Proxemics [and Comments and Replies] Author(s): Edward T. Hall, Ray L. Birdwhistell, Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, A. Richard Diebold, Jr., Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmonson, J. L. Fischer, , Solon T. Kimball, Weston La Barre, Frank Lynch, S. J., J. E. McClellan, Donald S. Marshall, G. B. Milner, Harvey B. Sarles, George L Trager, Andrew P. Vayda Source: Current , Vol. 9, No. 2/3 (Apr. - Jun., 1968), pp. 83-108 Published by: The Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2740724 . Accessed: 04/03/2011 19:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org Proxemics1

byEdward T. Hall

WESTERN MAN has conceptualizedspace in manyways, of thecorrectness of myown interpretationsof observ- rangingfrom Bogardus' (1933, 1959) social space and ed behavior in other cultures.In interpretingthe Sorokin's(1943) socioculturalspace to Lewin's(1948) actionsof people in othercultures, the only thing topologies.Chapple and Coon (1942) and Hallowell about which I am reasonablycertain is my own (1955) treateddistance technically when they describ- fleetingresponses. Working in a detailedway on the ed how it is measuredin differentcultures.2 Jammer micro-culturallevel (Hall 1966: 96) and onlywhere it (1960) has dealtwith the concepts of space (including was possibleto detectresponses on the,affective, as theirhistorical underpinnings) in physics.Proxemics,3 well as thebehavioral, level has motivatedme to con- the studyof man'sperception and use of space,per- centrateon my own cultureas it has been revealed tainsto noneof thesedirectly. Is is muchcloser, in- againstthe contrasting backdrop of othercultures. In stead,to thebehavioral complex of activitiesand their thissense, I am in agreementwith LUvi-Strauss (1966b) derivativesknown to the ethologistsas territoriality.when he speaksof theanthropology of thefuture as a It deals primarilywith out-of-awareness distance-set- sciencein whichpeople study themselves. My approach ting,4and owesmuch to thework of Sapir (1927) and has beento usemyself and othersas measuringdevices Whorf(1956). (or "controls,"if you like) at thosetimes when we Because of my communicationsbias, the sub- have been subjectedto contrastingcultural environ- jectsof proxemicresearch have generallybeen mem- ments.This last is important,for one can be no more bersof my own culture.Like Bateson(1948), I have learnedto dependmore on whatpeople do thanwhat 1 The researchreported on in thispaper was supportedby the theysay in responseto a directquestion, to pay close NationalInstitute of MentalHealth and theWenner-Gren Founda- attentionto thatwhich cannot be consciouslymanipu- tionfor Anthropological Research. lated, and to look for patternsrather than content 2 Hallowell'sintroduction to his Chapter9 (CulturalFactors in SpatialOrienta:ion) is particularlyrelevant to spaceperception. (Hall 1966). However,except in a few exceptional 3 In the courseof the developmentof proxemics,the workwas instances,I have neverbeen able to be reallycertain spokenof as "socialspace as bio-,"and "micro-space in interpersonalencounters." these wereactually abbreviated tech- nical descriptionsin whichthe propermeanings of the termsof referencewere known only to a fewspecialists. Further, the wide EDWARDT. HALL is a Professorof Anthropologyin theCollege spreadinterest in activitiesconnected with outer space provided an of Artsand Sciencesand a Professorof OrganizationTheory incentiveto distinguishbetween my workand thatof the outer- in the School of Businessat NorthwesternUniversity. He is spacescientists. I decided to inventa new termthat would indicate, also currentlya consultant to government,private foundations, in general,what the field was about.Among the terms I considered and business.Previously he servedas Directorof the United werehuman topology, chaology, the study of emptyspace, oriology, StatesState Department's Point IV Trainingprogram. thestudy of boundaries,chorology, the study of organizedspace. I Educatedat the Universityof Denver(A.B.) and Columbia finallychose "proxemics"as the mostsuitable for thataudience University(Ph.D.), Hall has taughtat theUniversity of Denver, mostlikely to encounterthe topic in thenear future. BenningtonCollege, Harvard BusinessSchool, and Illinois 4 The followingquote (Hall 1963) speaksto thematter of levels Instituteof Technology.He has done fieldwork in Micronesia. of awareness:"Any culture characteristically produces a simultaneous His mostrecent research deals withthe questionof how space arrayof patternedbehavior on severaldifferent-levels of awareness. is perceivedin the UnitedStates and abroad.His publications It is thereforeimportant to specifywhich levels of awarenessone is includeThe Silent Language,The Hidden Dimension,and describing. numerousarticles in professionaljournals. "Unlikemuch of thetraditional subject matter of anthropological The presentarticle, solicited by the Editorof CURRENT AN- observation,proxemic patterns, once learned,are maintainedlargely THROPOLOGY,was submittedon 6 x 67, and was sentfor CA* outof consciousawareness and thushave to be investigatedwithout treatmentto 40 scholars.The followingresponded with written resortto probingthe consciousminds of one's subjects.Direct comments:,Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, questioningwill yield few if anysignificant variables, as it willwith RichardDiebold, Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmondson,J. L. suchtopics as kinshipand housetype. In proxemicsone is dealing Fischer,Dell Hymes,Solon T. Kimball,Frank Lynch, Weston withphenomena akin to toneof voice, or evenstress and pitch in the La Barre,Donald Marshall,J. E. McClellan,G. B. Milner, Englishlanguage. Since these are builtinto the language,they are HarveyB. Sarles,George L. Trager,and AndrewP. Vayda. hardfor the speaker to consciously manipulate." Theircomments are printedin fullafter the author's text and Also see Hall (1959: Chap. 4) fora morecomplete statement are followedby a replyfrom the author. concerninglevels of awarenessrelating to change.

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 83 than vaguely aware of one's own culturein the absence thatis writtennowhere, known by none,and under- of face-to-faceencounters with people of other cul- stood by all." 8 It is this elaborateand secretcode tures.5 that becomesconfused with what is popularlycon- I firstbecame aware of my own interestin man's ceivedof as phenomenologicalexperience. It has long use of space when I was trainingAmericans for service beenbelieved that experience is what menshare and overseas and discovered that the way in which both thatit is possibleto bypasslanguage by referringback time and space were handled constituteda form of to experiencein orderto reachanother human being. communicationwhich was responded to as if it were This implicit(and oftenexplicit) belief concerning built into people and, therefore,universally valid. In man'srelation to experienceis basedon theassumption 1963a, I wrote: thatwhen two humanbeings are subjectedto thesame "experience,"virtually the same data is being fed ... Americans overseas were confrontedwith a variety of to the two nervous systemsand the two brains difficultiesbecause of culturaldifferences in the handling respond similarly.Proxemic researchcasts serious of space.People stood "too close"during conversations, and doubtson thevalidity of thisassumption, particularly whenthe Americans backed away to a comfortableconver- whenthe cultures are different.People fromdifferent sationaldistance, this was takento mean that Americans were cold, aloof, withdrawn,and distinterestedin the culturesinhabit different sensory worlds (see Hall people of the country.6U.S.A. housewivesmuttered about 1966: Chaps. 10, 11). They not only structurespaces "waste-space"in housesin the Middle East. In England, differently,but experienceit differently,because the Americanswho wereused to neighborlinesswere hurt when sensoriumis differently"programmed."9 There is a theydiscovered that their neighbors were no moreaccessible selectivescreening or filteringthat admits some types or friendlythan otherpeople, and in Latin America,ex- of data whiferejecting others. Sometimes this is accom- suburbanites,accustomed to unfencedyards, found that plishedby individuals"tuning out" one or moreof the highwalls theremade themfeel "shut out." Even in thesenses or a portionof perception.Otherwise, it is Germany,where so manyof my countrymenfelt at home, accomplishedby screening,which is one of the many radicallydifferent patterns in the use of space led to un- importantfunctions performed by tensions. architecture. expected If the spatial experienceis differentby virtueof differentpatterning of the sensesand selectiveatten- It was quite obvious that these apparently incon- tionand inattentionto specificaspects of theenviron- sequential differencesin spatial behavior resulted in ment,it would followwhat crowdsone people does significantmisunderstanding and intensifiedculture not necessarilycrowd another.Therefore, there can shock, often to the point of illness,for some members be no universalindex of crowding,no knownway of of the Americanoverseas colonies. Examinationof the measuringcrowding for all cultures.Instead, what one very strongand deep responsesto spatial cues on the mustask is, "Are the people involvedbeing stressed, part of overseas Americans highlightedmany of the and,if so, to whatdegree, and whatsenses are involv- patternsimplicit in the . These observa- ed?" To answerquestions such as theserequires special- tions directedmy thinkingto Whorf.As I have stated ists frommany disciplines, including pathology, bio- elsewhere(1966): chemistry,experimental psychology, and .10 The workof Gibson(1950) on perceptionand of Kil- ... only to a handful of people have the implications of patrick Whorf'sthinking become apparent. Difficult to grasp,they and others(1961) in transactionalpsychology becomesomewhat frightening when given careful thought. have provideduseful leads. They strikeat the root of the doctrineof "free will," because they indicatethat all men are captivesof the 8 By "all" one assumesthat Sapir meant the members of a given languagethey speak.7 ethniccommunity. 9 The precisemethods can onlybe surmisedby whichthe young aretaught to selectivelyattend some things while disregarding others It is my thesisthat the principleslaid down by Whorf andto favorone sense channel while suppressing another. It is reason- and his followersin relation to language apply to all able to assume,however, that culture provides a pattern,among other culturallypatterned behavior, but particularlyto those things,for a ratherelaborate and extraordinarilydetailed, but less contrived,Skinnerian (1953) reinforcementschedule in which aspects of culture which are most often taken for individualreinforcements are of such shortduration that they are granted and operate as Sapir (1927) so aptly put it notordinarily isolated out of the contextin whichthey occur. The ". - - in accordance with an elaborate and secret code workof Condon (1967) and othershas demonstratedthe extra- ordinarydegree to whichpeople are capableof respondingto each otherand coordinatingtheir behavior during conversations. Frame- 5 The problem of self-awarenesshas been a stumbling-blockfor by-frameexamination of moviestaken at 24 and 48 framesper psychologists-for years. We really do not know by what means the second and studyof simultaneouselectroencephalograms reveals brain interpretsthe data fed to it by the senses. Recentlythere has organized,coherent, synchronous behavior that is not normally been some progressin solving this problem. The solution appears to observablewithout the aid of high-speedcameras. One can putforth hinge on contrastsbuilt into the receptorsrather than simple stimula- thesuggestion, in theseterms, that positive and negative reinforcement tiohileading to a specificresponse (McCulloch 1964). canand does occur subliminally. 6 One can never be sure initiallyof the true significanceof this 10 The relationshipof proxemicsto kinesics(Birdwhistell 1952, sort of behavior. One learns with time to pay attentionto casual Hayes 1964, and Condon 1967) has been treatedelsewhere (Hall remarksengendered by the original response.Instead of saying that 1963b). Basically,and in thesimplest possible terms, proxemics is a particularAmerican was cool, aloof, or distant,an Arab subject not primarilyconcerned with the observationand recordingof the remarked:"What's the matter?Does he thinkI smell bad?" In this details of gesturesand body movements.Proxemics deals with instance,the referenceto olfactionprovided an importantclue to architecture,furniture, and the use of space,whereas kinesics, at Arab distance-settingmechanisms. present,is only indirectlyconcerned with the setting.Proxemic 7 By stressingthe importanceof Whorf's observations,I do not notationis simplerthan that employedin kinesics.Proxemics mean to imply that thereis no externalreality to be discovered,nor seeks to determinethe how of distance-setting(a questionof do I thinkthat Whorf believed this.The realitycan remainconstant, epistemology).It is importantfor the proxemicistto know as but what differentorganisms perceive is determined largely by muchas possibleabout the physiologyof the eye,and the many "what theyintend to do about it," in the words of a colleague. otherways in whichman perceivesdistance.

84 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY e-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

PIG. 1. Photoby H. Hediger,illustrating individual distance in the blackheadedgull. Hediger (1955, p. 66) was the firstto systematicallydescribe the variousdistances employed by animals and introducedthe concept of individualdistance 26 yearsago. FIG. 2. Personaldistance in pelicans.[Photo by EdwardT. Hall.]

In 1953,Trager and I postulateda theoryof culture basedon a linguisticmodel." We maintainedthat with themodel we wereusing, it mustbe possibleultimately to link major culturalsystems (of whichthere were several)to the physiologyof the organism;i.e., that thereshould be not only a prelinguisticbase (Trager 1949) but a preculturalbase as well. In 1959, I sug- FIG. 3. Pelicans on a rail. The maintenanceof uniformdistances gestedthe term"infra-culture" be used to between individuals of the species can be observed on the water designate (Fig. 2), on land, and while flyingin the air. [Photo by Edward thosebehavioral manifestations "that preceded culture T. Hall.] butlater became elaborated into culture." It followed fromthis that it mightbe helpfulin theanalysis of a primarycultural system, such as proxemics,to examine Hediger'sunique work in zoologyand anitnalbe- its infra-culturalbase. A look at the variousmanifes- havioris particularlyimportant to proxemics.He has tationsof territoriality(and theseare many) should devotedhimself to thestudy of whatoccurs when men help provideboth a foundationand a perspectiveto and animalsinteract in the wild, in zoos, and in cir- be used in consideringmore complex human elabora- cusesas well as in experimentalsituations. Hediger has tionsof space. demonstratedthe very point that Muchcan be learnedin thisregard from the etholo- would hope to make forman, namely that if one is gists.12It is difficultto considerman with other to interactrealistically with any organism,it is essen- animals,yet, in thelight of whatis knownof ethology, tial to gain a basic masteryof that organism'scom- it maybe appropriateto considerman as an organism municationssystems. Hediger is deeplycommitted to that has elaboratedand specializedhis extensions13 the positionthat the most commonerror in inter- to thepoint where they are rapidlyreplacing nature. pretinganimal behavior is anthropomorphizingor In otherwords, man has createda new dimension,the interpretingthe animals' communicationsas though culturaldimension, in relationto whichhe maintains they were human.His studiesof the domestication a stateof dynamicequilibrium. This processis one in processnot onlyunderline the necessityof thoroughly whichboth man and his environmentparticipate in understandingthe sensory symbolic world of a species moldingeach other.Man is now in the positionof (how it marksits territory,for example, or the com- creatinghis own biotope. He is, therefore,in the ponentsthat go to makeup itsbiotope), but also stress positionof determiningwhat kind of organismhe will the importanceof knowingthe specific way in which be. Thisis a frighteningthought in view of how little the specieshandles distance beyond strictly territorial we knowabout man and his needs.It also meansthat considerations(Hediger 1950, 1955, 1961). For exam- in a verydeep sense,man is creatingdifferent types ple, thereduction or eliminationof theflight reaction of peoplein his slums,his mentalhospitals, his cities, is essentialfor the survival of an organismin captivity. and his suburbs.What is more,the problemsman is In addition,it providesus withan operationaldefin- facingin tryingto createone world are muchmore itionof domestication.Hediger distinguished between complex than was formerlyassumed. Within the contactand non-contactspecies,14 and he was thefirst United States we have discoveredthat one group's to describein operationalterms personal and social slumis another'ssensorily enriched environment. (Fried distances(see Figures1, 2, 3). He has also demon- and Gleicher1961, Gans 1960,Abrams 1965). 14 McBridedoes not entirelyagree with Hediger'sbasic dis- 11 A versionof thisoriginal series of postulateswas publishedin tinctionand, instead, holds that there are timeswhen animals may 1959. be contactand other times when they may not. A three-way 12 MargaretMead (1961) has also suggestedthat anthropologists friendly polemic by mail betweenMcBride, Hediger, and me has havemuch to gain fromthe study of theworks of ethologists. resolvedmany of McBride'sobjections. It now appearsthat, like 13 The term"extension" summarizes a process in whichevolution dominancein genetics,contact/non-contact behavior is a matter accelerateswhen it occursoutside the body (see Hall 1959, 1966). of degreeand situation.

