spokesperson or a lamenting subject.
A more pragmatic issue concerns the fact that crisis
anthropology with its affection for embattled subjects
tends to pay less attention to Greeks who, for what-
ever reason, claim to support aspects of structural
reform (e.g., privatization) and who may be in favor,
even if ambivalently, of some European interventions
(but see Kalantzis 2015a; Theodossopoulos 2013). In
the fast pace of events in today’s Greece, which feels
incongruous with the temporality of publishing, these
subjects (along with the renewed antithesis between
anti-­austerity and proreforms and the new critiques of
austerity that have followed the 2015 elections) deserve
attention beyond their relegation to the (ominous)
background.
The Special Issue
The issue opens with Alexandra Bakalaki’s essay on
anti-­aerial spraying, a theory often mocked publicly
as conspiratorial, but one that is meaningful for some
people during a period of accentuated suspicion of
political elites. Bakalaki explores anti-­aerial spraying
activism beyond notions of resistance and unravels the
operation of the visual in it (e.g., as a metaphor and
as a medium for “revelations”). She looks at the way
in which anti-­aerial spraying theory articulates models
of temporality and being in the world and how it pro-
duces imaginings of oneself in a nexus of geograph-
ical and political matrices. The visual as a source for
understanding the relationship between Greece and
Germany (framed as oppositional during the crisis)
is the subject of Konstantinos Kalantzis’s article. He
examines how the visual is constitutive of nativism—a
dominant fantasy today—and then focuses on the Sfa-
kia region in Crete (an emblem of Greek indigeneity)
in order to understand the encounter between Sfakian
locals and German tourists before and after the crisis.
The article focuses on the visual and the material and
illuminates dynamics of power, affect, and circularity
in the contact between Greeks and Germans, which
becomes broadly instructive about the economy of
Greek national i­magination.
The possibilities of doing anthropology through
images and by collaborating with artists concern Eleana
Yalouri as well as Elpida Rikou and Io Chaviara. Yalouri
examines her cooperation with artist Nina Pappa in
creating a video composed of YouTube material on
the Greek crisis that focuses on prediction (which is
also a central issue for Bakalaki’s informants). Yalouri
reflects on the things that sound, text, and imagery do
for audiences and further explores people’s reactions to
the video. The essay raises concerns about disciplinary
boundaries and anthropology’s capacity to account for
uncertainty and unpredictability, which Yalouri sees as
fundamental to the current Greek phase. She argues for
the potential of montage and of emphasizing ambigu-
ity in opening up fruitful directions for analysis. Rikou
and Chaviara explore art-­practice more generally and
its role in envisioning and commenting on the Greek
crisis. They look at contemporary Greek attitudes to art,
and they review recent pieces that have dealt with pol-
itics and aesthetics surrounding the crisis. The article
discusses the potential operation of artworks as “traps”
of audiences and as “partners” of people attempting
analytical incisions into the present and finishes with
reflections on one author’s art-­practice that is particu-
larly focused on mimicry of official representations of
the current conjuncture.
 Introduction KALANTZIS
Erato Basea’s observation of how Greek filmmak-
ers have their work recontextualized by critics today
returns us to the problem of reading into the visual
what one already knows from its social context. The
global reception of certain Greek films as reflections
of crisis starkly reminds one of the limited positions
ascribed to art produced in the periphery. Basea goes
on to reflect on a stroll she took in Athens and thinks
through her own anxieties and desires as a subject sit-
uated in particular ­sociopolitical geographies. During
her walk, she identifies malaise but remains sanguine
about things she sees as signs of resilience in the land-
scape, showing us that it is perhaps somewhat inevi-
table to “see” and project the ­crisis onto material and
visual worlds, to the extent that the onlooker’s gazing
is grounded in fears and hopes about one’s present and
future. Christopher Pinney’s afterword grasps how the
crisis is deeply embedded in historical trajectories of the
visual in Western thought and politics. His fascinating
journey into tensions between anthropological priorities
and photographic practices, the worlds of Indian whisks
for repelling flies, and the works of authors ranging
from Walter Benjamin to Ariella Azoulay contemplate
the visual’s explosive potentiality in thinking, doing,
and imagining. The essays in this special issue prioritize
fields and sources, ranging from digital prophecies to
photographs pinned on eroded walls that have not been
at the center of inquiries into the Greek crisis thus far. As
they turn to the visible and the tangible and ponder the
new things they may offer for analysis, they also weave
them with long-­standing anthropological concerns and
debates over social experience. Together, these essays
think through the sort of things we can learn from the
visual and the material: the possible anthropologies we
can do through methodologies and subjects afforded by
visual and material culture as areas of struggle, methods
of research, and objects of analysis. The articles draw on
the authors’ own experimentations, often infused with
anxieties about their efficacy and reception—anxieties
that are intensified by the fact that they are negotiating
a theme and an era, which, if anything, is defined by
uncertainty over all sorts of givens, including what it
means to constitute a crisis.
