Introduction

Since Michael Herzfeld's Cultural Intimacy: Social Poetics in the Nation-state was first published in 1997, the concept of cultural intimacy has entered the anthropological lexicon and emerged as a key analytical tool for the study of the nation-state and the making of collective identities. Drawing upon his own extensive fieldwork in Greece, and also upon a rich body of work that other scholars have undertaken in countries around the world, Herzfeld defines cultural intimacy as "the recognition of those aspects of a cultural identity that are considered a source of external embarrassment but that nevertheless provide insiders with their assurance of common sociality, the familiarity with the bases of power that may at one moment assure the disenfranchised a degree of creative irreverence and at the next moment reinforce the effectiveness of intimidation" (1997:3). In its original formulation, the model rests on the following three basic premises: 1) the nation-state plays a critical role in the construction and presentation of collective identity in private and public life; 2) widespread ideas about "the West" shape the operation of cultural intimacy; and 3) embarrassment is inextricably intertwined with the airing of the nation-state's dirty laundry for the world to see.

Subsequent elaborations of the concept have aimed to build upon Herzfeld's seminal insights and propose new directions of scholarly investigation. A collection of essays edited by Andrew Shryock in 2004 is perhaps the most comprehensive attempt made thus far to enhance our understanding of cultural intimacy, by expanding the geographical scope of the concept beyond Greece and Europe and elucidating the production of social identities in public and within the context of an increasingly interconnected, mass-mediated world. Herzfeld responds to the pronouncements of the contributors to the above volume both in the volume itself (2004:317-35) and in the second edition of Cultural Intimacy, published in 2005 (especially in the entirely new Chapter Two). His refined formulation of the original model emerges within a conceptual framework for the comparative ethnographic analysis of the refractions and manifestations of nationalism in countries where he has conducted research, namely Greece, Italy, and most recently Thailand.

Our understanding of cultural intimacy has thus been significantly broadened. The model's liability to change has been brought to light; that is to say, the subject matter of cultural intimacy shifts according to changes over time in social values and socio-political tactics and strategies (Herzfeld's concept of "social poetics" is highly pertinent here), and adapts to historical contingencies. Also, the concept is associated not only with the study of the nation-state or of the historical and geopolitical specificities of Europe, but also with the study of any social entity, encompassing all its members, from cities and regions to diaspora groups and professional associations, anywhere in the world. This zone of intimacy stands in contradistinction to viewpoints regarding politically and economically powerful outsiders including, but not limited to, representatives of "the West," and also contains alternative discourses to those that are woven for the purpose of official self-presentation. And, while the sense of community remains paramount in the model, the violation of intimacy may very well involve responses that are different from embarrassment. The articles in this collection take on Herzfeld's challenge to expand his cultural intimacy framework, applying it to new communities (e.g., borderland, virtual, transnational) and tracing alternative responses (e.g., unwanted connivance and complaisance).

These scholarly discussions provide the context within which the present issue of Anthropological Quarterly is situated. The idea for the issue grew out of a Society for the Anthropology of Europe (SAE) Invited Session that was organized by Yuson Jung, Melissa L. Caldwell, and Kelly M. Askew at the 106th American Anthropological Association meeting in Washington, DC in 2007 to celebrate and pay homage to Michael Herzfeld's intellectual and personal generosity. The session was titled "Difference, (In)equality and Justice," and participants included some of Herzfeld's colleagues and former graduate students. In response to fertile discussion in the session, the contributors to this issue, all having had the privilege of working under Herzfeld's direct...