tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post115394415205759735..comments2024-02-24T18:30:26.749-07:00Comments on prairiemary: "WILLIAM HENRY HOLMES and the Rediscovery of the American West"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post-1154188871823640432006-07-29T10:01:00.000-06:002006-07-29T10:01:00.000-06:00Reid, I'd say that qualified as a "meeting!" I wa...Reid, I'd say that qualified as a "meeting!" I was in a long line of teachers at a conference in Minneapolis. It has always seemed significant to me that Margaret Mead started out as a minister's wife -- a suitably humble post for powerful people. But she never could "subdue herself" into at least the appearance of humility. All her husbands were significant contributors to science -- hardly wimpy! But she was one of the few women I can think of who had something like "short person's syndrome" -- most are male like Napoleon! That "thumbstick" was a consciously chosen intimidator that someone advised her to carry. They also warned her not to get too thin. A family member, I think -- male.<BR/><BR/>Prairie MaryMary Strachan Scriverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00538160009129822362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post-1154188229570229052006-07-29T09:50:00.000-06:002006-07-29T09:50:00.000-06:00I spoke with Margaret Mead once, though can't real...I spoke with Margaret Mead once, though can't really say that I met her. I was sitting in the audience for a symposium at the American Anthropological Association meetings in 1973. The session hadn't started yet and there were lots of people in the room standing in the aisles talking. Suddenly the room got quiet and the crowd parted like the Red Sea as Mead came stalking down the aisle using that big staff of hers. She came and sat next to me. We exchanged some banal pleasantries, but I was still an undergraduate and too intimidated to say much. She had a lot of charismaReid Farmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18382498430164817928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post-1154142696488273582006-07-28T21:11:00.000-06:002006-07-28T21:11:00.000-06:00Reid,I very much appreciate this comment of yours....Reid,<BR/><BR/>I very much appreciate this comment of yours. What you say is "in the book." Fernlund is a meticulous writer who is not above wit. I think he is a coming officer of the Western History Association.<BR/><BR/>The more I look at the 19th century "disciplines" -- which as you say are still "undisciplined" around the edges -- the more I see how arbitrary they can be. All knowledge today now begins to seem a connected and seamless flowing whole, which makes it even more important for a person to be sure of their vantage point, motives and goals.<BR/><BR/>I met Margaret Mead once -- she was old. I'm the same age and name as her daughter -- look a little like her. One cannot be that daring and passionate, willing to take risks, without making enemies.<BR/><BR/>As for Ursula LeGuin, she is a familiar face around my hometown, Portland, OR., and often could be spotted in the feminist bookstore near my apartment in the Nineties. Once I flew down from Vancouver, B.C., a couple of seats behind her and was VERY aware that we were flying over "Earthsea" with the real wizard in the plane with us. It's a flight that is a small plane, follows the coastline, and travels at dusk. I would not have been surprised to see her meld out the window and stand on the wing!<BR/><BR/>Prairie MaryMary Strachan Scriverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00538160009129822362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post-1154137217344693842006-07-28T19:40:00.000-06:002006-07-28T19:40:00.000-06:00Holmes is a representative of what archaeologists ...Holmes is a representative of what archaeologists now term the "Classificatory-Descriptive" phase of American archaeology. This was a period in the late 19th century when there was progress in describing artifacts and remains in an objective systematic manner for the first time. You are right, Holmes was on the wrong side of many issues, most notably siding with Ales Hrdlicka in believing that people first came to the New World after the Pleistocene. There is an old cartoon still seen in some Anthro departments that shows Hrdlicka standing at the Bering Straits with his hands up to stop the Siberians from migrating across. The bright side of that was that they demanded rigor in the data presented and real proof. When the real proof was found of Folsom points imbedded in Pleistocene bison ribs, it carried the day.<BR/><BR/>Holmes' insistence on organization and systmatic rigor was something the profession needed - actually STILL needs. His bureaucratic work at the Smithsonian and the BAE with Powell and Thomas gave archaeology one of its two homes in that period, along the the Peabody Museum at Harvard. That also was a valuable contribution.<BR/><BR/>It gave a base that the students that Boas was training at Columbia (like Kroeber) could expand on as the 20th century progressed.<BR/><BR/>Boas is now revered as the founder of modern anthropology in this country. I was fortunate enough to meet his daughter Franziska when I was working on a dig in Georgia in the mid-1970s. She was retired from a liberal arts college where she had taught dance. It was fascinating hearing her tell stories of her father and of her classmate at Barnard, Margaret Mead, whom she detested. She thought Mead was an ambitious liar who manipulated her father. Interesting perspective and not the first to make that charge.<BR/><BR/>BTW didn't know if you were aware that the science fiction writer, Ursula K. LeGuin, is Alfred Kroeber's daughter. More anthropological triviaReid Farmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18382498430164817928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11838465.post-1154009292858986572006-07-27T08:08:00.000-06:002006-07-27T08:08:00.000-06:00Sounds like something I would love to read...thank...Sounds like something I would love to read...thanks!Cowtown Pattiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07384649567351202679noreply@blogger.com