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 apparatus,and thearbitrary separation of theorganism N~~~~~ fromthat world alters context and in so doingdistorts meaning;18 and (b) the dividingline betweenthe or- ganism'sinternal and externalenvironment cannot be pinpointedprecisely.19 The organism-biotoperelation- shipcan onlybe understoodif it is seenas a delicately balancedseries of cyberneticmechanisms in whichposi- tiveand negativefeedback exert subtle but continuous controlover life. That is, theorganism and itsbiotope ' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L constitutea single,cohesive system (within a seriesof largersystems). To considerone without reference to the otheris meaningless. Two furtherethological studies draw attention to the connectionbetween territoriality and populationcon- trol.20Christian's (1960) classic studyof the James Island Sika deeradvances the thesisthat populations arecontrolled by physiological mechanisms that respond FIG. 4. One of a series of photographstaken over a two year to density.In a summarymade at a symposiumon periodto recordpersonal distances in public settings.This particular crowding,stress, and natural selection(Christian, settingwas a streetcarloading platformof sufficientlength that Flyger,and Davis 1961),it was statedthat: two cars would arrive and load simultaneously-a condition that reduced the bunching so characteristicof situationsin which only one car at a time is loading. The loading platformwas bounded on one side by streetcartracks and the other by a streetdense with Mortalityevidently resulted from shock following severe traffic.This made it possible to observe spacing comparable to metabolicdisturbance, probably as a resultof prolonged Hediger's gulls on a rail (see Fig. 1). [Photographsby Edward T. adrenocorticalhyperactivity, judging from the histological Hall.] material.There was no evidenceof infection, starvation, or otherobvious cause to explainthe mass mortality.

Christian'sstudy in onlyone of a numberof similar strated that critical distance is so that it can precise studiesof populationcollapse 21 due to stressfrom be measuredin centimeters.15 sensoryoverload (crowding).22 Schaifer(1956) has written about both "critical and "critical situations."'While he has stressed space." is not accessible to direct observation.This world is made up of the danger of drawing analogies from non-human iformation communicatedto the creaturefrom the outside in the forms,his descriptionsof social and group responses formof messagespicked up by its sense organs." to and his formulationof the conceptsof the crowding 18 Social scientiststrained in the North European traditionare Ccritical-densities" and "crises" are not only highly familiar with the trap laid by a dichotomizingof language and suggestivefor man but appear to involve processes culture.Some of the time we make our observationsin context,but that embrace an extraordinarilybroad -spectrumof oftenwe do not. Most, if not all, of Berelson and Steiner's(1964) substance. "findings"separate the organism,including man, from the matrix living of life both conceptuallyand operationally.Their interpretationof Recent studiesof spacing among animals reveal that Lewin's (1935) adopted versionof Zeigarnik's (1927) studyis seen one of the primaryfunctions of proper spacing is to in termsof drive ratherthan of social acts. It remained for Spitz permitthe completionof what Tinbergen(1952, 1958) (1964) to place Zeigarnik's work in contextagain. Berelson and terms "laction chains." has demonstrated Steiner's chapter on culture is particularlyfragmented. The work Tinbergen of the transactionalpsychologists is most conspicuous for its ab- that the life of the stickleback and other species is sence from their work. One is left with the impressionthat for made up of predictablebehavioral sequencesaccord'ing many Americans one does not really "know" something except to set paradigms.If a sequence is brokenor interrupt- when it is out of context.At the risk of stating the obvious, I is to start over fromthe wish to underscorewhat appears to be a growingconsensus among ed, it necessary again begin- ethologistsand ecologists that the organism and its environment ning.16Both animals and man, according to Spitz are so inextricablyintertwined that to consider either as separate (1964), require, at critical stages *in life, specific is an artifactof our own particularway of looking at things. amountsof space in order to act out the dialogues that 19 See "The Biochemistryof Crowding and Exocrinology",in lead to the consummationof most of the important Hall (1966). 20 Other studies that have contributedto the formationof my acts in life. thinkingare: Allee (1958); Bonner (1963); Calhoun (1962a; b); The findingsof ethologistsand animal psychologists Christian (1963); Christian and Davis (1964); Christian,Flyger, suggestthat: (a) each organisminhabits its own subjec- and Davis (1961); Deevey (1960); Eibl-Eibesfeldt(1961); Erring- tive 17 which is a functionof its ton (1956, 1957, 1961); Frake (1960); Gilliard (1960, 1963); world, perceptual Goffman (1959); Hediger (1950, 1955); Hinde and Tinbergen (1958); Howard (1920); Levi-Strauss (1966a); Lissman (1963); 15 For a description of these distances, see Hall (1966). Lorenz (1964); McBride (1964); McCulloch (1948); McCulloch 16 The territorialconcept is complex, representinga wide variety and Pitts (1947); Parks and Bruce (1961); Portmann (1959); of behavior patterns. Carpenter (1958), for example, lists 32 Rosenblith (1961); Schafer (1956); Selye (1956); Snyder (1961); functionsassociated with territoriality.In the context in which I Sullivan (1947); Tinbergen (1952, 1958); and Wynne-Edwards am using the termat present,what is importantis that thesensory (1962). paradigmsare not brokenor interferedwith. 21 Notable among these is the work of Paul Errington(1956, 17 Lissman (1963) has the following to say on this subject: 1957, 1961). His studiesof muskratsand theirbehavioral responses "Study of the ingenious adaptations displayed in the anatomy, to the stress from crowding are most revealing. He states that physiology,and behaviorof animals leads to the familiarconclusion muskratsshare with men the propensityfor growing savage under that each has evolved to suit life in its particularcorner of the stressfrom crowding (italics mine). world. Each animal also inhabits a private subjective world that 22 See my 1966 summaryof Christian'swork.

86 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY FIG. 5 Individualdistances between Italians on a walkwayoverlooking the Rome Airport.Photograph was takenin earlymorning on a warmsummer day. [Photoby EdwardT. Hall.]

Calhoun's experimentsand observationsare also havingan objectivevalue of truth which is hardlyever, and noteworthyfor their behavioraldata.23 He allowed inany case not seriously, tobe doubted. wild Norways rats,which were amply fed, to breed freelyin a quarter-acrepen. Tiheirnumber stabilized In my studyof proxemics,one of myobjectives has at 150 and neverexceeded 200 (Calhoun 1950). With beento examinea smallslice of lifein theUnited States a populationof 150, fightingbecame so disruptiveto -the experienceof space-and to learnabout some of normalmaternal care that only a few of the young the thingsAmericans take for granted.My emphasis survived.The ratsdid not distributethemselves evenly has not been on eitherthe manifestor even the latent throughoutthe pen, but organizedinto a dozen colo- contentbut rather on thestructural details, the implicit nies averaging12 ratseach (apparentlythe maximum perceptualelements. numberof ratsthat can live harmoniouslyin a natural Most individuals,try as theywill, can specifyfew group). if any of theelements that enter into perception.24 They The disordersof Calhoun'sovercrowded rats bear a can onlydescribe the end product.Thus, the student of strikingresemblance to those of some contemporary proxemicsis facedwith the problem of developingtech- Americanswho livein denselypacked urban conditions. niques to isolate and identifythe elementsof space Althoughcomparative studies of humans are rare, perception.What he aims to achieve is a sense-data Chombartde Lauwe (1959a, b) has gathereddaw on equivalentof the morphophonemic structure of language Frenchworkers' families and has demonstrateda statis- or thechemist's periodic table of theelements. His data ticalrelationship between crowded living conditions and shouldbe verifiableand the elementscapable of being physicaland social pathology.In the United Statesa combinedwith predictable results. Where does one look healthsurvey of Manhattan(Srole et al. 1962) showed for proceduralmodels when exploringa new field? thatonly 18% of a representativesample were freeof Descriptivelinguistics, faced with similar problems, has emotionaldisorders while 23% wereseriously disturbed providedmethods applicable to proxemics. or incapacitated. Sincethe days of theSanskrit grammarians, linguists have recognizedthat language is a systemwith structure and regularity.All writingsystems are abstractedfrom RESEARCH METHODS AND STRATEGIES thebuilding blocks or soundsof thelanguage represent- ed. These are identifiableand finitein number.The In theForeword to Jammer'sbook Conceptsof Space, way to isolatethem is to obtainspoken texts as raw data Einsteinhas summarizedmany of the methodological and thento recordthe details of speechas preciselyas problemsin proxemics: possible,using a notationsystem that is basedon identifi- able physiologicalprocesses so thatany trained.observer Theeyes of thescientist are directed upon those phenomena can make the same transcriptions.In linguistics,the whichare accessible to observation,upon their appreciation physiologicalstructure points of thesystem have been andconceptual formulation. In the attempt to achievea con- workedout. Thesestructure points were not known for ceptualformulation of the confusinglyimmense body of proxemicswhen I began my research.It was clear, observationaldata, the scientist makes use of a wholearsenal however,that in theperception of space, something miore of conceptswhich he imbibedpractically with his mother's thanthe visual system was involved.The questionsthen milk;and seldom if ever is he aware of the eternally problem- became:What othersystems? and, How do we know aticcharacter of his concepts. He usesthis conceptual mater- thatthey have been correctly indentified? ial, or, speakingmore exactly, these conceptual tools of Duringthe earlystages of myresearch, I useda wide thought,as something obviously, immutably given; something rangeof methodsand techniquesfor identifyingthe elementsof space perception-notjust because prox- 23 It is impossibleto do justiceto Calhounin any summary.The emics appeared to involve many differenttypes of full implicationof this thinkingis comprehendedonly when virtuallyeverything he has writtenhas been mastered.To under- standproperly his experimentsconducted under laboratorycondi- 24 Subjects included English, French,German, Swiss, Dutch, tions,for example, one mustbe conversantwith his earlierstudies Spanish,Arab, Armenian, Greek South Asian, Indian, Japanese, and conductedin the open in a naturalsetting. West Africans.

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June 1968 87 variables,but on the theorythat what I learnedin Rican, and Spanish-Americansubjects, our goal was to one way could be used to checkwhat I learnedin discoverthe specificways in whichthese ethnic groups otherways. Some of the researchtechniques, briefly code and organize theirsenses in face-to-faceencoun- describedbelow, are: observation,experiment, inter- ters. .(My experience in interculturalrelations had views (structuredand unstructured),analysis of the taught me that differencesin the proxemic behavior Englishlexicon, and the studyof space as it is re- lead to what Goffman [1961] calls "alienation in en- createdin literatureand in art. counters.") In the beginning,one of my assistants(a Germanphotographer) photographed lower class Ame- rican Negro subjectsinteracting with each other.Later these were shownslides and 8 x 10 inch prints OBSERVATION subjects of themselvesand were asked what was happeningin By observingpeople over a longperiod of timeas they the photographs.They were rarely able to tell us. useand reactto space,one can beginto discerndefinite However when one of the Negro subjects was given patternsof proxemicsbehavior. While photography is the control of a motorizeddrive camera and told to onlya supplementto otherforms of observation-an push the buttonwhenever he saw somethinghappen- extensionof the visual memory,as it were-it is an ing, he took frameafter frameof what I, as a white, absolutelyindispensable aid in recordingproxemic middle class American,considered identical pictures. behavior(see Figures4 and 5, pp. 86-87). It freezes Interviews with the Negro photographerand the actionsand allows the investigatorto examinese- subjects demonstratedthat they were acting out and quencesover and over again. The difficultyis to recordinga highly structureddialogue in which the photographpeople without intruding or alteringtheir cues were more subtle than, and quite differentfrom, behavior.Practice in using a very small camera those used by the white,middle class population. It (Minox), which I carrywith me at all times,has would appear that in thisparticular lower class Negro taughtme how to photographunobtrusively, and group, a great deal of informationis communicated this has made it possibleto use largercameras as by very small movementsof the hands and fingers. well.25 Several thousandphotographs have thusfar These movementswere almost imperceptibleto my been takenof people interactingunder natural con- studentsand me. 26 ditionsin the UnitedStates, France, England, Italy, In addition to direct observationand photographs, Greece,and Switzerland.These photographshave anothersource of data is the unself-consciouscomment provideddata againstwhich visual observationscan people make as a resultof some breach of spatial eti- be checked. quette.Such commentsoften help identifythe structure Thecamera and the photographs itproduces are extra- points in the proxemicsystem under study. Examples ordinarilysubtle and complextools (see Collier1967, thatoccur frequently are statementslike these: Byers1966, Worth 1966). For proxemics,the camera hasserved as a recordand remindersystem and a train- I wish he would stop breathingdown my neck. I can't ing aid for students.It has also been veryuseful in standthat! investigatinghow subjects structure their particular per- Have you noticedhow she is always touchingyou. She ceptualworlds. One of myassistants, a German,illus- can'tseem to keepher hands to herself. tratedthis point when asked to take an "intimate" He was so closehis facewas all distorted. photographfollowed by a, "public" photographof a femalesubject. I had expecteddistortion in theintimate Physical contact betweenpeople, breathingon people shotand greatdetail in thepublic shot. Not at all. The or directingone's breathaway frompeople, directeye intimateportrait was crispand clear and the public contact or avertingone's gaze, placing one's face so shotdeliberately out of focus". . . becauseyou aren't close to anotherthat visual accommodationis not pos- reallysupposed to lookat peoplein public"(or photo- sible,are all examplesof the kind of proxemicbehavior graphthem, either). that may be perfectlycorrect in one cultureand absol- In ourrecent investigations of proxemicbehavior of utelytaboo in another. variousethnic groups in theUnited States, my students and I havediscovered that it is essentialto use a member of thegroup we are studyingas thephotographer. Not EXPERIMENTALABSTRACT SITUATIONS only does the photographerconstantly interact with hissubjects (Byers 1966), but what he selectsto photo- It is possible to learn a good deal about how members graphrepresents culture-bound choice. Photographer of a given culturestructure space at various levels of subjectshave provided valuable insights on a numberof abstractionby settingup simplesituations in whichthey pointsat whichthe groups involved were at odds.They manipulateobjects.27 I used coinsand pencilsand asked also have notedserious omissions from photographic my subjectsto arrangethem so that theywere "close" textstaken by others(not of theirown group).For and "far apart" and "side by side" and "next to each example,in photographinglower class Negro,Puerto 26 The research referredto is currentlyunder way and will 25 For the past threeyears, a motorizeddrive, 250-exposurebulk appear in a handbook of procedures and methods in proxemic film 35 mm Nikon has been used. The 35 mm negative enlarges research. well and provides excellent detail at low cost, and the camera is 27 Little (1965, 1967) has established that the correlationbe- somewhat less bulky than a high-quality16 mm movie camera. tween the way a subjectperceives two otherpeople, two silhouettes, The half-frame35 mm camera has also proved to be a very con- two dolls, or two cylindersof wood is such that for all practical venient,compact instrument.So far,the 8 mm and super-8 movie purposes they are interchangeable.One must observe, however, cameras have not provided either the quality or the slow speeds that in all these contexts,the subject is judging spatial relations essentialfor this work. as an outsiderand not as a participant.

