@article{THESIS,
      recid = {11843},
      author = {Sogaard, Sofie},
      title = {Tupilat Metaphysics: Exploring Other-Than-Human  Subjectivity through the Lens of Rhizomatic Indeterminacy},
      publisher = {University of Chicago},
      school = {M.A.},
      address = {2024-06},
      number = {THESIS},
      abstract = {This paper examines three tupilak assemblages made by  Kalaallit angakkok Mitsivarniannga in 1905 and1906, by  request of Danish ethnographer William Thalbitzer, as well  as “tupilat” carvings sold as souvenirs throughout  Kalaallit Nunaat. Drawing upon a framework of rhizomatic  indeterminacy, Kalaallit and post-reformation European  understandings of Mitsivarniannga’s tupilat are understood  to come from incompatible metaphorical systems (Nadasdy  2011) and thus differ in their realities. Despite this  incommensurability, perceptions of tupilat are  complementary phenomena (Nadasdy 2021); they both make up  tupilat truths. These different routes of perception allow  for a multiplicity of perspectives of tupilat and  “tupilat”, adding to the inbetweenness of their qualities.  Understanding this, one can frame Mitsivarniannga’s tupilat  as something similar to material ghosts, as tangible forms  of afterlife (Dawdy 2020), or as metapersons (Sahlins  2022)—though solely when in spirit form—as they lose their  agential magic when embedded within a physical form. In  delving into the realm of commodities, I ask: do “tupilat”  carvings exist in a nuanced ontological space: transformed  into fetishes through the agency of those who make and sell  them and conjured to life through the act of the sale  (Dawdy 2017)? When refracted through the lens of the  fetishism, do Kalaallit artists act as mediators within a  spiritual economy, transforming “tupilat” subjectivities  through relationships within Kalaallit-tourist social  networks?},
      url = {http://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/11843},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.6082/uchicago.11843},
}