Practicing caste on touching and not touching

This work attempts a fundamental break from the tradition of caste studies, using a version of phenomenology, structuralism, and post-structuralism to give a radical description of touchability and untouchability in terms of a rhetoric and semantics of touch. Written in minimalist style, it attempts...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Jaaware, Aniket
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: New York, NY Fordham University Press 2019, 2019©2019
Series:Commonalities
Subjects:
Online Access:
Collection: JSTOR Books - Collection details see MPG.ReNa
LEADER 01876nam a2200313 u 4500
001 EB002066347
003 EBX01000000000000001206437
005 00000000000000.0
007 tu|||||||||||||||||||||
008 220916 r ||| eng
020 |a 0823282287 
020 |a 9780823282289 
050 4 |a BF275 
100 1 |a Jaaware, Aniket 
245 0 0 |a Practicing caste  |h Elektronische Ressource  |b on touching and not touching  |c Aniket Jaaware 
260 |a New York, NY  |b Fordham University Press  |c 2019, 2019©2019 
300 |a 1 online resource 
505 0 |a Includes bibliographical references and index 
505 0 |a Touch and its elements and kinds -- Touch, an a priori approach -- Touch in its social and historical aspects I -- Touch in its social and historical aspects II -- Touch and texts: ancient and modern -- (Un)touchability of things and people -- Sociality and sociability -- Recapitulation with variations 
653 |a Caste 
653 |a Touch 
653 |a HISTORY / Asia / India & South Asia 
653 |a PSYCHOLOGY / Physiological Psychology 
041 0 7 |a eng  |2 ISO 639-2 
989 |b JSTOR  |a JSTOR Books 
490 0 |a Commonalities 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/j.ctv75d9m7  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
082 0 |a 152.1/82 
520 |a This work attempts a fundamental break from the tradition of caste studies, using a version of phenomenology, structuralism, and post-structuralism to give a radical description of touchability and untouchability in terms of a rhetoric and semantics of touch. Written in minimalist style, it attempts to see if regulations on touchability can be seen as generalizable, and not seen merely as an Indian phenomenon. It also argues that, upon examination, several traditional sociological, political, and moral categories do not prove to be useful for understanding touchability and untouchability