Introduction: Collaboration and the Fruits of Awkward Relations

1 Bredwa-Mensah, Justesen, and Jørgensen 2007: 6.

2 E.g. Bredwa-Mensah, Justesen, and Jørgensen 2007; Kurt-Nielsen et al. 2008.

3 Often a conglomerate of Danes, Germans, Swedes, and Norwegians.

4 Bredwa-Mensah, Justesen, and Jørgensen 2007: 6.

5 An extract from the speech made by the Danish Minister of Culture; see also the Ministry of Culture’s official webpage.

6 Sometimes also called the Adinkra symbol.

7 B. Meyer 2010: 10.

8 See e.g. Quarcoo in DeCorse 2001: 71, who uses the symbol as a vignette.

9 Bredwa-Mensah, Justesen, and Jørgensen 2007: 8.

10 Kurt-Nielsen et al. 2008: 58.

11 See e.g.: Kurt-Nielsen et al. 2008: 67; Knippel 2003; but also already Jeppesen aired this sentiment of urgency in 1966: 71–2.

12 Jørgensen in Larsen 2006.

13 Verran 2001: 117–118; Verran 2007: 171ff.

14 Verran 2007: 181.

15 I am not seeking to fill in such existing categories with any so-called data – I refrain from blindly assuming ‘gate-keeping concepts’, whether custodians of regions or themes (cf. Das 2003: 4; F. Hastrup 2011a: 7).

16 Holbraad 2007: 206–207.

17 Henare, Holbraad, and Wastell (2007).

18 Brichet and Hastrup 2011.

19 See Dilley 1999, K. Hastrup 2004.

20 F. Hastrup suggests that this fieldwork condition of sharing a particular concern and thereby co-creating objects and subjects can be termed a kind of lateral theorisation (Hastrup 2011b).

21 In a later collaborative fieldwork with Frida Hastrup, we have been playing with the metaphor of a snowball to characterise our methodological track. But whereas the snowball never changes its composition and entails a sense of accumulative weight and given direction we prefer to name our methodology ‘dustballing’ to indicate a flickering character and the unplanned clotting of details across genres that do neither refer back nor accumulate to a meta-point of view (Brichet and Hastrup 2018). A dustball navigates and transforms itself according to the conditions and clues given.

22 Verran 2001: 30.

23 Verran 2009: 173.

24 See also F. Hastrup 2013.

25 Brichet and Hastrup 2011; F. Hastrup 2011b.

26 Tsing 2005: xi.

27 Brichet 2011.

28 The museum was thereby following a trend that has been discussed by anthropologists Mads Daugbjerg and Thomas Fibiger. See the special issue of the journal “History and Anthropology” on Globalised Heritage, edited by Daugbjerg and Fibiger 2011.

29 Tsing 2005: 2.

30 Ibid.

31 Greenough and Tsing 2003: 15.

32 See also Kurt-Nielsen et al. 2008: 55.

33 Altogether, the project was granted approximately $1million.

34 Greenough and Tsing 2003.

35 Ibid: 16.

36 See also Macdonald 2009: 4ff.

37 Strathern 1987: 286ff; 290. I am indebted to the vocabulary and insights presented by Strathern in the article An Awkward Relationship (1987).

38 See Littler 2005: 13; Macdonald 2009: 25.

39 For a similar point see F. Hastrup 2011b.

40 UNESCO 1972: Articles 1 and 2.

41 See Byrne [1991] 2008; Smith [2006] 2008; Harrison 2010: 26ff; a similar discussion can be found in the UNESCO report, Our Creative Diversity (1996: 36ff); see also Federspiel 1998, 1999; Hylland-Eriksen 2001; Haffstein 2004.

42 Heritage projects thought in relation to communities is a concern treated, for instance, by Waterton and Smith 2010: 8, 11; Watson and Waterton 2010: 1ff; Chirikure et al. 2010: 31ff.

43 Recently, such discussions, with regard to heritage work in Africa, have been adressed in the edited book Postcolonial Archaeologies in Africa (Schmidt 2009). See also Smith 2006: 299; de Jong and Rowlands 2010: 22ff; Waterton and Smith 2010: 12.

44 See the two previous notes.