Introduction
10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2452
Introduzione al Forum dei curatori.
application/pdf
2239-625X
2452
1
en
Filippo M. Zerilli
Anuac
Introduction
Text.Serial.Journal
https://ojs.unica.it/index.php/anuac
5
Forum: Anthropologists in/of the Neoliberal Academy
2016-08-13
2016-08-06
2016-08-13
42-45
1
Filippo M. Zerilli
2016
10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2452
42
Università di Cagliari, Italy
2239-625X
1
en
45
Introduction
https://ojs.unica.it/index.php/anuac/article/download/2452/2083
5
                                                       2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90




                                                                                                      FORUM




Student-led demonstration, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, February 4, 2015. Overpass Light Brigade, Joe Brusky
photographer. Source: overpasslightbrigade.org/love-light-for-uw-fight-the-cuts/.



Anthropologists in/of the neoliberal academy
Edited by
Tracey HEATHERINGTON & Filippo M. ZERILLI

Contributions of
Cris SHORE & Susan WRIGHT, Vintilă MIHĂILESCU, Sarah GREEN, Gabriela VARGAS-CETINA
& Steffan Igor AYORA-DIAZ, Tracey HEATHERINGTON, Dimitris DALAKOGLOU, Noelle MOLÉ
LISTON, Susana NAROTZKY, Jaro STACUL, Meredith WELCH-DEVINE, Jon P. MITCHELL.




This work is licensed under the Creative Commons © TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI (EDS)
Anthropologists in/of the Neoliberal Academy
2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90.
ISSN: 2239-625X – DOI: 10.7340/anuac2239-625X-2437
42                                                   ANTHROPOLOGISTS IN/OF THE NEOLIBERAL ACADEMY




Introduction
Tracey HEATHERINGTON
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
Filippo M. ZERILLI
Uiniversity of Cagliari




    The university, which has long remained one of the most conservative institutional
models, has undergone dramatic transformations in recent years. This is true worldwi-
de, notably due to reforms of the public sector that have intensified the commoditiza-
tion of academic life, activities, roles and “products”. The modality and outcome of
this process is not everywhere the same, as Sarah Green plainly puts it in her contribu-
tion to this Forum. In fact, this collection of short commentaries originated with the
simple idea that while the neoliberalization of the university is a global trend that stron-
gly impacts across different academic systems, it also has some specific, local features
that influence the daily work and lives of students, researchers, teachers and admini-
strators in particular ways. Even within a given national context shaped by the very
same reforms and policies, we might observe specific articulations resulting from the
various ways in which policy changes are introduced and managed, at times accommo-
dated but sometimes resisted, subverted, or challenged by different subjects according
to their visions of the university’s purpose and meaning in society as well as their own
aspired roles. From this perspective, this Forum intends to explore how significant
changes are actually occurring “on the ground”, as it were, by comparing the immedia-
te experiences of colleagues working in a variety of academic roles and settings. Al-
though some of the authors invited to participate in the Forum have produced signifi-
cant expert contributions to the field of audit culture and education 1, our intention is
not to collect new research per se but instead, to gather fresh thoughts and insights by
reflecting on current events and personal observations related to the changing institutio-
nal contexts in which different anthropologists are embedded.
    In this Forum we present contributions related to university settings in various coun-
tries, including Australia and New Zealand, Romania, Denmark, Greece, Finland, Me-
xico, US, Holland, Spain, Canada and the UK. While this selection of cases obviously
cannot offer a geographically comprehensive picture of what is happening at global le-

1. This is an expanding field of research in anthropology, shaped by the influential essay of Cris Shore
and Susan Wright (1999) and a seminal collection edited by Marilyn Strathern (2000).


