…By highlighting the contradictions in the notions of citizenship, ‘locality,’ marginality, and self-representation, Tsing challenges the wider conceptions of the ‘Other.’…
(excerpt from a paper critique:)
In the Realm of the Diamond Queen is a difficult one for me to get through. To the extent that a re-reading is an absolute requirement.
In doing so, I was again struck by the elegant complexity and depth of exposition Tsing has laid out in her study of ‘marginalization.’ So much so, in fact, that I had difficulty anchoring on one topic which I could just about attempt to expound on. To understate it, I felt quite…piddling…even from the first few pages of this book. And that did not improve much 100 pages later. I have to confess that I have had to go over a number of segments repeatedly in the hopes of making her argument sink in. In a sense, Diamond Queen is something I feel I could only be relatively equipped to handle after I have had at least 2 years’ worth of being entrenched in ethnographic literature.
…The degree of impression Diamond Queen left on me is particularly suggestive: ‘marginality,’ at first glance, is a ‘feature’ I have taken to be simply straightforward. I considered it as a well-demarcated and -defined product of the intersection of history and the ecology, with the subsequent emergence of a ‘core’ ideology later impacting more distinctively on the existence of this ‘space at the margins.’ In addition, I have understood those at the margins to be in a perpetual conflict or resistance with the center; at most, with a prevailing active animosity over the status quo.
Tsing unflinchingly disabused me of that notion.
As she has shown in the study of the Meratus, marginality is more than an awareness of a territory (with or without physical boundaries) characterized as ‘removed from’ the political, cultural, and economic core. What I used to apprehend as a dialectical relationship actually finds complexity among the Meratus and their association with the state.
By showing how certain Meratus place themselves within and beyond the state’s peripheral and dismissive gaze, Tsing reveals the nuances that underlie Meratus personhood.
Among others is an ostensibly circuitous provenance that bring to mind a sort of Catch-22: the Meratus leaders are clamoring for state recognition and citizenship. The state then informs them to advocate certain ‘civilized’ comportment (like literacy), while retaining formulations of ethnic identity (249) under the auspices of ‘ethnic pluralism.’ But since national ideology compartmentalizes the Meratus as an ‘out-of-the-way’ people, whose (inaccurately) ‘nomadic’ nature (to name a few) suspend them in the static hold of pre-history, they are, as a result, consigned to their current circumstance. They are physically ‘out-of-the-way’ (and figuratively stay that way) because their settlement areas are so far removed from the tolerable reaches of state intervention that hardly any official bothers to look their way long enough to understand their culture or way of thinking. Hence, Meratus claims for consideration of acknowledged citizenship remain overlooked.
Tsing goes on to provide tangible evidence of this ambivalence. And this is where, in my opinion, Diamond Queen subtly but strongly latches onto my rather mystified engagement. Despite the pitiful frequency with which I become entangled in the author’s juxtaposition of Meratus ethnicity and state ideology, I cannot help but appreciate Tsing’s interpretation of Meratus social and political actions as negotiated maneuvers that are invoked to appease national policies of assimilation while simultaneously embedded in traditional or localized ideals of Meratus personhood.
Such performative actions, then, reflect contingent, contradictory, and shifting self-identities which are still strangely effective in maintaining, if not in justifying, ethnic beliefs and traditions. It is in these practices that the Meratus obviates stereotypes of a passive, impotent minority.
...For what it is worth, I have a high regard for the Diamond Queen; but there have also been segments in her narrative that come across as incongruous (like the bulk of her discussion on ‘Conditions of Living’), if not quite superfluous. The interesting thing is that she shows the marginality of the Meratus through largely episodic snapshots experienced by only a handful of people, most of which ‘stand out’ (even if Tsing assiduously claims otherwise) from the ‘average’ Meratus. If this is just another way for her to underscore the highly polemical and irresolute nature of marginality and Meratus identity, then she has succeeded in this regard...