88 CURRENT AN rHROPOLOGY other"and thento tell me whethertwo objectswere H1all: PROXEMICS "together"or not. Arab subjectswere unable or un- willingto makea judgmentsas to whethertwo objects One sectionof ourquestionnaire dealt with listening wereclose together or notif thesurroundtng area was behavior28 and was designedto elicitinformation on notspecified. In otherwords, Arabs saw theobjects in wheresubjects looked at the personbeing addressed a context;Americans saw theobjects only in relationto forfeedback. This proved to be oneof themost produc- eachother. tivesections of our questionnaire.What emerged from interviewswith foreign subjects was nota directanswer tothe questions but a seriesof complaints that Americans neverlisten or complaintsabout what Americans com- STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS municateby the way in whichthey listen. Arabs said we areashamed all thetime. What made them think so? The My wifeand I interviewedboth American and foreign factthat we withholdour breathand directit away subjectsin depth,following a detailedinterview sche- fromthe other person. Latin Americansubjects com- dule.The shortest interviews took six hours; the longest plainedthat Americans never listened or werealways lastedsix months and was still producing data when that breakingoff, a conclusionthey drew fromthe fact phaseof the work was terminated.In thecourse of these thatour eyeswander. The informationthat we sought studies,it became apparent that although the answers of by this line of inquiryconcerned the type of per- differentsubjects to anyparticular question might vary, ceptualinvolvement of the two subjects. theinterview schedule as a wholecould teach us much abouthow the subjects structured and experienced space. Conclusionscould be drawnfrom the way in whichthe questionswere answered and fromthe difficulties en- ANALYSIS OF THE LEXICON counteredin understanding particular questions. The protocolfor the interviews began with a general I have longmaintained (Hall and Trager1953, Hall questionconcerning the home and household,and the 1959)that culture is basicallya communicativeprocess. activitiesand namedareas contained in thehouse. The Thisprocess occurs-simultaneously on many levels, some homewas chosenas a startingpoint not only because ofthem more explicit than others. Language is one of the everyonehas one, but also becauseit had been our explicitlevels. Boas (1911) was thefirst cxperiencethat subjects can usuallytalk about the con- to emphasizethe relationshipbetween language and cretefeatures of thehome even when they find it dif- culture.He madehis point in thesimplest, most obvious ficultor inappropriateto talkabout other topics. Once way by analyzinglexicons of languages.Whorf (1956) thehome picture had been recorded along with drawings wentbeyond Boas and suggestedthat language lays and diagrams,the same material was coveredin a dif- a prominentrole in moldingthe perceptual world of a He ferentway byexploring such topics as privacy,bound- culture. states, aries,the rightsof propinquity,and theplace of the particularhome in its social and geographic setting. Fur- We dissectnature along lines laid downby our natural niturearrangements inhome and officeprovided added languages.The categoriesand typesthat we isolatefrom dataon social relationships, and so didlinguistic features theworld of phenomena we do notfind there.... suchas wordsor concepts that were difficult to translate. Altogether,some 90 topicswere covered. One ofthe most valuable features of our protocol was *Whorf observed that in Hopi, timeand space are thatit was sufficientlyculture-bound to causeforeign inextricablybound up in each other;to alterone is to subjectsto raisequestions that revealed not only the changethe other. He says, structuresof theirown proxemic systems but the taken- for-grantedaspects of our systemas well. ""Wheredo The Hopi thoughtworld has no imaginaryspace .... In yougo to be alone?"-a normalquestion for Americans otherwords, the Hopi cannot as speakersof Indo-European -puzzled andsometimes angered Arabs. Some represen- languagesdo, 'imagine"such a placeas Heavenor Hell. tativeArab repliesare, "Who wants to be alone?" Furthermore"hollow" spaces like room, chamber, hall are "Wheredo you go to be crazy?" "Paradisewithout notreally named objects but are rather located.... peopleis Hell." Trespassingis thoughtof in theUnited Statesas a universallyrecognizable violation of the mores,yet our interviewsfailed to turnup anything Sapir'sand Whorf'sinfluence, extended far beyond evenapproaching this concept among urban Arabs. The the confinesof descriptivelinguistics, caused me to actual structureof the interviewproved to be a reviewthe lexicon of the pocket Oxford Dictionary and valuableresearch instrument. The pointis bothsubtle to extractfrom it all theterms having spatial connota- and important.By followinga standardprotocol, then, tions such as: "over," "under,""away from,""to- we were conductingresearch simultaneously on two gether,""next to," "beside,""adjacent," "congruent," differentlevels: level A was the manifestcontent, "level,""upright." Altogether, some 20% of thisdic- Answersto Questions;and level B (the more im- portantand basic)was thecontrast in structureof two 28 It long has been taken for granted that the signal, sign, or culturalsystems, one beingused in contextto elicitthe message is what the social scientistconcentrates on when doing other. The most valuable sessions turned out to be communicationsresearch. I observed some years ago that much of the slippage in interculturalcommunication occurs because the those in which foreignsubjects took issue with our speaker cannot tell whetherthe person he is addressingis listening spatial catagories. or not (Hall 1964b).

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 89 tionary,or approximately5,000 lexical items,were staticthe scene which is generallyperceived in an in- recorded.29 stant. Theprincipal difficulty inusing art as culturaldata is to distinguishbetween the artist's technique (which INTERPRETATION OF ART alonereveals the building blocks of hiscreation) and hissubject matter, which may be designedto be per- ParallelingWhorf's thinking about language, the trans- suasiveand is oftencontroversial 32 because tastes in actionalpsychologists have demonstratedthat percep- artdiffer. Despite such complexities, the data are suf- tionis notpassive but is learnedand in facthighly pat- ficientlyrich to warrant any effort that is required. terned.It is a truetransaction in whichthe world and theperceiver both participate. A paintingor printmust thereforeconform to theWeltanschauung of theculture ANALYSIS OF LITERATURE to whichit is directedand to theperceptual patterns of theartist at thetime he is creating.Artists know that Anexamination ofthe writer's sense impressions reveals perceptionis a transaction;in fact, they take it for grant- muchabout his perceptual world. If a writerrefers to ed. visionto build his images it is possibleto examine these Theartist is botha sensitiveobserver and a communi- imagesto determinewhat kind of visionhe uses.Is it cator.How well he succeedsdepends in part on the foveal,macular, or peripheral vision? Which of Gibson's degreeto which he has been able to ainalyze and organize numerousways of seeingperspective does he employ? perceptualdata in waysthat are meaningfulto his au- Whatis the role of olfaction and touch? dience.The mannerin whichsense impressionsare Writersexpress what readersalready know and employedby the artist reveals data aboutboth the artist wouldhave expressed ifthey had possessed the requisite and hisaudience. analyticcapability, training and skills. When the writer Gideon(1962.), Dorner (1958), and Grosser(1951) succeeds,there is a closeregister between his descriptions have contributedto the specificunderstanding of the andhis reader's own sensory pattern, since writers evoke way Europeanman has developedhis perceptualor- spatialimages in thereader. The question I asked my- ganizationthrough the ages.30For example,Grosser selfwas: "What clues does the writer provide the reader commentsthat the portraitis distinguishedfrom any thatenable him to construct a spatial image?" It seemed otherkind of paintingby a psychologicalnearness tome that an analysis of passages that are spatially evoc- which". . . dependsdirectly on theactual interval-the ativewould be revealing.I asked subjects to mark such distancein feetand inches between the model and paint- passagesin a sampleof overa hundredrepresentative er... ." He setsthis distance at fourto eightfeet and novels.The first texts used were those which contained notesthat it createsthe characteristic"quality" of a spatialimages that subjects vividly recalled from past portrait,"the peculiar sort of communication,almost a reading.This group of passages, elicited from those who conversation,that the person who looksat thepicture had spontaneouslycommented on them,ultimately is able to holdwith the person painted there." Grosser's provedto be of the most value. discussionof the difficulties of ores orteningand of the As in painting,the representation ofspace in litera- distortionsthat occur when the painter or perceivergets turechanges over time, and appearsto reflectrather tooclose to hissubject closely parallels my subjects' de- accuratelygrowing awareness of thenature as wellas scriptionsof theirperception of otherswhen they are theproxemic patterns of theculture. McLuhan (1963) "too close." notes,for example, that the first reference to three- The distinctionmade by Gibson(1950) betweenthe dimensionalvisual perspective in literatureoccurs in visualfield (the image cast on theretina) and thevisual King Lear, whenEdgar seeks to persuadethe blinded world(the stable ipmage created in themind) is essential Duke of Gloucesterthat they indeed stand atop the to thecomprehension of thedifferences in thework of cliffsof Dover. Thoreau'sWalden is repletewith two artistslike Hobbemaand Rembrandt.Hobbema spatialimages. Referring to his smallcabin and its depictedthe visual world perceived in thesame way a influenceon hisconversation, he writes: sceneoutside a windowis perceived,as a summaryof hundreds,if not thousands, of visual fields. Rembrandt, ... oursentences wanted room to unfoldand form their in contrast,painted visual fields.31In effect,he made columnsinthe interval. Individuals, like nations, must have suitablebroad and natural boundaries, even a neutral 29 It goes withoutsaying that unless the anthropologistis thor- groundbetween them ... If weare merely loquacious and oughlyconversant with the language as it relatesto therest of the loudtalkers, then we canafford to standvery near to- culture,the use of the lexiconas an analytictool is not possible. gether,cheek to jowl,and feeleach other's breath; but if In thisregard, I have receivedinvaluable aid frommy colleague wespeak reservedly andthoughtfully wewant to be farther MoukhtarAni, who has devotedyears to the preparationof an apart,that all animalheat and moisture may have a chance Arab-Englishdictionary. Ani's immersionin the lexiconsof the two languageshas madeit possiblefor him to deal explicitlywith to evaporate(italics mine). contraststhat would not otherwisebe so obvious. 30 Westernart is analyzableaccording to theperspective catagories MarkTwain was fascinatedwith spatial imagery and identifiedby Gibson (1950). Linearperspective is onlyone of a greatmany different ways in whichobjects are seen in depth. itsdistortion. He setout to createimpossible spatial 31 Like all great artists,Rembrandt painted in depth,com- municatingon manydifferent levels. Ip someof his pictures,there 32 It is importantto emphasizethat the proceduresused in this are two or morevisual fields, so thatthe eye jumpsfrom one to seriesof studieswere not concernedwith that level of analysis the other.He undoubtedlywas ahead of his time,and he cer- that deals with art stylesor subjectmatter or contentin the tainlyviolated the art mores.His recordingof the instantof per- conventionalsense. Both stylisticand contentanalyses represent ceptionappears to be extraordinarilyaccurate (for those of us who valid pointsof entryinto an analysisof art,but theyare more leamedto see in the Europeantradition). It is onlyrecently that suitableto intrasystemicanalysis than to thecomparison of two or popularculture has begunto catchup withhim. moredifferent systems.

