Re: These guard dogs (Re: Evidence for "Big Bang Theory")
Philip Young (email@example.com)
26 May 1995 17:39:42 GMT
In article <Admin.0xqm@oubliette.COM>,
Panopticon@oubliette.COM (Eric Shook) writes:
|> I wonder if Anthropology in Australia suffers from its very own bias just
|> like ours does? Could it be that Gil's point of view focuses more strongly
|> upon areas which Australians really found themselves to be guilty of
|> stomping on? This would be something like our Western guilt over
|> modernization. We keep turning right back to that point no matter what, and
|> eventually we might find that it has shaped our version of Anthropological
|> inquiry, and out lived its utility. So, perhaps Gil is speaking from the
|> POV of Australia, replete with its focus upon problems that are very real
|> and in need of greater intention down under?
Gil being Australian, that's just embarrassing to the rest of
us. His idiosyncrayic views and style are entirely his own.
National stereotypes are not applicable.
Philip R. Young | firstname.lastname@example.org
"It is the lurid intermixture of the two that produces the
illuminating blaze of the infernal regions."
- Nathaniel Hawthorne, "Rappaccini's Daughter"