Re: The Golden Bough by Frazer - a question
ABuehrle (anitab@interlog.com)
Tue, 17 Jan 1995 14:39:37 LOCAL
In article <clbrock-1301951813440001@brock.astro.umanitoba.ca> clbrock@cc.umanitoba.ca (Martin Clutton-Brock) writes:
>Path: interlog.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!newsflash.concordia.ca!canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca!brock.astro.umanitoba.ca!user
>From: clbrock@cc.umanitoba.ca (Martin Clutton-Brock)
>Newsgroups: sci.anthropology
>Subject: Re: The Golden Bough by Frazer - a question
>Date: 13 Jan 1995 23:03:01 GMT
>Organization: University of Manitoba
>Lines: 16
>Distribution: world
>Message-ID: <clbrock-1301951813440001@brock.astro.umanitoba.ca>
>References: <TVALKONE.95Jan10223752@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: brock.astro.umanitoba.ca
>In article <TVALKONE.95Jan10223752@klaava.Helsinki.FI>,
>tvalkone@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero M Valkonen) wrote:
>> I recently bought James Frazer's The Golden Bough, because I'd
>> known it had influenced some quite important writers (Eliot,
>> Pound), and because it cost almost nothing. Now, I'm interested
>> to know how this book is regarded today. Is it completely
>> invalid, scientifically, is it still appreciated, or what?
>My impression is that Frazer's theories are regarded as worthless, but the
>data he assembles is fascinating. I don't think you can find anything
>comparable elsewhere in an easily accessible form. If anyone knows of a
>better and more recent collection of folk beliefs, I'd like to know about
>it.
>Martin.
I don't honestly don't know of any work that has managed to scrape across
and influence so many many discplines. Historically 'the golden bough' is
an important work. In Anthropology there has never been any-thing that has
reached its magnitude; at least in terms of research. /:#
- we are so specialized these days. In the 19th century they didn't think of
such things.
|