90 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY paradoxesin whichthe reader "sees" intimate details at Hall: PROXEMICS incredibledistances, or experiencesspaces so vast that themind boggles at comprehendingthem. Most of Mark THE RELATIONSHIPOF THESPOKEN LANGUAGE Twain's distancesare visual and auditory.Kafka, in TO PROXEMICS The Trial,emphasizes the body and therole of kines- theticdistance perception. The vitalityof St. Exupery's The contentof conversationis linkedto distanceand imagesis in hisuse of kinesthetic,tactile, olfactory, and situationas wellas tothe relationship of the participants, auditoryperceptions. theiremotions, and theiractivity. Joos (1962) relates linguisticanalysis to distanceand situationin a manner applicableto a proxemicframe of reference.His five styles-intimate,casual, consultative,formal, and frozen-canbe equatedroughly with the intimate, per- sonal,social-consultative, and publiczones of United CONCEPTS AND MEASURES Statesproxemic patterns. The factthat Joos treats lang- uageas a transaction(introducing feedback) rather than THREE CATEGORIES OF SPACE as a one-wayprocess makes his conceptual model espec- iallyapplicable to proxemics.His workis also relevant in that it introducesthe situationaldialect (Hall It has provedhelpful in proxemicresearch to be able 1960b).34 to referto thedegree to whichcultures treat.proxemic Hockett(1958) has definedcommunication as any featuresas fixed,semi-fixed, or dynamic(Hall 1963a, eventthat triggers another organism. (This definition 1966).,In general,walls and territorialboundaries are wouldinclude the environment, although it is notclear treatedas fixedfeatures. However, territory may be a thatHockett intended this.) Originally, he listedseven seasonalaffair, as it is withthe migrating Bedouin of designfeatures for language: Syria,and therefore,territory is sometimes classified as semi-fixedor dynamic.Furniture can be eitherfixed or semi-fixed.Interpersonal distance is usually treated 1) duality(units or cenemesthat build up) informally33 and is dynamicfor most peoples of North 2) interchangeability("A" can play "B's" part,and Europeanorigin. These distinctionsare importantin vice-versa) interculturalencounters. If one persontreats as move- 3) displacement(intime or space) able thatwhich is consideredfixed by someoneelse, it 4) specialization(the attachmentof specificmeanings causesreal anxiety. For example,a Germansubject (an to specificthings) immigrantto theUnited States), who treatedfurniture 5) arbitrariness(there is nonecessary connection between as fixed,had boltedto the floorthe chairon which theevent and the symbol) visitorssat in hisoffice. This caused great consternation 6) productivity(novel forms can be created) amongAmerican visitors. One of my Chinesesubjects informedme that in Chinaa visitorwould not dream of 7) culturaltransmission (as contrastedwith genetic adjustingthe furnitureto conformto his unwritten transmission) definitionof an interactiondistance unless specifically instructedto do so byhis host. American students in my Later,Hockett (1960) expandedthe list to 13 in an classes,who cover a widespectrum of ethnic,class, and effortto sharpen or clarify his definition of language. In regionalcultures within the UnitedStates, have been theprocess he clearedup someproblems while creating evenlydivided between those who adjustthe furniture others.Hockett's concept of thedesign features repre- to conformto an informalnorm and thosewho do not. sentsa breakthroughin our understanding of communi- cation.As a culturallyelaborated form of communica- tion,proxemics satisfies all of Hockett'sseven original SOCIOPETAL AND SOCIOFUGAL SPACE designfeatures, even productivity(the architector designerstriving to createnew forms).In general,the Anothertype of observationto be made by proxemic evolutionarystudies of language as outlinedby Hockett fieldworkersis whether the space is organizedso thatit and theinfra-cultural basis for proxemics seem to paral- is conduciveto communicationbetween people (socio- lel eachother. There are somepoints of departure.Dis- petal) or whetherit is organizedto producesolitarity placementin timeand spaceof an incipientbut recog- (sociofugal)(Osmond 1957). Whatis sociofugalto one nizableform occurs with territorial marking at thelevel cultureor subculturemay be sociopetalto another.An Arab colleaguehas noted,for instance, that his small, 34 The term"situational dialect" refers to the differentforms paneled recreationroom was "sehr-gemiittlich"or of languagethat are used in and are characteristicof specific "cozy" to Germanfriends but had just the opposite situations,such as officialese,the languageof themarketplace, and effecton Arabs,who found it oppressive. the specializeddialects of differentoccupational, professional, and subclass groups. Masteryof the situationaldialect marks the individualas a memberof thegroup. The termsituational dialect was originallysuggested to me by EdmundS. Glennin a conver- 33 The terminformal, as used here,refers to one of threelevels sationin 1960. To my knowledgeno adequateinventory of the of culture.The othertwo levels are formaland technical.The situationaldialects of anylanguage exists. Such an inventorywould formallevel of cultureis thatwhich is integratedinto the entire providean easy measureof relativesocial complexityof a given culture;everyone knows it and takesit forgranted. The informal culture.Leach (1966) refersto the different"brands" of English level is made up of thoseimprecise attitudes that are situational; embodying"social categories"in such a way as to indicatethat the technicallevel is the fullyexplicated and analyzedactivity he is referringto situationaldialects. Lantis' (1960) articlealso (see Hall 1959). pertainsto thesituational dialect. Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 91 U) 0 z Oa"j oi a

w z W-[ W.0 W. *6,;z W. CM b W Si zu a 1--uiz Zzw -1 W ik P -cu W (\j a:W tn9 J IL C a j A 0 .1 z IL j o 39 az W 39 0).g 10 1-- W 2z cr 0 W -1tli W 0 iw ig 10 W ui 0 P: IL 0 W z U. "a a W. 64 W 46 z W W o Z 0 ty 0: > W 0 'W S "' -, l. Q -5 8z"D a *0 c(a go W 4) 4) F7= (J)be W U)U) OD z 5 x (aILJ 0:WOt A ;t0 .9j Z CWI A W IL W ci W ZJ ILIIZO IL z W LL. U. 0: IL 0 US g: "Lc, go:z W U)

W Z >z 15 4i 0 J z a z W Wla R C3 C) LL 'o WZ > xi> J 0 .4 o 4, a) W W Z 5 ctiza W 79 -0 c(5 WZqj W N CM b Ly F- 0 WA zw z > IOL W W.Ja wsl 0 id,tj ILaa U) 5I D;wv- L) 5 , r Z W W(a g OD b I ; ; W C3 Am LL, 3 3 3 z W a. IC 0: 5 1 .W. zw rz 0 W

cti XW 4) J U) WU) W0 A x (D W U) W-J C) c) W W we W d w' r. z W= WW zW LO W 2 J 0

cl 0 W 2: :a us aW ig-C Le a co0 Hw=V z 0 Le W W > L' 'z 0a: aW 6 4-J 0 a z to 0 W W ir to0 VW Lt 0 z n C W to 2: it 1-9I Oj..v X 0 SSV CZ 39 0 q) z 4 a W :'J o uw) W ti'l a W IL Co IL J) Co ON ty U) -J W a LE xviz U) 11Z g I tot :. E4L IL -J 0 U) W C\J = = 15 igs U) 01 IL IC z C4 Wa. I-zf 9 I z U) t .JU) 0 0UZI 40121.-m IC CL Zi 1 a-C 0 z U) t SUt "La W I z LI) ,Ws LI) C3 ug z 1 W -jC3 0 z

LL

z I z W ZW z z oz W 2 z W W > .14 0Z cr Ct 0 A W 5 z -J> F- pC3 g .4 .4 t; ., -J LL. cr 6-4,4 m 8 o m cwr 0 cr in 7! - - M W 4 -4 W (f) 0 0

U CM 9~~~~

00

..a d

tLU (0JS T (A U 01 f 0~~~"

u X o ob1 ~ aolMi ~ i- /, >:?kg g LLL-J I - Iil ?'a 61/ 4/

_ . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~z ~'WI<

LL- O Lii gsAw 0~~~~~~~c LLXW :0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L _ wl3gu0Eg z i ,Z X Z

^ _ UZ F i..,,-

LLXWI q-1X1B1161~~LLI 1 la// _ ",. . a,=. .s. .,,, z " kz u71L YloI?1?1X a 91XlXl 181t1o1- 1 Z/ w ' _ _ CEm 18 181t1z 1X1z1g/ - 10

I..,; - SIItI Z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ZA.

z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Vol9vI.t No. 2-321S. Api-Jn 196 19 LLJ8 of mammals.When ungulatesare frightenedby a to screenout enoughsound when he was working pantherthey release an olfactorysign from the gland in his study.As a contrastin sensoryneeds, Fried in theirhoofs that warns others of theirkind traveling and Gleicher(1961) and Fried (1963) found that the same traillater that there is dangerin the bush. West End Bostoniansof Italian descent required By presentingus with a well-laid-outscheme that greatauditory involvement, and it is my interpreta- comparescommunication systems across speciesand tionthat part of theirshock at beingrelocated away generalines, Hockett not only has provideda series fromthe Boston West Side to moremodern buildings of specificpoints held up to the mirrorof life but was due to an unfamiliarand uncongenialsensory also has relatedthem in a particularway. His points mix.They felt shut off from people. American middle shouldbe takennot as absolutesbut as positionson classsubjects working in LatinAmerica miss visual in- a continuum.As an absolute,for instance, total feed- volvementwith their neighbors and feelshut out by the back does not exist,because the speakeronly hears adobe walls thatmake everyLatin-American home a and is aware of part of what he is saying.Duality privateaffair. Frenchmen, accustomed to a wideassort- of patterning,the "small arrangements of a relatively mentof pungentodors as theymove along city streets, verysmall stockof distinguishablesounds which are maysuffer a formof sensorydeprivation in theAmeri- in themselveswholly meaningless,"would, by the canurban setting with its uniform acrid smell. substitutionof a single word ("information"for Elsewhere(1963b), I havedescribed a notationsystem "sounds"),prove to be a characteristicof all lifebegin- based on eightdifferent dimensions or scales for the ningwith RNA andDNA and endingwith communica- senses(1) postural-sex;(2) sociofugal-sociopetal;(3) tiveforms that are present but have yet to be technically kinesthetic;(4) touch; (5) retinal;(6) thermal;(7) analysed.It is withlanguage, then, that we completethe olfactory;(8) voice loudness.This systemenables the circle,beginning and endingwith speciesother than fieldworkerto focushis attention on specificbehavioral man. segmentsthat will ultimatelyenable him to distinguish betweenthe behavior of onegroup and thatof another.

No KNOWN UNIVERSAL DISTANCE-SETTING MECHANISM ... in spiteof their apparent complexity, cultural systems are so organizedthat their context can be learnedand Observations,interviews, analysis of artand literature, controlledby all normalmembers of the group... The all pointto the fact that there is no fixeddistance-sensing anthropologist knows that what he is lookingfor are mechanism(or mechanisms)in manthat is universalfor patterneddistinctions that transcend individual differences all cultures.One of the complexitiesof proxemicre- and are closelyintegrated into the social matrix in which searchis thefact that not only are people unable to des- theyoccur. cribehow theyset distances, but each ethnicgroup sets distancesin itsown way. In fact,their measuring rods Table 1 (see p. 92) showsthe relationship of varying are different.Some of theperceived distances expand distancesas experiencedby Americansof North and shrinkaccording to circumstances.Interpersonal Europeanheritage in relationto the differentsenses. distanceis a constellationof sensory inputs that is coded ina particularway. For instance, middle class American subjectsof North European extraction set many of their interpersonaldistances visually (Hall 1964a,b 1966).35 AREAS TO BE INVESTIGATED Thisis accomplishedto someextent by signalsreceived frommuscular feedback in theeyes, gauged by the point Researchin proxemics underscores what anthropologists at whichthe subject begins to feelcross-eyed or has dif- know,that what is takenfor grantedin one culture ficultyfocusing, etc. Additional visual referencesused maynot even exist in another.It is thereforeimpossible are thesize of theretinal image, perceived detail, and to makeup a universallist of questionsfor revealing peripheralmovement. The visualinteraction of Arabs thestructure of proxemicsystems. Our experiencewith is intense;they are directlyand totallyinvolved. The the extensiveprotocol referred to earlierwas that it Arabstares; the American does not. The Arab's olfactory was at bestonly a culturallybiased soundingboard. senseis actively involved in establishing and maintaining Althoughgreat pains had beentaken to makethe prot- contact.Arabs tend to stayinside the olfactory bubble ocol as culture-freeas possible,this turned out to be of theirinterlocutor, whereas Americans try to stay out- impossible.The followinglist of problemsfor proxemic sideof it. researchwill also reflectthe biasesof its originator's All thesenses are ultimatelyinvolved in settingdis- culture,not only in itsorganization but also in itscon- tanceand bear thesame relationto proxemicsas the tent. vocal apparatus(teeth, tongue, hard and softpalate, and vocal cords)does to .If man is thought 1. How manykinds of distancedo peoplemaintain? of as beingin a constanttransaction with his environ- (It wouldbe usefulto knowthe total range of human ment,sometimes actively, sometimes passively, it can behaviorin thisrespect.) be seen,that selectivescreening is as necessaryas 2. How arethese distances differentiated? patternedstimulation of the senses.It is no wonder then that one of our sublects,a Germanprofessor, 3. What relationships,activities, and emotionsare foundeven the solid architectureof early20th cen- associatedwith each distance? turyAmerica unsatisfactory to him becauseit failed 4. In general,what can be classifiedas fixedfeature, semi-fixedfeature, and dynamicspace? 35 Theyare notexclusively visual, but theydo havea visualbias. 5. Whatis sociofugaland whatis sociopetal?

94 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 6. Boundaries: Hall: PROXEMICS a. How are boundariesconceived? b. How permanentare they? presentin a givensituation. Therefore, when two people c. Whatconstitutes a violation of a boundary? ofdifferent cultures interact, each uses different criteria d. How are boundariesmarked? to interpretthe other's behavior, and each mayeasily e. Whenand how do you knowyou are insidea misinterpretthe relationship,the activity,or the boundary? emotionsinvolved. 7. Is therea hierarchyof spacesfrom, for example, Thestudy of culture in theproxemic sense is thestudy mostintimate and mostsacred to mostpublic? ofpeoples' use of their perceptual apparatus in different activities,in different 8. Relatedto both(1) and (7), is therea hierarchyof emotionalstates during different relationships,settings, and contexts.No singleresearch distancesbetween people? Who is permittedin each, and thiscom- underwhat circumstances? techniqueis sufficientin scopeto investigate plex,multi-dimensional subject. The researchtechnique 9. Who is permittedto touch,and underwhat cir- is, therefore,a functionof the particularfacet under cumstances? examinationat thetime and manycall forthe involve- 10. Are there taboos against touching,looking, mentof many disciplines.36 listening,and smelling? To whomdo theyapply? Like all basicstudies of thecommunicative process, 11. Whatscreening needs are there? For what senses proxemics,as I thinkof it,is moreconcerned with how and whichrelationships? thanwhy, and moreconcerned with structure than con- and is apt to be 12. Whatis thenature of thesensory involvement tent.The workis admittedlydetailed routine.It addressesitself to basichuman situations in forthe different relationships in thenormal course of con- everydaylife? an area of culturethat is ordinarilyhidden from sciousawareness. For thisreason, proxemics frequently 13. Whatspecific spatial needs are there? leadsto new insightsabout specific cultures, as well as 14. Whatare the spatial references in thelexicon? to insightsinto the generalized concept of cultureitself. 15. Is therea special handlingof space between In formulatingmy thinkingconcerning proxemics, I andsubordinates? have maintainedthat culture is an extensionof basic superordinates biologicalprocesses. While man's extensionsas they evolve may mask the underlyingrelationships which maintainthe equilibriumof biologicalsystems, the ABSTRACT relationshipsand systemsare no lessreal by virtueof beinghidden. In thewords of Ian McHarg(1963): Virtuallyeverything that man is and doesis associated withspace. Man's senseof spaceis a synthesisof many sensoryinputs: visual, auditory, kinesthetic, olfactory, ... no speciescan existwithout an environment,no species and thermal.Not onlydoes each of theseconstitute a can existin an environmentof its exclusive creation, no complexsystem (as for example,the dozen or more speciescan survive,save as a nondisruptivemember of an ecologicalcommunity. Every member must adjust to other differentways of experiencing depth visually), but each membersofthe community and to theenvironment inorder is moldedand patterned by culture. Hence people reared tosurvive. Man is notexcluded from this test. in differentcultures live in differentsensory worlds. Whatis more,they are generallyunaware of thedegree to whichthe worlds may differ. 36 Althoughthe studyof proxemicsis new,the pointsmade in the basic documentshave stimulatedresearch in anthropology Fromthe study of culture we learnthat the patterning (Watson and Graves 1966), architecture(Adams; Thiel 1961), ofperceptual worlds is a functionnot only of the specific psychology(Little 1966; Hellersberg1966), and photography culturebut of the relationship,activity, and (Byers1966).

