|
|
I'm a bit troubled too, but not by the new AAJohn Stevens (8859jstev@UMBSKY.CC.UMB.EDU)Sat, 8 Oct 1994 12:09:05 EDT
for "voice o' reason" for his measured response to the Tedlock eruption that has been going on recently on the list. Give the Tedlocks, time, folks; it's a tough job they're doing, and as I've said before, most editors worth their salt try to make a lasting first impression that lets you not only what side of the fence they're on, but what color they want to paint it. The Tedlocks are pretty flamboyant (and maybe a little intolerant), and I'm glad that they laid it all out before us. Don't start a war (to paraphrase Mike) until you know there's an enemy. It seems to me that this debate lies at the heart of the whole specialization debate so nicely encapsulated by Trish Clay's recent post. For me, it is a debate not about what you study, but how. Too many people in "area studies" \lack a solid theoretical or methodological approach, and this hurts their work. You can't learn about something with knowing a somehow to learn it. This is why no less an iconoclast than myself embraces the mantle of (budding) anthropologist. If we all have one thing in common, it is the literal definition of anthropology: the study of MAN. Culture has long been held to be a central part of that study, so of course there will be more specializations around that heart of anthropological inquiry. I would love to see an Ethnoarchaology group or a Biocultural discussion, etc; that's the kind of diversity that powers what is ideally the most encompassing and holistic of the human/science disciplines. Anthropology gives me an anchor in the knowledge whorl. Whether I'm studying history, literature, the rhetoric of human rights, epistemology, religion, or North American cultures, I know that I have a default perspective. I can analyze meaning, critique assumptions, and describe behavior, all under the aegis of anthropology, and that suits me fine. It's almost an identity thing; it's knowing where you're coming from. Maybe that's why the whole Tedlock thing has been raging, because some see this grand old organ churning out music that isn't to their taste and that does not reflect them? Personally, I don't think that any one journal can possibly encompass the discipline, but if it presents thoughtful work and attempts to cover multiple perspectives, then I'll be satisfied. Best regards, John Stevens University of Massachusetts 8859JSTEV@umbsky.cc.umb.edu
|