Acknowledgments
I am very grateful to Catherine Morgan and staff at the
­British School at Athens for warmly hosting the workshop
“Imagi(ni)ng ‘Crisis’: Materialities of Seeing and Represent-
ing in the Greek Critical Conjuncture,” which I organized in
December 2013, and offering tremendous organization and
hospitality. Many thanks to Charles Stewart for initial encour-
9
agement and suggestions. I am particularly indebted to Chris
Pinney for giving the keynote lecture at the workshop and
immensely energizing it with his contributions. My thanks
also go to the people who gave papers at the workshop and
the audience for its patience and stimulating participation.
I am grateful to this issue’s authors for the time and energy
they have offered and to the journal editors Mark Westmore-
land, Jenny Chio, and Brent Luvaas for all their work that has
made this special issue possible.
Note
1 Afterintroducing the term crisis, I use it without enclosing it
in quotation marks.
2 The common term for homeland in Greek is “fatherland”
(patridha).
References
Alexandrakis, Othon
2013  Neoliberalism and the New Agora: Exploring Sur-
vival, Emergence, and Political Subjectivity Among
Pluralized Subaltern Communities in Athens, Greece.
Anthropological Quarterly 86(1):77–105.
Athanasiou, Athena
2011  Becoming Precarious Through Regimes of Gen-
der, Capital and Nation. In Hot Spots: Beyond the
“Greek Crisis”: Histories, Rhetorics, Politics, special
issue, Cultural Anthropology. Penelope Papailias, ed.
http://www.culanth.org/fieldsights/250-becoming-­
precarious-through-regimes-of-gender-capital-and-
nation.
2012  Crisis as a “State of Emergency.” Athens: Savvalas
[Greek].
Berger, John
1980  About Looking. London: Writers and Readers.
Chatterjee, Partha
1993  The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postco-
lonial Histories. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press.
Dalakoglou, Dimitris
2013  Neo-­Nazism and Neoliberalism: A Few Comments on
Violence in Athens at the Time of Crisis. Working
USA: The Journal of Labor and Society 16(2):283–
292.
Dalakoglou, Dimitris, and Antonis Vradis
2011  Introduction. In Revolt and Crisis in Greece: Between
a Present Yet to Pass and a Future Still to Come.
Antonis Vradis and Dimitris Dalakoglou, eds. Pp.
13–25. Oakland, CA: AK Press and Occupied London.
Davis, Elizabeth
2015  “We’ve Toiled Without End”: Publicity, Crisis, and the
10 VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY REVIEW Volume 32 Number 1 Spring 2016
Suicide “Epidemic” in Greece. Comparative Studies in
Society and History 57(4):1000–1036.
Faris, James C.
1993  A Response to Terence Turner. Anthropology Today
9(1):12–13.
Herzfeld, Michael
2011  Crisis Attack: Impromptu Ethnography in the Greek
Maelstrom. Anthropology Today 27(5):22–26.
High, Holly
2012  Re-­Reading the Potlatch in a Time of Crisis: Debt and
the Distinctions That Matter. Social Anthropology
20(4):363–379.
Hirschon, Renée
2012  Cultural Mismatches: Greek Conduct in the Current
Euro Situation. http://blog.oxfordcollegeofmarketing.
com/2012/02/06/cultural-mismatches-greek-con-
duct-in-the-current-euro-situation/?goback-
p%2Egde_101061_member_93606972.
Kalantzis, Konstantinos
2012  Crete as Warriorhood: Visual Explorations of Social
Imaginaries in “Crisis.” Anthropology Today 28(3):7–
11.
2014  On Ambivalent Nativism: Hegemony, Photography
and “Recalcitrant Alterity” in Sphakia, Crete. Ameri-
can Ethnologist 41(1):56–75.
2015a   “Fak Germani”: Materialities of Nationhood and
Transgression in the Greek Crisis. Comparative
Studies in Society and History 57(4):1037–1069.
2015b   Reflections on Objects, Spirits and Photographs
from a Present Becoming Damaged Future. History
and Anthropology 26(4):504–514.
Knight, Daniel M.
2012a  Turn of the Screw: Narratives of History and Econ-
omy in the Greek Crisis. Journal of Mediterranean
Studies 21(1):53–76.
2012b  Cultural Proximity: Crisis, Time and Social Mem-
ory in Central Greece. History and Anthropology
23(3):349–374.
Kulick, Don
2006   Theory in Furs: Masochist Anthropology. Current
Anthropology 47(6):933–952.
Kyriakopoulos, Leandros
2011  The State of Exception as Precondition for Crisis. In
Hot Spots: Beyond the “Greek Crisis”: Histories, Rhet-
orics, Politics, special issue, Cultural Anthropology.