social perceptionof space which has ly or indirectlyrelated to customary Comments beensemi-dormant since the first dec- human (and non-human)positioning adesfollowing the impact of non-Eucli- as evidencedin directbehavior, "art by RAY L. BIRDWHISTELL dean geometryand, later,of relativity and artifact."As such,it is reminis- theory.As one who had carefully cent of the work Malinowski(excep- ,Pa., U.S.A.22 VI 67 followedHall's writings,it was my tingthe emphasis of Malinowskiupon Hall's earlierwritings, his program- vain hope that in this discussion,es- theintensive analysis of particularcul- maticarticles in theAmerican Anthro- peciallyprepared for an international tures).Hall fullyappreciates the im- pologist,and his twobooks, The Silent and professionalaudience, he would portanceof culturecontact situations Language and The Hidden Dimension, presentus with a systematicand or- as contextsfor the provision of critical have stimulatedconsiderable interest derlydiscourse on hispostulates, meth- data and in his discussionunderscores among studentsfrom various behav- odology,and theoreticalorganization. lessonslearned almost two generations ioral sciences.His sensitivityand per- Fromthe noteshe has presentedhere ago in the comparativestudies of ceptivityabout humanspace utiliza- instead,it is difficultto assessaspects Zuni, for example,and a generation tion and, in particular,the cultural of his positionwithout doing damage ago in thestudies of "cultureat a dis- variabilityof space conceptionand to implicitcontexts. tance" (Benedict,Mead, Metraux,et utilizationas illustratedin culture At its broadest,proxemics would al.). In his presentationof data, Hall contactsituations have contributedto seemto be concernedwith the investi- is a sensitiveculturologist, abstracting the awakeningof an interestin the gationof all behaviorwhich is direct- pointsas patternsand makinguse o

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 thecomparative import of thesepoints vestigationcan becomecomprehensible ume or intensityon thepart of speak- to arriveat generalizationsabout. hu- onlywhen he straightensout theepis- ers. Comparably,increase in number man variabilityand malleability.His temologyhere; decisionsat thislevel of kinesicsignals or in theirextent or conclusionthat not only does man determineresearch design. intensityis accompaniedby variation behave differentlyfrom one cultural Of equal importis Hall's statement in paralinguisticand proxemicbehav- contextto another,but that,by and thathe usesa "communicational"em- ior. In the same way, the presenceor large,he behavesdifferently because phasis.His reportthat he has beenin- absenceof touchingor its gesturalsur- he has internalizedhis surround in the fluencedby thewritings of Whorfand rogateswas accompaniedor followed specialand orderedways of his parti- Sapir and by at least certainaspects by adaptationsin the proxemic,the cular culturereinforces a perspective of thoseof Batesondoes not ma e it paralinguistic,and the kinesicmodal- all too oftenabsent from "culture and clear what he meansby "communica- ities. This interdependenceof com- personality"studies, which tend to see tion."Larger acquaintance with Hall's municativemodalities at thesocial in- cultureas externaland coerciveto its writingsleaves the reader with the teractionallevel mirrors,and probably membership.It is fromsuch work as feelingthat Hall's view of communic- in evolutionis interinfluentialwith, Hall's that anthropologistsare re- ation lies somewherewithin a field thenon-distinctiveness of sensory pro- mindedthat "psychic unity" does not demarcatedby HarryStack Sullivan's cessesin thecentral nervous system of meanthat man is one and onlysociety transactionalism,certain aspects of in- man and otheranimals. I cannotsee or cultureor environmentvaries. formationtheory, and GeorgeL. Tra- how Hall, withoutreference to the When we turn fromthis over-all ger's global incorporationof all cul- other interdependentmodalities, can appraisalof his workto theexamina- tureas communication.These are all study communicationby the analysis tion of theoreticalparticulars, Hall perfectlyvalid positions,but an amal- of the arrangementof bodiesin space becomessomewhat less manageable. gam of these varisized assumption or by interviewingactors as to what He locatesproxemics as being"much systemsrequires a definitiveand delin- they think they were doing or by closer"to theorders of behavior"and eating lexicon for the reader who analysis(however perceptive) of their theirderivatives known to theetholo- wouldfollow Hall's discussion.Again, viewsof theirmodes of interactionor gistsas territoriality."He acknowledg- we are confrontedwith the difficulty by thecounting of itemsin a lexicon. es his debtto Hediger,Tinbergen, and of proceedingfrom a fuzzyconception Theseare elegantand well-testedeth- others (particularlyCalhoun) with- of infra-cultural.Man by any defini- nographictechniques, yet at thisstage out specificallyestablishing the rele- tion (exceptone whichby exclusion of the reportedwork they provide vance of these studies to his own defines man as the only culture- little more than interestingesoterica work. I concludefrom the fact that bearinganimal and the only com- for the studentof communicationor he explicitly turns from Sorokin, municator)is a specializedcommuni- socialorganization. Data becomesevi- Lewin, Hallowell, and Chapple and cator. Ethologyand behavioralbiol- dence only in the contextof theory. Coon and reiterateshis concernwith ogy have providedus withvast quan- "out-of-awareness"behavior that his titiesof still only partiallyanalyzed interestin theethologists is in thepsy- data thatsuggest that both communi- by BERNHARD BOCK* chologicalrather than the sociological cationand social organizationare im- Braunschweig,Germany 8 VII67 of theirwork. I have not manentfor animalspecies at least as implications of calls atten- beenable to gainclues as to thisorien- primitiveas thefishes (and perhapsas Hall's survey proxemics far back in evolutionaryhistory as tionto a numberof problemsof great tationfrom his referencesto "biology." of man. I may do him an live birthand bisexuality).It would importancefor the sciences and "physiology." pointsof view injusticewhen I concludethat he uses seemtenable that both social organi- Additionalproxematic theseterms interchangeably. It is this zation and communication(the latter mightbe: loose treatmentof the diachronicand the dynamicaspect of the former) 1) "rhythms" of density (rush synchronicviews of data that makes appear adaptivelywith specialization hours,night hours) in citylife. it at timesinconvenient to organize and interdependentmulti-individual 2) varyingwishes (of Westernin- his data into comparableorders of activity.Such a positiondoes not deny dividuals) for solitude, company, materials. the role of physiologicalor psychol- crowds. Partof thedifficulty in circumscrib-ogical processes in theaccomplishment 3) the differencesin atmosphere ing or criticizingthe postulates,the of the interactivetask (shortterm or betweena crowdedand a poorlyat- methodology,or, even, the subject inextension) but does in a sensetrivial- tendedtheatrical performance and the matterof Hall's discussionslies in his ize themfor the analysis of anthropolo- differentproxematic attitudes of audi- conceptof "infra-cultural."On the gical or communicationalproblems. encesat thecinema, the opera, a foot- one hand,he uses the termin a dia- Fromthis point of view,the sociolog- ball game. chronicsense, to referto "thosebehav- ical analysisof thecontext from which 4) the effectsof the geographical ioral manifestationsthat preceded cul- one takesdata forthe analysis of com- and the social environmenton proxe- turebut laterbecame elaborated into municationalbehavior, structure, or maticphenomena; changes of attitude culture."("Culture," incidentally,is evolution is the sine qua non of the on movingto a new place; chances seenby Hall as "basicallya comunica- researchprocedure. of humanadaptability. tive process.")On the otherhand, he Hall's ingenuoussurprise that small 5) alterationsin proxematicpat- seemsto use "infraculture"in a syn- movementsof thehand and bodywere ternsdue to childhoodneglect, puberty chronicsense, to referto an underly- of relevanceto the comprehensionof difficulties,or personalmisfortune; the ingbiological or physiologicalor psy- the "lowerclass Negro" groupwhich possibilitythat children, regardless of chologicalneed systemor raw-mate- he studiedis revealingas to his con- culturepatterns, are moreready for rial (in Linton'ssense) sub-stratum to ception of communication.Albert social contactsor are in generalbetter culturalbehavior. It is in thisarea of Scheflenand I have been repeatedly able to bear populationdensity, than his theorythat his dismissalor, per- impressedwith the variationand sur- adults. haps,heuristic avoidance of thesocio- rogatefunctioning of modalityutiliza- 6) furtherproblems of sociability: logical implicationsof his subjector tion in the analysis of ongoing inter- possible differencesin proxematic de- object matterbecomes most critical. actional scenesrecorded on sound film. velopmentbetween only children and His referencesto "situational"rubrics The relative positions of communi- childrenwith siblings; social class dif- do not in my mind resolvethis un- cants (interactants) varies systemati- ferences; rural-urban differences;the cally with increase or decrease in vol- demand for company in cases of dan-

96 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY ger and distress;saluting habits from Hall: PROXEMICS close up and fromafar. 7) thecontrast between formal pat- ilar distinctionsare made,for example, the analystmust discover the way in ternsof attitudeand the real feelings in the series"Mr. Brown,""Brown," which the ethnographerdistorts the and possiblydeviant behaviour of in- "Thomas,""Tom," "Tommy." Modern culturebecause of his own personal dividualsand groups. youngpeople in WesternEurope are systemof perceptions,including his 8) the"I-You" relationat various moreready to call each otherby their own experiencesand theneuroses and/ stages(acquaintance, friendship, love, Christian names than were their or defensesthat he has created in kinship). parents.Nicknames and argotsserve adapting to his experience.Such a 9) the quick and easy spread of as symbolsof solidarityand exclude schemewould be anotherstep in the culture,news, and propagandain den- strangersfrom the intimacyof the directionof understandingthe process selypopulated areas and, on theother group. ofcross-cultural learning and commun- hand, the far-reachinginfluence of Hall is rightin pointingout that ication. radio and television,even in thinly voice loudnessis proxematicallyrele- populatedareas. vant. His conceptof the "situational 10) proxematicdifferences among dialect" is also very useful.In this by A. RICHARD DIEBOLD, JR.* the senses: connectionit is again essentialto con- (a) near distance:touch and taste; siderlistening behaviour, as everytalk Stanford,Calif., U.S.A. 19 vii67 (b) near or middledistances: smell; may be conceivedas a kind of cyber- For thosewho have an interestin (es- (cf. the German saying: "I can't netic mechanismwith feedback.The pecially non-verbal) communicative smell[ = stafid]him."); style varietiesof the language-e.g., behavior,one of themore striking ob- (c) far distances:hearing and sight. public, official, private, intimate- staclesto researchin this area is it- Mostlywe shall finda combination revealproxematic differences. selfone of communication,in thiscase and cross-checkingof the senses,pos- An abundantsource of proxematic with otherspecialists. Hopefully this sibilydirected by reason,will, or cul- data will be the educationaland di- paper by Hall will reachsome of the tura pattern. dactic literatureof mankind,works scatteredaudience that is so engaged 11) proxematicaspects of games, and passagesin poetryand prose,pro- and helpestablish the interdisciplinary dancing,parties, youth clubs, schools, verbsand parables,rules of conduct, contactswhich are vitallyneeded. For sports. and textbookson interpersonalrela- the benefitof this audience,I would 12) proxematic problems of the tions. like to registera few generalremarks group:the network of with the experiencejust gained of betweenmembers of a group,varying having completeda lengthyreview- withdegree of intimacy,and the pos- by PAUL BOHANNAN* articleof "anthropologyand thecom- sible solidarityof the group against parativepsychology of communicative strangers. Evanston,III., U.S.A. 28 VI 67 behavior"(Diebold 1967). 13) proxematicproblems of accul- Hall's observationsare vital for an- "Proxemicbehavior," as definedby turation. thropologistsengaged in research.His Hall in thisand his otherpublications, 14) symbolismsof contactand fel- use of "native" photographersto re- is but one perhapssomewhat arbitrar- lowship:, miming, pre-linguis- cord and then to interpretfor him ily definedcategory of thetotal range tic sounds,handshakes, kisses, embra- whatwas goingon shouldbe parallel- of communicativebehavior which hu- ces,partly combined with utterances. ed in all branchesof ethnography. mans use in social interaction.Some 15) deviationsfrom the usual prox- Many of us have used informantsas significantcaveats follow from this ematic patternsof a group due to extensi6nsof our own sensesin exam- reminder. adaptationto an alteredenvironment. ningthe culturewe are studying.We The firstis thatwe knowrelatively On thispoint, the Human Adaptabil- would do well to examinethis tech- littleas yet aboutwhat Hall calls the itySection of the InternationalBiolo- nique for the ways in which it can "infra-culturalbases" of the human gical Programmight furnish essential help us to get at the crucialpoints in communicativeethogram. Indeed, we details. the culture. should begin by askingjust what is Keiter(1966) hints at thewide range Thisprocedure allows us to examine this ethogramand whetherthe term of humaninteraction from the hermit in detail the transactionsbetween "ethogram"itself is appropriate.This to the city-dwellerand pointsto the anthropologistand informant.At the is to invokethe familiar"nature-nur- customof thehandshake as a "fiction" risk of ruiningthe ethnography(ex- ture"issue which besets any interpre- of humanfellowship even in the mass cept where the anthropologistis ex- tive cross-culturalor trans-specific society.The authoralso discussesthe periencedin the culturehe is study- analysisof humanbehavior. It is to problemof boredomreactions in en- ing), why not study anthropologistsask questionswhich, despite the recent forcedcommunities such as submarine anthropologizing?How do theymake impactof ethologyand comparative crewsor polar expeditions. spatialadjustments? How do theyfind psychologyon anthropologicaltheory, As to proxematicaspects of linguis- theirown feelingsand ideas affected producesqualls in the still predomin- tics, I want to commentas follows: by those of theirinformants? For a ately empiricist(or "culture-relativis- From the point of lexicography,spe- longtime, I have wantedto do a field tic") climate of anthropologicalin- cial attentionshould probably be paid job in association with a psycho- quiry.How muchof humancommuni- to the lexical domain("Wortfeld") of analyst.Give the ethnographersuffi- cativebehavior is culturallyuniversal? social life; but since the relationbe- cient trainingin psychiatryto be Of those componentswhich are, to tweenproxemics and languageis not un-self-consciousand awareof someof what extentcan theirappearance in onlya questionof lexicology, but also his own defenses.Give the psycho- organicallyand functionallynormal a matterof grammarand style,one analystsufficient anthropological train- humansbe said to be constitutionally shouldanalyze tribal, local, and "fam- ing to understandthe role of culture. determined?(For instance,can it be ily" vocabulariesas well as normal Then let the ethnographer and the demonstratedthat any of thesecom- dictionaries.Moreover, the formsof analystinform one anothervery care- ponentsare geneticallyencoded and personaladdress, may vary according fully:the ethnographermust discover endogenouslyreleased?) Is theresome to the degreeof intimacy(cf. the use the degreeand kind of "skew" which "infra-cultural"species-specific com- of the personalpronoun, French: tu- comesfrom the psychoanalyst's focus- municativeethogram for Homo sapi- vous, Germandu-Sie); in English,sim- ing on psychicviews of the culture; ens? Anthropologistswould tradition-

