Right so there are a lot of approaches to the literature, any one of which would have its emphases and exclusions. I find it perennially useful and intellectually satisfying to see the discipline from the longue durée, particularly since the problems of theory and method that now absorb it are nested in its curious history. My list went no further than the 80s because things after that, from our perspective, haven't yet cemented too neatly--stuff becomes confused, and a series of new critiques (post-modern, feminist, queer, post-colonial, to name the bigger ones) splinter the discipline. Certain theoretical markers crop up with great frequency, and a taste for Parisian theorists takes hold in a big way. Contemporary ethnographies are a special literature, and there's a lot of dispute about what makes a good ethnography. Meanwhile, the journal literature is strange and hermetic, and has entirely different standards to follow and agendas to advance. Personally, then, I would shy from reading too many contemporary ethnographies and articles, save for in your chosen sub-field, in which case the recommendation would have to be rather personal.
What do you plan to work on, "wheninhell"?
"Frozenroses," the latter Pritchard book on magic is perhaps most interesting. If you do read it, do consult secondary sources about it to put the work in the colonial context from which it emerged.