2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90
TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI (EDS)                                            43


vel, we seek to enlarge the sphere of critical and provocative conversations about emer-
ging models of higher education across national contexts. In their introduction to a re-
cent volume on neoliberalism in higher education, Boone Shear and Susan Brin Hyatt
establish «the university as an important location of hegemonic struggle» (2015: 3),
and explore how focused ethnographic research and analysis can help imagine more po-
sitive transformations going forward. We, too, aim to stimulate reflection on the chan-
ging role of the university today in concrete, empirical, ideally ethnographic terms. In
assembling this set of commentaries, however, we asked our contributors for relatively
informal, timely and accessible contributions that can make our perspectives and con-
cerns from inside the academy easier to share with the general public. The immediate,
thoughtful and even passionate responses we received within a very short timeframe
have highlighted just how imperative a topic this is.
    Our Forum opens up with a paper by Cris Shore and Sue Wright whose analysis fra-
mes and resonates with many other contributions here, and particularly with Jon Mit-
chell’s account of the making of academic subjectivities. Drawing on years of systema-
tic research within different university contexts, Shore and Wright make clear that the
neoliberal model is not only transforming the role of the university in society, but also
creating new kind of subjects whose practices and ethos are structured by an emerging
entrepreneurial culture taking root at the heart of the academy. Dimtris Dalakoglou
considers how neoliberal shifts promote entrepreneurial strategies and self-interested
behaviour in academics. Exploring the etymology of idiocy, he insists it is crucial to re-
cognize and challenge the actions of the many “idiots” now circulating in academia,
that is, those simply acting according to selfish interests. Unfortunately, selfish or “idio-
tic” behaviour is often disguised and not always easy to identify as such, especially con-
sidering that the university is traditionally populated by “semi-scholars”, as formulated
by Arnold van Gennep in his inimitable, sardonic description of academic life (van
Gennep 1911). Dalakoglou asks us to take sides, and reassert the moral ethos of com-
mon good.
    In different ways, both Vintilă Mihăilescu for Romania and Jon Mitchell for UK
suggest how difficult it is escaping from the audit regime and its trivial, apparently un-
questionable truths. How could one argue against “teaching excellence” and “best prac-
tices”, or to refuse to submit to “international standards”? However, as their contribu-
tions and others show, behind such apparently non-negotiable concepts and values, the-
re exists considerable discretion. Paradoxically, assuming what is taken for granted and
naturalized as signs of merit might ultimately produce nefarious social and political im-
pacts to research and teaching, two essential activities of university professionals that
are currently undergoing a process of unnecessary and unwanted separation. Yet Sarah
Green reminds us that despite many haunting parallels and convergences across cases,
we should remain attuned to the heterogeneity of neoliberal processes. Examining her
experiences in the UK and Finland comparatively, she reflects that despite many negati-
ve impacts associated with new audit cultures, budget cuts, and moves toward privatiza-

                                             2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90
44                                              ANTHROPOLOGISTS IN/OF THE NEOLIBERAL ACADEMY