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 97 ally hold that it is impossibleto fac- "across-a-crowded-room"phenomenon. them.The young man's looking be- tor out such species-specificcom- Each has independentlytaken notice havior?It could well dependon how ponentsfrom the complex of over- of the other and occasionallygazes the girl is dressed;conceivably eyes lyingbehavior acquired during encul- across the room. What happens if are mutuallyaverted if the girl is turationand subsequentparticipation theireyes meet?Let us say that this wearing a miniskirtwhich climbs of theindividual in a particularsocio- eye-engagementis maintained,per- gravity-defiantduring the dance move- cultural group. And it is generally hapsbriefly, and now notetwo aspects ments.If gaze he does, do the young concededby ethologists,even by those of this confrontation:(1) its context, man'ssimultaneous facial displays con- who have been cited as extreme"in- a veryparticular sort of social-physi- vey bemusedcamaraderie or lascivious stincttheorists," that endogenousbe- cal space, i.e., a party; and (2) the scrutiny?Suppose now that the music havioral responses are increasingly communicativechannels which are permitsslow movementand bodily more modifiableby experientialfac- active-at this point almostexclusiv- contact.Use of the audio-vocalchan- tors in the highervertebrate orders, ely the visual-gesturalchannel, and nel (i.e., conversation)will of course especiallyso withthe plasticity typical with only minimalutilization of the be facilitated;the tactilechannel will of human behavior.These questions total potentialrange of signalswhich be activatedthrough various sorts of beg, not becauseHall has posed them mightbe producedin that channel, body contact; each partnerwill be directly,but becauseof the heavyun- i.e., withonly eye-engagementand no broughtinto what Hall delightfully derpinningof his researchin theetho- or only subliminalfacial or postural calls "the olfactorybubble of [one's] logical literature.Nor do I feel that displays.In short,no otherchaa?nels interlocuter;"and, contingentupon he has obviatedthis issue by injecting are open,and interactionitself is ten- how "closely" the two dance (and a gratuitousexperiential relativism uous,but communication did transpire. upon discrepanciesin height,etc.), the throughpaying homage to Whorf. (Withincertain distances and barring visual-gesturalchannel is now attenu- The secondcaveat is a problemof certaindefects in thevisual apparatus, ated, at least as far as mutualeye- ascribingto variables dependentor all save themost functionally disturb- engagementis concerned.And if it independentstatus. If it is true that ed individuals in all sociotultural pleasesboth to do so and theydance proxemicbehavior (or kinesic,or par- groupsare able to perceivewhether with maximal body contact,why is alinguistic,or however you divide they are "being looked at" [direct it (let us concentrateon chest to up the pie) is just one of manycate- eye-engagement]as opposed to "past," breast)that this erogenous invasion is goriesof interactionalbehavior, what "beyond,"or "through";see, e.g. Ar- permittedor encouragedby the girl do we knowof its functionaliEldepen- gyle and Oean [1965.]; Diebold on the dance-floorand laterrebuffed dence of other communicativesub- [1967]; Gibsonand Pick [1963]; Rie- by her on the back-porchwhen re- systems?I take it as foregoneconclu- mer[1955]. Beinglooked at does have establishedby theyoung man manual- sionthat the physical distance between interactionalsemanticity, which pre- ly-when, we note,although the girl's an interactingdyad can "mean" quite dictablycan mean differentthings in attractionto the youngman has not differentthings depending,among differentsocieties, and differentthings diminished,there is a changeof con- other variables,upon (1) the wider in differentcontexts within one socie- text for theirphysical distance, and temporaland spatialcontext in which ty. More intriguingis the finding eye-engagementhas beenrestored? The the confrontationtakes place and (2) that mutualeye-engagement and sud- questionsare not so rhetoricalas they theco-occurrence or non-occurrenceof den apperceptionof being looked at mightseem. signaltransmission in one or severalof producemeasurable changes in auto- Is all proxemicbehavior so context- thechannels which link the dyad (e.g., nomicactivity, thus suggesting a still specificand sensitiveto regulationby visual-gestural,audio-visual). Regret- undeterminedconstitutional component manifold-channelsignalling? I believe tably we know only too littleabout for the informationprocessing in- it is. And I do not believethat many how these various signals mightbe volved in this typeof visual interac- of theseeveryday interactional situa- mutuallycorroborative or summating tion.)We mightask whetherthe girl's tionslend themselves readily to experi- in theinformation they transmit; when unavertedgaze was somehowlinked to mentalmanipulation in thelaboratory, theyconflict in the informationwhich this socially particularproxemic set- nor to certain heuristicmeasuring they convey; and how context-sensi-ting. What if the pair had firstnotic- techniques in naturalistic settings. tive theyare to the proxemicsettings ed each otherat an airport?Granted Imaginethe difficulties,for instance, which most interestHall. And here certainshared components of psycho- of pluggingour couple above into a forme is a crucialdilemma; for while social background,if the youngman polygraphin orderto tap changesin manyof Hall's observationsstem from "stared,"the girl might well averther psychodynamicstate and autonomic contrastiveanalyses of cross-cultural gaze and striveto avoid eye-engage- activation,or attemptingto filmthe communicationand the difficulties ment altogether,supplementing this thwartedindiscretion on the back- theseconfrontations often entail, we signal of non-receptivityby precons- porch.The outlook,however, is not as do notreally know which discrepancy, ciousor motivatedpostural (e.g., stan- bleak as thissuggests. What seemsto whichchannel, emits the criticalsta- ding sidewaystoward the man) or be in orderis extensiveand intensive tic. It seems to me that we do not facial (e.g., unsmiling)cues, her pos- "field observations."Hall indicates have as yetenough insight into context sible interestnotwithstanding. The how this mightbe fruitfullypursued specificityand inter-channellinkages physicaldistance separating them is and how anthropologistscan be and even withinour own society,or any the same as thatat the party,but the have been enlistedto make a signifi- subgroupof it, to permitunequivocal affective-socialdistance is quite dif- cant contribution.I hope he will be conclusionson thesematters. ferent. encouragedto continueproviding us The followingtrivial example gives Let us supposenow thatthe princi- with the benefitsof his advice and some indicationof what I mean by pals have introducedthemselves and experience. contextspecificity and channelselec- are happily dancing. But dancing tion:The settingis an informalparty, what? If the frug,the tactilechannel well-attended,with drinking and dan- is inoperativeand the audio-vocal, by MARSHALL DURBIN* cing. Th.e two principalsare a young although now potentiallyopen, is man and a girl, unattachedand as attenuatedbecause of thephysical dis- New Orleans, La., U.S.A. 19 VII 67 yetunacquainted, who findthemselves tancerequired by thisdance styleand Hall's work on proxemicsand kine- attractedto one another.How? The theextreme channel noise which intru- sics has been of great serviceto the first "encounter" is the familiar des in the resultingspace between behavioralsciences in generalas well

98 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY as to anthropologyin particular.I Hall: PROXEMICS take it for grantedthat his contribu- tionsare widelyrecognized; the com- Hockett'sconcept of designfeatures re- tactics.I sensea certainvagueness of mentswhich follow will thereforebe presentsa breakthroughin our understan- graspthroughout, which I believefol- criticalones, dealing especiallywith ding of communication. lows fromfailure to differentiateap- Hall's discussion(in otherpublications In my opinion, the concept of design propriatelybetween the factorsin hu- as well as thisarticle) of proxemicbe- features represents a breakthrough man similarityand the factorsin cul- havioras a communicationsystem. only if we ask, "what type of analysis turaldifference: between ethology and Hall does not clearly outline the for a communicationsystem can we ethnology.This is relatedto the tac- differencesbetween (a) proxemicbe- provide which will account for each tical eclecticismwhich has assembled havior and otherhuman communica- of these features?" Productivity was forus a greatdeal of informationon tionsystems and (b) proxemicbehavior long recognized as a salient featureof biosocialspacing but seems to me defi- and otheranimal communication sys- language, but not until the introduc- cientin incisiveconclusions-even pre- tems.Pervasive throughout his workis tion of a linguisticanalysis (transfor- liminaryor descriptiveones. the idea thata relationshipexists be- mational grammar) which accounted I questionwhether ethological prin- tweenterritoriality in non-humans and for it did it become a significantfact ciples can usefullrbe applied to cul- proxemicbehavior in humans.One is of language. In other words, and con- tural variation.Human ethologyis led to believe,although he does not trary to what Hall says (p. 95), the fundamentallyunitary. If proxemics explicitysay so, thatthe latterdevel- whys are more important than the is subjectto variationwithin the spe- oped fromthe former. From this view hows; content takes precedence over cies,we maytherefore regard ethology it would follow that proxemicsdeals structureif we assume that the struc- as an importantpart of the back- with structurerather than with con- ture has already been mapped out to groundto studyingit, but the explana- tent,and indeedHall makesthis clear: a reasonable degree. Unless produc- tion of the variationmust lie else- ". . .proxemics,as I think of it, is tivityin proxemicbehavior is account- where.I believe it does, and I find more.., concernedwith structure than ed for in termsof a contentanalysis, it particularlyintriguing Hall's com- with content... (p. 95). While Hall is no more interestingthan the fact municativephrasing of the matter.I has set about the taskof mappingthe that a dog can be taughtto respond to would, however,prefer to focus the structuremost ably, I findthis work an infinity of stimuli. Only by ex- problemyet moresharply by concen- muchless interestingthan the study of amining the content side of proxemic tratingspecifically on spatial meta- thecontent (significance, meaning, etc.) behavior will we understandwhy the phor. I would include,as Hall does, which the structurecarries; for it is architector designercreates new forms verbally,graphically, plastically, and at the point wherethe structurebe- and predict how he is able to do so. architecturallyexpressed metaphor, gins to take on myriadsignificances I find it curious that Hall is so but I would also includebehavioral or meaningsthat it can be identified and gesturalmetaphor as well. I see as a human ready to rely upon linquistics as a structureand of interest model for his proxemicsand yet deny no difficultyin so interpretinghis to anthropologists.In spite of Hall's data even when the metaphorex- emphasison structure,I am content its rightfulrole, since the lin- quitesure guist must employ contentor meaning pressedis tacit,covert, or unconscious, that in his analysishe has inevitably and I see somepotential gains. had recourseto content(as the in his analyses. It may be relevantthat linguists linguistshave only recentlybegun to When Hall reportsthat no general of the50's did-cf. Harris1951-who descriptiveframework for proxemics maintainedthat theycould carry recognize the pressure which content out exerts upon structureand to account will work in all cultures,I believe a structuralanalysis of a languagewith- thisis one way of statingthat the cul- out recourseto meaning).To the for it in their analyses. Chomsky ex- (1965) gives the following example of turalstructuring ofspace is metaphoric tentthat analysis in proxemicsis pure- the pressureof contentupon structure: -for metaphorhas no universallimit- ly structural,proxemics can be com- ations. But metaphor is culturally pared to animal territorialityonly in John is easy to please. structuredand can be ethnologically a verytrivial way and cannotbe com- John is eager to please. studiedand explained.Hall seemsto pared to otherhuman communication and me to writeoff somewhattoo easily systemsat all. Indeed,it is doubtfulif the relevanceof awarenessand of it can be comparedeven with non- To please John is easy. consciouscultural patterns to the pro- humancommunication systems if we blem. Surely if I avert my eyes to acceptSebeok's (1963 : 465) definition but not: * To please John is eager. avoid beingcharged with witchcraft, of zoosemioticsas involving keep myhands to myselfto avoid be- ... the codingof informationin cyber- A perhaps less obvious but more in- ingthought sexually aggressive, crouch neticcontrol processes and the consequen- terestingexample is the following: to keep my head "low," or stand to ces thatare imposedby thiscategorization keepmy body fromrepose in the pre- where living animals functionas input/ I see the house which is big and theconscious mean- output senceof thechief, linkingdevices.... white. ings of theseusages can be obtained Coding processes may perhaps be I see the house which is white and frominformants and are relevantto understoodwithout reference to con- big. explaningthem. tent,but a categorizationor subcate- and Let me nonethelessagree with Hall gorizationprocess can neverbe under- I see the big white house. that the moreproblematic and hence stood unlessthe analystrefers to its moreinteresting patterns of spacingin contentaspects; and it is preciselya but not: man are covert.Construed as meta- special,but not yet well understood, * I see the white big house. phors,they are the spatialprojections type of categorizationprocess which of culturalvalues. I am not entirely distinguisheshuman communication persuadedthat space mustnecessarily systemsfrom the communicationsys- by MUNRO S. EDMONSON* be approachedas a separablesystem temsof otheranimals. of metaphor.I considerit morelikely Hall fails,again, tO distinguishbe- New Orleans,La., U.S.A. 19.vi 67 thatvarious cultural ideas can be ex- tween humancommunication systems Two kinds of confusion seem to me pressedspatially as an alternativeor and those of other animals when he to flaw this stimulatingarticle: one is supplementto expressingthem in other states (p. 91): a matter of theory and the other of ways, and I would anticipate that

