Columbia University and Social Science Research Council.
Br J Sociol. 2018 Sep;69(3):522-537. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12607. Epub 2018 Oct 17.
This 2017 British Journal of Sociology Lecture builds upon ideas developed in The Social Life of DNA: Race, Reparations, and Reconciliation after the Genome (Nelson 2016). I argue that one of the more significant developments of the postgenomic era is the circulation of DNA analysis outside of the life sciences, especially commercial applications such as direct-to-consumer genealogical testing. These tests are increasingly taken up in 'reconciliation projects' - endeavours in which DNA analysis is put to the use of repairing the past, including a recently launched attempt in the United States to locate descendants of enslaved persons sold by the Jesuit stewards of Georgetown College in order to bolster that institution's finances. With this reconciliation project, genetic genealogy has become a vehicle for a form of social repair, and most particularly, the reuniting of 'lost' kin. This use of genetic genealogy takes place against the backdrop of an expanding, national inquiry into ties between education and slavery. In the process, the legacy of racial slavery is rendered both contemporary and proximate, despite a 'colour-blind' racial project that aims to negate the significance of this history and its coeval development with US higher education. Elite educational institutions such as Georgetown that elect to excavate these histories are soon after faced with the choice of how to respond, on campus and beyond, to revelations of entanglements between edification and bondage. However imperfectly, colleges and universities are among the few institutional settings where the contested issue of structural racism (and remedies to it) may be aired. It is in these fraught debates that the exercise of 'institutional morality' can take shape; organizations engage in practices that articulate institutional values and are faced with a choice of symbolic and distributional responses.
这篇 2017 年英国社会学杂志演讲建立在《DNA 的社会生活:基因组后的种族、赔偿和和解》(纳尔逊 2016 年)中提出的观点之上。我认为,后基因组时代的一个更重要的发展是 DNA 分析在生命科学之外的流通,特别是直接面向消费者的家谱测试等商业应用。这些测试越来越多地被用于“和解项目”——努力中,DNA 分析被用于修复过去,包括最近在美国发起的一项尝试,旨在寻找被乔治城学院耶稣会管理人出售的奴隶的后代,以支持该机构的财务状况。通过这个和解项目,遗传家谱学已经成为一种社会修复的手段,特别是重新联系“失去”的亲属。这种对遗传家谱学的使用发生在对教育和奴隶制之间关系的全国性调查不断扩大的背景下。在此过程中,尽管存在一个旨在否定这段历史及其与美国高等教育同期发展的“色盲”种族项目,但种族奴隶制的遗产仍然具有当代性和邻近性。像乔治城这样选择挖掘这些历史的精英教育机构很快就面临着如何在校园内外对教育与奴役之间的纠葛做出回应的选择。尽管不完美,但学院和大学是少数几个可以公开讨论结构性种族主义(及其补救措施)这一有争议问题的机构环境之一。正是在这些激烈的辩论中,“机构道德”的实践可以形成;组织从事阐明机构价值观的实践,并面临着象征性和分配性反应的选择。