ABSTRACT
Interaction is between; correspondence in-between. The life of lines is a process of correspondence. Thus for the between-ness of subjects, in Arendt’s formulation, I substitute the correspondence of lines, and for the web of human relationships, the meshwork. What are the implications of this substitution for the discipline and practice of anthropology? Without wishing to sound overly hyperbolic, I believe that it has the potential to transform our approach to the study of social life in all its traditional subfields: of kinship and affinity, ecology and economy, ritual and religion, politics and law. It can also help to take us beyond the divisions between human biology and culture, and between human evolution and history, that up to now have acted as road blocks to our thinking. Finally, it can change the ways we value and purpose our work, and the responsibilities that attach to it. Let me conclude by touching on each of these areas in turn.