Penelope Papailias, ed. http://www.culanth.org/field-
sights/255-the-state-of-exception-as-precondition-
for-crisis.
Morphy, Howard, and Marcus Banks
1997   Introduction: Rethinking Visual Anthropology. In
Rethinking Visual Anthropology. Marcus Banks and
Howard Morphy, eds. Pp. 1–35. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Panourgiá, Neni
2011  The Squared Constitution of Dissent. In Hot Spots:
Beyond the “Greek Crisis”: Histories, Rhetorics, Pol-
itics, special issue, Cultural Anthropology. Penelope
Papailias, ed. http://www.culanth.org/fieldsights/252-
the-squared-constitution-of-dissent.
Papailias, Penelope
2011a   Beyond the “Greek Crisis”: Histories, Rhetorics,
Politics Hot Spots. In Beyond the “Greek Crisis”:
Histories, Rhetorics, Politics, special issue, Cultural
Anthropology. Penelope Papailias, ed. http://www.
culanth.org/fieldsights/243-beyond-the-greek-­
crisis-histories-rhetorics-politics.
2011b  Witnessing the Crisis. In Hot Spots: Beyond the “Greek
Crisis”: Histories, Rhetorics, Politics, ­special issue, Cul-
tural Anthropology. Penelope Papailias, ed. http://www.
culanth.org/fieldsights/246-­witnessing-the-crisis.
Papanikolaou, Dimitris
2011  Archive Trouble. In Hot Spots: Beyond the “Greek
Crisis”: Histories, Rhetorics, Politics, special issue,
Cultural Anthropology. Penelope Papailias, ed. http://
www.culanth.org/fieldsights/247-archive-trouble.
Petridou, Elia
2001  The Taste of Home. In Home Possessions: Material
Culture Behind Closed Doors. Daniel Miller, ed. Pp.
87–104. Oxford: Berg.
Pinney, Christopher
1992  The Lexical Spaces of Eye-Spy. In Film as Ethnog-
raphy. Peter Ian Crawford and David Turton, eds.
Pp. 26–49. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
2002  Visual Culture. In The Material Culture Reader. Victor
Buchli, ed. Pp. 81–86. Oxford: Berg.
2006  Four Types of Visual Culture. In Handbook of Mate-
rial Culture. Christopher Tilley, Webb Keane, Susan
Kuechler, and Michael Rowlands, eds. Pp. 131–144.
London: Sage.
2008  Colonialism and Culture. In The Sage Handbook of
Cultural Analysis. Tony Bennett and John Frow, eds.
Pp. 382–406. London: Sage.
Rakopoulos, Theodoros
2014  The Crisis Seen from Below, Within, and Against: From
Solidarity Economy to Food Distribution Cooperatives
in Greece. Dialectical Anthropology 38(2):189–207.
2015  Solidarity’s Tensions: Informality, Sociality, and the
Greek Crisis. Social Analysis 59(3):85–104.
Roitman, Janet
2012  Crisis, Political Concepts: A Critical Lexicon. http://
www.politicalconcepts.org/issue1/crisis/.
2014  Anti-Crisis. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Seremetakis, Nadia, ed.
1994  The Senses Still, Perception and Memory as Material
Culture in Modernity. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
 Introduction KALANTZIS
Stewart, Charles
2012:  Dreaming and Historical Consciousness in
Island Greece. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Sutton, David
2001  Remembrance of Repasts: An Anthropology of Food
and Memory. Oxford: Berg.
Taussig, Michael
1994  Physiognomic Aspects of Visual Worlds. In Visualizing
Theory: Selected Essays from Visual Anthropology
Review. Lucien Taylor, ed. Pp. 205–213. London:
Routledge.
Theodossopoulos, Dimitrios
2013  Infuriated with the Infuriated? Blaming Tactics and
Discontent about the Greek Financial Crisis. Current
Anthropology 54(2):200–221.
11
2014  The Ambivalence of Anti-­ Austerity Indignation in
Greece: Resistance, Hegemony and Complicity. His-
tory and Anthropology 25(4):488–506.
Vournelis, Leonidas
2016  Alexander’s Great Treasure: Wonder and Mistrust
in Neoliberal Greece. History and Anthropology
27(1):121–133.
Yiakoumaki, Vassiliki
2011  Contesting Histories of Greek Student Protest, or the
Debate on “Open” and “Closed” Universities. In Hot
Spots: Beyond the “Greek Crisis”: Histories, Rheto-
rics, ­
Politics, special issue, Cultural Anthropology.
Penelope Papailias, ed. http://www.culanth.org/
fieldsights/248-contesting-histories-of-greek-stu-
dent-protestor-the-debate-on-open-and-closed-uni-
versities.