Alaska Journal of Anthropology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Alaska Journal of Anthropology Volume Two, Numbers 1 - 2 2004 ALASKA ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION TABLE oF CoNTENTS SPECIAL SE<:rlON: .. "MAKL~G IT'' Emnru BY MAIIDARRT BLACKM&"l" ~Ll>ID MOllY LEE ImRoorcTION: MAKI.:«i IT: CrulATJIIIG AR'TIFACTS t\ THE Arff»ROPOl.OGtCAL SrnJNG - MARGARET Br.ACKMAN AND i\.fol!Y IJill .... " ............ ., ........................................ ,,,.,, ............................... 4 0 Fmsr 11m fAIDBOU MARGARET BucKMA:;; .................................... ......................... 8 NOT MAKING Ir: FoRMAIJ£\t, Cutl11RAL SJG:IDTCANGR AND Til!! S'ruDY oF NATIVE A.'\J.I!RICAN Br.SKETRY ~ Mom Lrili ........................................................................................................................ 18 "Is TnAT ASoo You'RE MAKII'.'(;r' uAR No, ABooKCASE.'j l.E.tiRNJNG, HoowoRK A.\'D VlS!MJ. e IcoNOGRAPHY IN SOP~nl YuP'IK f,oNTOOS- CHrt.:w. HENSEL ............................................ "" •., 24 E) Nor ALL DRlffWOOD [s CREAnm EQUAL: WOOD USE ANn VAI.Uil ALoNG THE YuKON AND 0 KusKOKWIM RIVER.'>, AlAsKA ~ CLAIIlli Aux. ANn KAREN B1mwsmR ... ,,,... , ............ , .......... 48 LRIIRNING, ~lliiNGl TRA&TORM1NG: Co.NCJM'S!ON..'i OK "MAKING Ir" -ArnoN;\ JoNArrts .................. 66 Tun SIGNmcA.TVCE o.F DOG TRAC'nON R)R 1'fiR ANALYSiS OJI PREHISTORIC A.lir'..xtc Socmnm - 0 WlLllAM L. SIIEPPARD ... " ................................. ". '""" .......................... '"" ................ 70 0 A HISTORY OF HuMAN L\sn Us~: os Sr. MATTHEw IsuNn, AIAsK>\ ~ DENNIS GruFI<1N .•••••• , ... 84 0 REDATING TJJE Hor SPRJNGS Srrn 1N .Poo:r Mou.F;n.j AiAs.KA - HERBERT D. G. MASCl-l.JJ.IlR .... 100 RAmor:ARBON DAms FROM THE EAlln' Hm.ocENIJ COlrl!!ONENI' or A STRATIFIED Sr:rn (SEI.-009) 0 AT AuRoRA LAGOON, KnNM PENL"iSUL\, AlASKA· JANET R. KLEIN AND PETm ZoiURS ......... 118 A PVNl!-x Wn.i.rn BooE GnAYE FROM Sfi<lJQAQ, Sr. LtwRHNCF. IsrA"'i:n: Evmt.'«'£ oF Hwn Soct>\L 0 S'!AND,.G, A.D. 775-1020 ·DAVID P. STAU<Y AND OwEN K. iiiASON .............................. 126 Oru:.1mw.noNS oN RfsnARCHl?<."G AND ~Llli.\GING AMSK>\ NATIVR OR>\1. HISTORY: A C.<\SE S'ItiUY KF•Nf.TH !,, PRAIT ............................................................................................................ 138 BooK RRVIEWs jAMns KAru: ft...ND }A.II.JES A. FAu. - SnEM P.!!'m's ALASKA: 'f:uE TEmu.rom oF trrn UPPER Coox INm· DllNA'INA, 2:-m ED ... DoN E. DUMoND .................................. ., ........................ , .. ,,.. ,., ...... 154 PHY1JJS FAST: NoRTIIERN AritABASGAN SuRVIVAl., Wru-mN, CoMMUi'H1'Y AND IIIE Fun.1w.- STEVFi J. UNGDON ... """" ........................................ ,.:, ....................... '"'"":'" ..... ,,,. ........... ,, ....... !56 WALLACE M. Ot.C,()N; THROUGH Si'A.'USH EYEs: SPANISH VOYAGES TO Ar._A._<:.KA; 1774~1792 -J DAVID McMAHAN ...................................................................................................................... !58 CAJ«JL ZANE Jou.ru; "\VITI! Bu:NoR MmAGIIAQ OoZEvA: FAlTit) Foon & FAMILY lN A YDPIK WnAUNG GoMMUNI'l'Y- KArrlllRINE RlillDY·li1AsCH.vm ........................................................................... 160 DDN E. DuMoND: ARcHAllOLOGY ON nm Ar..w;,\ PENINSUlA; Tim LEADER CREEK Srm AND Irs CoNmxT R. K. IIARRIT .................................................................................................................. 162 SriIE GnruE ... ,.... ,, .............................. ,....... ,,,,,,,,, .......... ,.,, .. ., .................................... ,,,, 170 ii Alaska Journal ofAnthropology Volume 2, Numbers 1 - 2 Table of Contents iii INTRODUCTION: MAKING IT: CREATING ARTIFACTS IN THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL SETTING Margaret Blackman Professor, Department of Anthropology, State University ofNew York, Brockport, NY I 4420 Molly Lee Curator of Ethnology and Professor of Anthropology, University of Alaska Musenm of the North, Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960. [email protected] "Yesterday evening and today I have been in a state ofexcitement, caused by my success in making combs. I have an artistic intoxication, it's a little like writing verse. " So wrote the father of participant observation, diversionary, a welcome respite from the loneliness and Bronislaw Malinowski, in 1914 (Malinowski 1967: 125). frustration of fieldwork. Malinowski obviously enjoyed Malinowski was in the field at the time, "creating arti working with his hands, appeared to be good at it, and facts in the anthropological setting." He purchased the waxed far more euphoric about his accomplishments in tortoise shell for the combs (at a bargain price, he adds), artifact making than in ethnography. and drew the designs for them. By his own account he