tion in each case, there was no single, inevitable path toward a specific neoliberal mo-
del. Rather, there may be unexpected opportunities to shape the changing university in
positive directions, particularly in national contexts where the public recognizes the va-
lue of higher education as a benefit to society.
   The exploration of alternative moral frames for academic work running through the-
se commentaries indeed suggests broad-based challenges to the ethos of neoliberalism.
This gives some insight into emerging debates and conflicts around educational reform.
Green’s account of university downsizing in liberal Finland resonates with Tracey Hea-
therington’s discussion of Wisconsin, but the latter emphasizes a clash in cultural va-
lues around education, and an evolving social mobilization to protect the core values of
the university. Similarly, Gabriela Vargas-Cetina and Igor Ayora-Diaz consider the
transformation of their own distinguished institution from a research-driven university
into a “public service” university driven by market values. These deep changes to hi-
gher education are determined not only by the Mexican government, but also mandated
by international agencies. They are taking place against an increasingly politicized bac-
kdrop of Oaxacan resistance to general educational reform. Where student mobiliza-
tions against educational reforms have taken place across Europe in response to austeri-
ty measures, these two cases illustrate the growing stakes for teachers and faculty.
   The current transformation of the academic landscape, notably in UK and US, in-
cludes growing symbolic and financial privileges accorded to STEM fields (Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). As Shore and Wright, Heatherington, Na-
rotzky, and Welch-Devine each show, this has serious consequences for what are some-
times perceived as less “relevant” or marginal disciplines in the Arts, Humanities and
Social Sciences. In this regard, the recent diminishing number of faculty in social anth-
ropology in Italy is also telling (Palumbo 2013). Noelle Molé Liston, Meredith Welch-
Devine, and Tracey Heatherington all discuss the problem of growing precarity from
different subject positions in the US context. While Molé Liston and Welch-Devine oc-
cupy untenured positions outside of anthropology departments, Heatherington has wit-
nessed the loss of tenure guarantees as well as challenges to academic freedom within a
state university system. Both Welch-Devine and Heatherington also play complex dual
roles as research faculty and administrators advocating for graduate programs that must
survive in the context of the audit regime. In fact, the significance of neoliberal shifts
for students remains an important concern for many of us. Susana Narotzky, Meredith
Welch-Devine and Jaro Stacul offer three different national perspectives upon the re-
making of academic subjectivities among students, who often have no choice but to de-
dicate more attention to working off campus than to their studies. Here we see how the
increasing precarity of faculty and staff is matched by increasing precarity and debt for
students, affecting the quality of their training in our discipline and consequently, the
discipline itself.




2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90
TRACEY HEATHERINGTON, FILIPPO M. ZERILLI (EDS)                                                45


   It is our hope that this Forum will establish a platform to host and discuss future
contributions on this theme and above all, to move together toward a coalition in favour
of the university as we think it should be. In this, we draw inspiration from the collea-
gues who established the Overpass Light Brigade in Milwaukee, Wisconsin 2. Since
2011, this alliance for creative activism has continued to champion public education
and bring visibility to progressive causes, by lighting up signs above the highways and
public spaces. Over the past five years they have forged a network that spans well
beyond the state, and reminded us how powerful our words, ideas and collective actions
can be. While current policy discourses may tend to reinforce the hegemony of neoli-
beralism, both Tim Ingold (2016) and Tracey Heatherington (this Forum) recognize
expanding local movements to reclaim the model of the public university. If, as Tho-
mas Docherty recently argued (2015: 1), «there is a war on the future of the
university» worldwide, then it is essential that we become engaged, take sides, and de-
cide actively what kind of university we do stand for.
REFERENCES
Docherty, Thomas, 2015, Universities at War, London, Sage.
Ingold, Tim, 2016, Reclaiming the University of Aberdeen, Guest Post by Professor Timothy
       Ingold, University of Aberdeen, http://cdbu.org.uk/reclaiming-the-university-of-aber-
       deen/ (accessed on 19 June 2016).
Palumbo, Berardino, 2013, Messages in a bottle. Etnografia e autoetnografia del campo accade-
       mico antropologico in Italia, La Ricerca Folklorica, 67-68: 169-194.
Shear, Boone W., Susan Brin Hyatt, 2015, Introduction: Higher education, engaged anthropo-
       logy and hegemonic struggle, in Learning under neoliberalism: Ethnographies of gover-
       nance in higher education, Susan Brin Hyatt, Boone W. Shear, Susan Wright, eds, New
       York and Oxford, Berghahn: 1-29.
Shore, Cris, Susan Wright, 1999, Audit Culture and Anthropology: Neo-Liberalism in British
       Higher Education, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 5, 4: 557-575.
Strathern, Marilyn, ed, 2000, Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics
       and the Academy, London and New York, Routledge.
Van Gennep, Arnold, 1911, Les Demi-Savants. Esthétique comparée. Linguistique. Pathologie
       végétale. Biologie. Ethnographie. Folklore. Epigraphie. Anthropométrie. Critique Littérai-
       re. La synthèse, Paris, Mercure de France.




2. See http://overpasslightbrigade.org.


                                               2016 ⎸ANUAC. VOL. 5, N° 1, GIUGNO 2016: 41-90