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 99 theremay be considerablevariation in portantto studyolfactory reactions in man nature,do indicatethat transcul- the degreeto whichspace is used in social relationships,but simply to turalproxemic ethnography will be as thisfashion in differentcultures. questionhow much and when it is feasible as transculturaldescriptive The demonstrationthat space is useful to conceptualizethe problem linguistics.I would take Hall's account structuredin complex ways relating "emically"in termsof distinctivefea- of his personalresearch experience as to the whole gamutof culturalcausa- tures,such as "in" or "out" of the testimonyto a dialectic(feedback) stra- tion is an importantcontribution to "olfactorybubble." At least some of tegy,analysis of one'sown cultureand thescope and sensitivityof anthropol- Hall's othervariables, such as loudness of anotherbeing interdependent. This ogy,and I thinkwe are verymuch in of voice,appear to vary continuously interpretationwould be consistentwith Hall's debt for his extensiveexplora- ratherthan discretely. the importanceof Whorf to Hall, tion of the problem. Lebensraum, Hall's experimentsin askingsubjects since Whorfstressed the necessityof breathingspace, "ten foot poles," close fromdifferent cultures to arrangeob- contrastiveanalysis and saw it as a way and distantrelatives, contagion, pol- iects in various ways are extremely to transcendone's own system. lution,and "keepingin touch," are promisingand deserveto be extended. 2) The relationbetween cross-cultu- importantmetaphors and deservethe As I am sure he realizes,these have ral differencesand infra-culturalbases mostprecise and comprehensiveanaly - implicationsabout the kindsof com- is sometimesunclear. The statement sis. I wouldurge that we retainthe position. found characteristicallyin thatthere can be no universalindex of broadview suggested by Hall's work graphicand plastic arts in particular crowdingmight be takento implythat and considermicrospatial metaphors cultures. In a cross-culturalcompara- anythinggoes. The commenton etho- in thesame field with cognitive and tive study buildingupon work by logical studyof pathologiesinvolving linguisticorderings of spaceand with HerbertBarry (1957) and G. P. Mur- physiologicalmechanisms that respond themacrospatial patterns of mythol- dock (1957), I have suggestedthat a to densitysuggests that an ethological ogyand cosmology. work of art is "a sortot map of the approachto man would finduniversal societyin which the artist-and his limitsnatural to thespecies. Interrela- public-live" (Fischer1961 :89), and tionsbetween cultural selectivity and by J. L. FISCHER* that "designelements are symbolicof biologicallybased commonalitiesseem membersof the society"(p. 82). It one of the mostimportant and open New Orleans,La., U.S.A. 17 VI 67 would be very interestingto have a aspectsof proxemics. Hall's paper on proxemicsis full of c6mparisonin severalcultures between 3) Hall mentionsculturally different promisingresearch suggestions, as well the arrangingof design elementsin hierarchiesof modality.This question as implicationsfor a theoryof culture. traditionalart and the arrangingof a is importantto assessmentof cultural I will commenton one theoreticalstandardized set of objectsin an ex- differencesin the role of language, pointand another point which is more perimentalsituation. I would expect speakingbeing selection of one modal- methodological. correspondences,as I think Hall ity among others. Observationson Hall notesthat he has looked to des- would; and thesein turnshould both relative hierarchyand interplayof criptivelinguistics for a "procedural correspondto the way people of the vocaland proxemicchannels will be of model"for constructing his proxemic societyspace themselvesphysically in greatvalue. Can one say anythingnow theory.More specifically, he uses pho- socialsituations, as well as to moreab- aboutdifferences between groups as to nologicalanalysis as theguide for his stractvariables of social structuredis- therelative role ("functional load") of proxemicanalysis. I suspectthis may cussedin mypaper. theproxemic? have led him to look for discrete, 4) Currentlinguistic theory, if ta- separableanalogues of phonemesin ken as a model,would not place pri- areasof behaviorwhere perhaps there by DELL HYMES maryemphasis on phonologicalunits are none.Questions such as theway and the universalsby which to ap- peoplespace themselves in rooms may Philadelphia,Pa., U.S.A.20 VII 67 proachthem, but on grammaticalre- perhapsbe betterhandled with a con- Hall's workis importantto an anthro- lationshipsand their corresponding tinuousscale ratherthan with dis- pologyof communicationand theeth- universals.A proxemicequivalent is cretevariables. Even in linguisticsthe nographyit requires.I shouldlike to perhapsto be foundin act sequences pervasivenessof discrete variables has raise some questionsthat may help and therules underlying them. beenquestioned for some phenomena clarify for us Hall's perspective. In greatpart the examples given here (cf. Bolinger1961). 1) The initial stresson studying are proxemicportions of a communi- An exampleof an excessiveuse of one's own cultureparallels a call for cative lexicon, illustratingcontrasts discretethinking is Hall's referenceto studyof one's own languageamong in semanticstructuring (e.g., withhold the"olfactory bubble" of a participanttransformational linguists, a school breathand directit away from the in a conversation.This is, perhaps, Hall does not mention.The linguists other person: "ashamed" signifians: onlya figureof ,but is seems Hall doescite have stressedanalysis of signifie).Unlike kinesics,proxemics to me to be ratherinappropriate. A systemsother than their own. It is not might lack much of a syntactic bubbleis extremelywell-defined and clear how Hall can distrusthis own dimension,but discussionof face-to- extremelyregular. The olfactoryzone trained,sensitive perception of proxe- face encounterssuggests otherwise. A of a person,on theother hand, has no mics in other cultures,yet rely on crucial step mightbe to move from definiteboundary and graduallyfades Whorf as to Hopi metaphysics.If normsand structurepoints to their out; if thereare anyair currentsit is forcedto choose,I would take Hall. motivatedselection (cf. Hall 1964b). irregularin shape.Olfactory sensit- At issue may be only the degreeof 5) It is usefulto identifystyles with ivity varies considerably,probably explicitnessin methodologyachieved definingsituations as a firststep, as morethan other senses, from one in- in linguisticsand in proxemics(com- withthe set asserted by Joosfor Amer- dividualto another,depending on paringhere Hopi proxemicsand Hopi ican English(cf. Gleason 1965:357ff.) minorrespiratory diseases, allergies, grammar). or the registersof Halliday,McIntosh smokinghabits, and probablythe in- Hall's contrastsand insights,discus- and Strevens(1964:89). Modes appro- heritedcondition of the olfactoryor- sionsof method,and developmentof priateto one situation,however, can gans. The odor producedalso varies physiologicalstructure points, together be usedin anotherto alludeto thefirst accordingto season and temperature, wviththe possibilityof experimental or commenton thesecond (what Gum- ventilationof the space, etc. This, of results(Watson and Graves 1966) and perz calls "metaphoricalswitching"). course,is not to say that it is unim- theuniversal basis in infraculturalhu- One needstherefore to deal withsys-

100 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY tematicrelations between repertoires Hall: PROXEMICS of codes, styles,and the like, on the one hand,and situations,on theother, by SOLON T. KIMBALL* ed time-sequencesof event analysis withone set of relationsdefining "un- seemmuch more appropriate as com- marked" (normal) usage and other Gainesville,Fla., U.S.A. 31 VII 67 plementarymethodological tools. Al- sets of relationsdefining "marked" For thosewho are alreadyacquainted together,this representsa ratherex- usage-the particularvalues that are with Hall's writingthere is nothing tensivereformulation of anthropolog- markedbeing perhaps insult, beseech- new in this summaryof his research ical methodand thought. ment,comic relief, etc. on the spatial behaviorof man-a 6) Sapir (1927 [1949:556-57]) cer- field whichhe identifiesby the term tainlyanticipates proxemics as he does "proxemics."The value of this ac- by WESTON LA BARRE* muchof therest of contemporaryeth- count,then, will not be foundin its nographyof communication.Behind contentbut in theopportunity to exa- Durham,N.C., U.S.A. 19 VI67 his insistenceon the tyrannicalcon- mine the relevanceof proxemicsfor Hall has pioneeredin a newand subtle sistencyin social behaviorof uncons- anthropologyand otherdisciplines. area of covertculture that is "written cious formsis Boas (1911), just as the We may countas an initialpositive nowhere,known by none,and under- developmentin Sapir (1927, 1929, contributionthe reassertionof thesig- stood by all." His presentessay is an 1931) is behindWhorf. (Notice that nificanceof certainfundamental con- excellentand authoritativesummary Boas did not makehis pointso much ceptsin theirapplication to spatialas- of some of the ways in whichpeople withlexicons as withobligatory gram- pects of behavior.These include re- are "programmed"differently. My maticalcategories and processes). cognitionof the infra-culturalanimal remarksare intendedto be helpfulby What Boas, Sapir, and Whorfheld base of man's culturalextensions and suggestingfurther refinements of ob- as to the relationof languageto ha- the treatmentof an organismand its servation. bitual behavior,etc., requiresmore biotopeas a singlesystem. From the First of all, the negative instance carefulexplication than it has usually examinationof thevariabilities of such may be significant.Like manyAmeri- gottenfrom either admirers or critics. systemswe can abstractpattern, struc- cans.from the northernpart of the A varietyof systematicpositions are ture,and process.The uniformityin UnitedStates, I am stillsurprised that possible, and have been expressed. methodpermits analytical compara- total strangerson the streetsof my Moreover,there are two typesof re- bilityamong all disciplinesthat study SouthernPiedmont town oftengreet lativity,and Whorf'stype, that of livingorganisms. This is an achieve- me as thoughI werea personalfriend. structure,depends upon the second, mentof greatsignificance. At firstI interpretedthis as extreme thatof use (on thesepoints, see Hymes The impressivefindings of theetho- friendlinessthat goes beyondnormal 1966). In proxemicterms, the conse- logistson the relationbetween space Americanextraversion. I have since quencesof a proxemicsystem depend and animal behaviorcited by Hall learned,however, that it is the result upon therelative role of proxemicbe- certainly.add weightto his argument. of myunconsciously looking at people haviorin a group,and on the role of In hisreport on hisown research,how- in Northernurban fashion.in the the given systemrelative to possible ever, there is a notable absence of South, looking directly at people others(an analogueto multilingualismthe "behavioral sequences" which Tin- impliesyou know them,so that,with and code-switching). bergenfound among the stickleback varyingdegrees of incertitudeor dif- 7) The discussionof spatial and (Tinbergen1952). The naturalhistory fidence,people respond to a merelook bodily imageryin art and literature of the time dimensionin behavior with a "friendly"greeting, a pheno- suggestsa strikingessay by Burke shouldrank equally in importancewith menonthat can be easilydemonstrated (1966). thatof space. Only by understanding experimentally.Also, if forsome rea- 8) Definitionof communicationas the relationbetween the two can we son one wants formalanonymity in any eventthat triggersanother orga- gain understandingof either,if our public,even when passing close by,by ism makes"communication" a super- perspectiveis thatof systemsand not not lookingat the otherperson one fluousterm and is incompatiblewith of traits. is officiallynot there (though he an ethnographicapproach, in which We shouldalso ask aboutthe impli- may remindyou later,a bit aggressiv- muchof thepoint must be to determine cationsfor anthropology of theproxe- ely or chidingly,that he saw you on justwhat events are culturallyregard- micsapproach. It is reasonableto ex- the street,which both knew). ed as communicative(Gerbner 1966, pect,for one thing,that future research All this suggeststhe necessityfor Hymes1964, 1967a). will pay closer attentionto territor- discriminatingregional differences, 9) Hall findsHockett's first seven iality and spatial behaviorthan has even in one country.For example,in designfeatures of languageto apply researchin the past. From the new privatecolloquy, two Southernbusi- equallywell to proxemics.He findsthe data we will be able to providean- nessmen will stand together on a street- expansionof the list to thirteenfea- swersfor manyof the 15.basic prob- corner,somewhat closer together than turesto clear up someproblems while lems which Hall lists as yet to be elsewherein the United States, but creatingothers. From these remarks it investigated;but will this knowledge studiouslyavoid one another'seyes, is not clear whetheror not Hall finds informus about cultural processes? gazing about explicitlyalmost any- the expandedlist successfulin distin- Unfortunately,the answeris probably whereelse. By contrast,two profes- guishinglanguage from proxemics, and no, sincemost of the problemsare so sional men of Northernorigin will it would be valuable to have his fur- phrasedthat they lead to classification stand somewhatfarther apart in pri- therviews on thispoint. ratherthan to explanationsof the in- vate conversation,but will exchange 10) It would be good to know if dependenciesbetween aspects of be- repeated "frank" looks into other's Hall considersthe notionsof (a) per- havior.This is not what Hall would eyes with "constant checking" on sonal culture (Sapir 1938; Gooden- wish. Further,the precisionof obser- facial expressions,often raising both ough 1963:257-77; Hymes 1964:29, vationwhich proxemics requires must eyebrowsin director skepticalgaze. n. 8), (b) organizationof diversity be paralleledby equallyprecise obser- The contrastis so markedthat one can ratherthan replicationof uniformity vationsfor otheraspects of behavior. predictregional origin on thebasis of (Wallace 1961), and (c) diversityof The traditionalconcepts of status,role, thisclue alone. communicativecompetence within a family,etc. are too grossfor such pur- Beyond this,there is a contcxtual society(Hymes 1967b) to apply with poses. The orderof actionin interac- dimension.One of the reasonsthat regardto proxemics. tion analysisand the activity-focus-watching amateur "home movies" is