spent many enjoyable hours working on combs, but not For many anthropologists in the field making arti without some guilt: "In the morning wasted some time on facts as Malinowski did continues to be a welcome di tortoise shell" and, "I went back home intending to write version from the stresses of field research and a mile retrosp[ective] Diary, and to work on tortoise shell only a stone of self-accomplishment in a foreign culture. At the little while. I started at 9 and was at it until I. .. " In same time, it can also be an important form of participant successive pages of his famous diary the entry, "tortoise observation, a way ofjoining in, expressing a willingness shell" becomes a gloss for time spent designing and mak to learn, and earning approval. Research methods text ing combs. Malinowski's combs were the tall curved tor books and manuals don't mention making artifacts as a toise shell variety made famous in 0. Hemy's "The Gift," participant observation strategy (e.g., Jackson 1987; and they were destined for his fiancee, Elsie, who waited Russell 2002; Wolcott 1995) perhaps because such ac out his long stint of fieldwork in Australia. tivity is assumed too inconsequential, or perhaps because it might blur the separation between observer and ob Perhaps Malinowsld 's comh designs drew upon the served that such texts are often at pains to emphasize. native art he saw about him, for at one point he com ments-maybe facetiously, maybe not- "we planned Making objects in the context of fieldwork is more to launch a new Papuan style." It's worthy of note that apt to come from the toolldt of the aesthetic anthropolo his mentor in comb-making, the other half of this "we" gist or the art historian studying the art of a particular was not a native, but a white ex-patriate on the Melanesian culture than from that of the ethnographer. At the very island ofSamarai, identified in the diary only as "Smith." least the former have more reason to confess that they Why, one wonders, would Malinowski have been spend have made or attempted to mal<e the objects that are the ing so much time with a non-Native? Was it the lure of subjects of their study. Making ethnographic artifacts companionship of someone from his own culture, a temp "artifaking"- to use a term coined by art historian Bill tation we anthropologists are urged to forego in the field? Holm- has even led former hobbyists, such as Holm, Or was it, perhaps, a tradeoff? Had Smith set up a cot into academe. Their careful attention to process and style tage industry and willingly traded companionship for an has resulted in the identification and atiiculation of the other pair of hands? formal rules underlying art styles (e.g., Bennett 1997; Holm 1965). Whatever else, few would disagree that, Unlike the authors whose papers follow, having made it, one can explain the process in ways that Malinowski's artistic efforts had no ethnographic purpose, those without such first hand knowledge cannot. though they clearly might have had. They were simply 4 Alaska Journal of Anthropology Volume 2, Numbers 1 -2 In the course of his decades long studies oflnuit art cially the narrowing effects that a focus on the purely Nelson Graburn tried his hand at carving Inuit stone technical aspects of an art form can have on its study. sculpture and he included one of his artifacts in a serious "Making it," in her view, may limit understanding by con research experiment. In an effort to resolve an ongoing fining one's interpretation of ethnographic objects to the debate about the aesthetic evaluation oflnuit art, Graburn very formal mles of their construction and style. Given subjected 25 pieces oflnuit sculpture exhibiting a range our divergent views, we thought the topic worthy of a of styles and workmanship to two different audiences symposium at the Alaska Anthropological Association for evaluation. The first comprised Canadian Inuit in meetings. Accordingly, Lee recruited several panelists several northern communities (Graburn 1977). The and a discussant to join in the exchange, which took place second included White collectors, critics, and exhibit in March of 2003. selectors, along with intelligent others not so familiar with Inuit art history (Graburn 2001 [1986]). The collection "Making it" raises the issue of what it is about arti both groups evaluated included two non-Inuit-though facts/art that we should be attending to in seeking to un not identified as such-sculptures, one of which was a derstand them. The contributors brought a range of per snail carved by Graburn. Commenting on the results of spectives, expertise, and Alaskan field experiences to the this experiment, Graburn stated that, for neither audience discussion. Hensel uses his efforts as an occasion for of raters were there were any clear-cut "winners" among reflecting on the differences between