First of all, this (Thick Descriptions) was my first time reading anything anthropological/any writings on anthropology, so I found it a little difficult to understand at first without a having a previous foundation or background. However, the in-class discussion and especially the illustrative example through Trump/Kyle Rittenhouse really made some concepts clearer for me, especially the notion of layered meanings and contexts, and the difference between thin and thick descriptions.
The Trump/Kyle Rittenhouse example also brought up a question regarding the way Gertz distinguishes between thin and thick description: can you really ever have a truly thin description? Gertz’s simplest example of the difference is the physical description (an eyelid contraction, which is thin) and the context (a wink, which is thick(er)). What’s interesting to me is that, in the case of the Rittenhouse video, even seemingly ‘thin’ descriptions can be ‘thick’ and that it seems difficult (to me) to produce a physical description of events without attributing at least an additional layer of meaning. For example, Trump describes the events by saying “I guess it looks like he fell, and then they very violently attacked him”. His use of the word violent adds a layer of meaning to the events. Trump surely has his own motivations for describing the video as a ‘violent attack’ on Rittenhouse, but even other attempts to describe what happened are informed by the wider context (the cultural layers) brought by the viewers. Do the other people in the video approach Rittenhouse? Attack him? Attempt to disarm? Surround? Threaten? Every one of these words has a different connotation and meaning associated with them; no matter which are used in an attempt to describe the physical actions (in an attempt to provide a thin description), the describer adds a layer of thickness and meaning. I think that in the in case of events such as this one that are more complex than singular physical movements (ex: an eyelid contraction), it would be quite challenging and maybe impossible to obtain an objective and ‘thin’ description of events for the ethnographer to analyze.
Rei – I agree with you that even a thin description has both meaning and some context. Geertz would agree with you too! This is what Geertz himself means when he says it’s “turtles all the way down” or that culture is a “suspended” web of meaning. In other words, one cannot explain or interpret something outside of culture and context. Even language shapes meaning. Further, keep in mind that he argues that the thicker interpretation is a more convincing if not more valid interpretation because it draws on a rich context to explain behavior.