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 101 fromthe speakerhe does not know. ated by the distanceof the listener dancingseems mostly to be exhibited oftenso uncomfortableor embarras- Anotherfacet of the topographic and to be watched. Perhaps this is singis thatthe subjects, as in a stillpho- context in proxemics:many teachers relatedto thechange from participant tograph,look at themovie taker, whom have the reputationof having "eyes to spectatorsports as well. theymay know better than the viewer in theback of theirhead." The reason There is probablya status compo- (to his discomfort)knows them- is verysimple. As theysit, students do nent in proxemicsalso. The poet whereas,in professionalmovies, we are not ordinarilysee one another'sfaces, Auden, who is not unself-conscious accustomedto the rigid convention henceto see moreof othersand to be about the dignityand charismaof the thatthe actornever looks directlyat seen by fewerof themfrom the back bard, who is acutelysensitive proxe- thecamera. Both in moviesand on the seemsto conferincreasing anonymity mically (especially to architecture), stage,to do so even at a distancein- and psychologicalprivacy as theysit and who sharplydelineates his private volves the audienceand sharplydis- farthertoward the rear of the room. and publicselves, was onlyhalf-play- ruptsthe dramaticillusion that one is This is an illusion.Again becauseof fulwhen he wrote"Some thirtyinches watching,unseen, a "real life" situa- thesensitivity of theeyes to peripheral frommy nose/The frontier of myPer- tion.(The factthat television commer- movement,all theteacher need do dur- son goes" (Auden 1965 4). Arthur cialsoften involve actors looking at the ing an examinationis to turnhis erst- Schlesingernoted that on the newsof viewer is, I believe, anotherreason whileindiscriminate gaze immediately SenatorJohn Kennedy's election to the why some people particularlydislike upona head raisingup forthat student Presidencythe people who had been themand feel theirprivacy has been to be convincedthe teacherhas been closelyassociated with his campaign rudely or oafishlyinvaded by the watchinghim specificallythe whole immediatelybehaved as if his space- "gall" of total strangersacting as if time.A smileby the teachermakes it envelopehad suddenlyexpanded enor- they knew you, and in your own even worse,in mobilizingthe guiltof mously,like some impenetrableplate- livingroom at that).The contrastbe- a possiblecheater. Also, an occasional glass mana inviolablythere (Schlesin- tweenhome and professionalmovies strolland pauseat therear of theroom, ger 1965). The late Presidentwas also was brilliantlyexploited in one of the wherethe studentis seen by but does acutelysensitive to the proxemicsof Burton-Taylormovies when "home not see theteacher, induces a verypa- politicsand privacy(Schlesinger 1965 movies" were indicatedvery simply nic of honesty. : 98-104,et passim Chap. IV). With and unmistakablyby the actors'look- Thereis a sex component of prox- respectto symbolicspace and psychic- ing directlyinto the cameraand put- emics to be attendedto. At faculty proxemicmeanings, we might also ting on the self-consciousnessof the partiesin theU.S.A., notoriously,men interestourselves in thedistinct spatial amateurwho knows he's being "taken." and womentend to place themselves differencesbetween Florence and By habituallylooking into the camera, on eitherside of an imaginaryline, Rome, London and Paris, as well as certainmasters of ceremoniesand pub- diagonalor otherwiseacross the room, in suchphenomena as Gauguin'sflight lic figuresalways look amateurish, whenthey sit down.This is nota mat- to Tahiti and Joyce'sself-exile from despitecontrived tics of folksydis- ter of sex-relevanttopical interests, Ireland,and the discoverablereasons embarrassment,such as touchingthe either,for many women bitterly com- forall these. nose,etc. (La Barre,1964). Likewise, plain at missingthe masculine conver- Hall astutelynotes that each animal onlya trustednewscaster like the Amer- sation,since they can talk to women species has its "private subjective ican WalterCronkite, with his mag- any day in the supermarket.Further- world" proxemicallyand ecologically. nificentlycandid editorializingface, more,men tend to sitfarther apart and In thisconnection, von Vexkiill'ssen- that lets you know exactly how he to move about morerestlessly, e.g. in sitiveKantian approach to theoretical feelsabout each itemof newsand in- argument;women sit moreclosely and biology (1926) profitablywould be terveningadvertisment can be allowed tendto keepone place.However, in an studiedby proxemicists.Finally, I will to look directlyinto one's private intellectuallynon-pretentious "fun" shortlypublish a book in whichit is living room. Also, his distancefrom party,every one of theabove descrip- arguedthat the proxemicpatterns of theTV camerais exactlyright for both tions mustbe modified,even though hominids,in contrastwith those of ba- dignityand friendliness. the very same people are involved. boons,similarly terrestrial in thesame By contrastwith all thisin movies Again, the topographyof rooms in environmentas early Australopitheci- and its natural extension,televi- differenthouses makes for quite dif- nes,have a directbearing not onlyon sion, one of the secretsof successful ferentparties. sexual dimorphismand biomase but viva voce publicspeaking especially at There is also an age component in also on humanevolution itself. scme distanceon a podiumis to look proxemics.In a livingroom and large constantlyinto the eyes of one specific porch we once entertained80 high individualafter another-not merely school studentswith comfortin the by FRANK LYNCH, S.J.* to sample feedback,but also to "en- samespace in whichmore than 12 (sit- gage" the audience (only a few get down party) to two dozen (stand-up QuezonCity, The Philippines.25 VII67 looked at, but everyone feels the party) adults would feel "crowded." Hall's work has been usefuland pro- speakeris interestedin one's personal Furthermore,though sometimes close vocative. I wish, however,that he reactions,and one is not an ignored enoughindeed at the studentparty, would movemore quickly toward the fractionof a "captiveaudience"). Fur- the young people accorded larger studyof subculturaldifferences in dis- thermore,experienced teachers are space-bubblesat all timesto eachof the tance-settingand give us fewer un- aware of a topographic element in five adults presenteven thoughstu- differentiated"Americans," "Arabs," teaching: apple-polishers,especially dentsrepeatedly sought out theadults. and "Greeks."General categories such the prettybut not-so-brightgirls, sit It is also possiblethat proxemic pat- as the latterare justifiable,and even toward the frontof the classroom, ternsvary in historictime. For examp- inevitable,in the early stagesof any whereasthe more detached and in- le, thereal contactual closeness of dan- interculturalresearch, but I would like dependentminds cluster more to the cing in an older generationcontrasts to see greaterattention now to those rear. In my own quarter-centuryof with the perhapsmore overt but still status and regional distinctionsof teaching,the most brilliantstudents only symbolicyard-apart sexuality of which Hall is so clearly aware. My have almostinvariably sat in the last all youthfuldances from the twist desireis prompted by thefact that our row. The same may be seen in other onward. Older dancing was to be researchin the mappingof Tagalog academicpublic lecturing;the degree mutuallyexperienced; the narcissistic, disease and kinship categorieshas of interestin thesubject may be indic- sometimesdolefully isolate individual made it painfullyclear that every

102 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY individual within this subnational Hall: PROXEMICS group has his own way of seeing things,and getson withothers by the 1) The attemptto draw general tain aspectsof behavior,then a Skin- overlapshe shareswith them; we look metaphysicalimplications from the nerianapproach to learningis indeed forwardto even greaterdifferences discoveryof cultural regularitiesis appropriate.Explanation of thelearn- when we compareTagalog speakers doomedto fail. Whorf'sideas are dif- ing of proxemicbehavior will show with other Filipinos.There seemsto ficultto graspmostly because they are how the reinforcementschedules con- be no reasonto expectthat the use of terriblymuddled: they are frighteningtrolling that aspect of behaviorare space will show significantlysmaller only as ambiguousshadows are frigh- relatedto the contingenciesof a par- inter-subculturaldifferences. tening.It is interestingthat Hall puts ticularculture; a culturewhich keeps Attentionto subculturaldifferences "free will" inside'quotation marks; the child close to the mother'sknee will naturallyinclude a studyof how theiruse meansthat nothing precise is untilthe age of fivewill use reinforc- stimulidifferent from those of a situationsare subculturallydefined as to be understoodby what's inside in,g calling,for instance,for one kind of them.And whenanyone says "all men cu ture whichseparates a child from interpersonalspace or another.Among are captives of the language they its motherat the inceptionof thesub- multilinguals(as manyFilipinos are), speak," we know immediatelythat sequentpregnancy. Thus a wholestra- therole of thelanguage or dialectused he's tryingto give us shiversrather tegyof investigatingproxemic behav- to open a conversation,to carryit on, thana clearmessage. The word "cap- ior can be developedon the precise to interruptit, or to close it, will pre- tive" makes'sense only as it has a studyof how theseschedules of rein- dictablybe foundmost telling as an significantopposite, like "escapee," forcementare relatedto othercultural interveningvariable determiningin- "captor," etc. What is the contrast contingencies. terpersonaldistance. It has been ob- here?This shiveryand mostlymean- If proxemicsis really a branchof served by our interviewers,among ingless talk about captives can be linguistics,however, as Hall sometimes others,that at timesthe situation itself replaced by two rather simple as- seemsto believe,then what a young- calls for one language or another, sertions: sterlearns is not behaviorat all but while at other times the language a) Any man can say only what is a systemof rules,and the learningof chosenas an openersignals the tone sayable in the language(s)he speaks. thoserules cannot be accountedfor by of the situationand gets distinctre- b) Any man can perceivehis en- Skinnerianreinforcement (Chomsky sultsin termsof interpersonalspace. vironmentonly withinthe categories 1959; McClellan1966). I can see some and distinctionsavailable to him in reasonsfor treatingproxemics as a thelanguage(s) he speaks. branchof linguistics,others for not. I thatthis con- by J.E. MCCLELLAN* Assertion(a) is a tautologycon- rathersuspect, however, veying no informationwhatsoever, ceptual distinctionwill have to be Philadelphia,Pa., U.S.A. 12 VI 67 ergonothing frightening. Assertion (b) worked out with some precisionbe- To reveal the culturalsignificance of is an empiricalgeneralization which is forethe researchoutlined at the end particularhuman acts is the goal of interestingif not (as it stands) pre- of Hall's paper can be pursuedeffec- all social science.Hall and his col- ciselytrue. Research on (b) will push tively. leagueshave demonstratedconclusiv- us to investigatethe connectionbe- In fine: proxemicshas proved an ely that acts which establishspatial tween the neurophysiologicalstruc- enormouslyfruitful field of research relationsarnong persons are (as we turesof perceptionand the syntactic despitethe cloudinessof its guiding mightnot have suspectedthey would structuresof language;and if my un- principle.The time may come, how- be) acts fraughtwith culturalsignifi- derstandingis at all accurate,that's ever, to tidy thingsup a bit even cance. Those responsiblefor practical wherethe gold is. It's timeto forget whileadvancing the empirical research. social decisionsshould be especially the vagaries of general communica- gratefulfor the lessons taught by Hall: tions theory,especially the seminal, when,for example,we evaluatevari- brilliant confusionsof Whorf, and by DONALD S. MARSHALL* ous plans for racial integrationin move proxemicsonto the empirical urban schools-busing, educational basisof neurophysiology. Alexandria,V4., U.S.A. 25 VII67 parks,urban-suburban exchan es-we 2) In preciselywhat senseis proxe- Hall's articleis a distinctcontribution can no longerignore (as we ave in micsto be considereda branchof lin- to anthropologicaltheory, and to ap- thepast) the various patterns of spa- guistics?If one carriesa "communi- plied anthropology,pointing out some tialrelations created by each proposed cations bias" to the point of saying ramificationsof theapparent fact that solution.If it servedno otherpurpose, thatculture is a processof communica- space may be viewed or treateddif- the odd term"proxemics" would be tion,then one has theproblem of mak- ferentlyin various cultures.Perhaps an excellentmnemonic device recall- ing it clear how language,in the full even moresignificant is that part of ing those subtle,unconscious, but senseof the term,differs from other the articlewhich representsa begin- emotionallypotent acts by which men formsof communications.One can ningeffort to relatecultural treatment keeptheir world at theright distance. treatany ecologicalsystem as a pro- of space to the moreuniversal aspects I takethe present article to be signif- cessof communication;in someinstan- of culturaldynamics. I am sorrythat icantas a reflectionof thefuture of ces this model may be quite illumin- Hall did not developthis in morede- proxemicsrather than as a reportof ating, in others merely distracting tail. findings,which are available in greater (Black 1962). It is alwayswell to em- The articlereflects certain points of detailelsewhere. I suspect,though I phasize continuity-e.g.,between or- view which,in myopinion, prevent it cannotprove it here,that certain ob- ganismand biotope,between culture frombeing as importanta contribu- viousphilosophical confusions which and physiology,etc.-but it is also tionas it mighthave been.First, I do maynot have hinderedproxemic re- necessary,occasionally, to emphasize not findin it a treatmentof the dif- searchin its early stages (possibly quite differences,especially between langu- ferentiationof individual behavior thereverse) may prove in thefuture age properand otherforms of com- fromthe abstractmean of groupbe- to be formidableobstacles. Let me munications.For researchin proxe- havior. My impressionis that there mention,just as examples,two philo- mics,this difference is crucial,for on may be morevariation in individual sophicallyquestionable points in Hall's it dependswhat theory of learning is behaviorand attitudesin thetreatment essay (the numbercould be expanded to be employedin interpretingthe of space wvithina groupthan thereis indefinitelyif space allowed it): data. If proxemicsis thestudy of cer- fromcultural aroun to cultural group. Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 103 My secondconcern is that,without quiredin any majorarea of ethnogra- Ultimately,what may prove to be explicitlysaying so, Hall attemptsto phic study,irrespective of who the importantin proxemicsis not so much build "proxemics"into what would subjectsare and of whetherone is boundaries,but doors-methods of appearto be a separatefield of study. studying"structure" or "content." communication across boundaries. Othershave attemptedto do thesame My last, and perhapsmost funda- Having definedsocial space, our task thingwith the field labeled "seman- mental,point of differencewith Hall will be to discoverby what means tics."Granted the importanceof both (and perhapsthis is an articleof faith boundariescan be crossed,by whom, of thesefacets of culture,nevertheless ratherthan reason) is withhis prefer- when,where, in what directionsand theyremain but two amongthe very encefor the analysis of structurerather withwhat credentials.A Fijian house, many facetsof culturalbehavior. It thancontent. To methe "why" of what for example,has for boundariesfour wouldseem to methat once one under- is beingobserved seems much more sig- walls,but it is itsfour doors that are so- standsand acceptsthe fact that differ- nificantthan the detailed re-analysis of cially significant:One door is for vi- entcultures treat space, ideas, and ob- the"what." One mustagree, of course, sitorsin general,two doorsare forthe jects differentlyone mustthen go on that to analyze any subject,one first membersof the householdand privi- to moreprofound aspects of research- must be thoroughlyaware of the leged visitors,and one door is forthe to the"whys" ratherthan the "whats." "what" of that subject;but I believe ownerof the house and no one else. Thirdly,I have some reservations one mustthen go on to understandthe overthe fact much of thearticle seems "why." for it is the answerto this by HARVEY B. SARLES* built around only a relativelyfew querywhich will lead us to an ulti- "facts."Presumably, Hall and his stu- mateknowledge of "man'sways." Minneapolis,Minn., U.S.A. 31 VII67 dents have many more data upon This review of Hall's work and whichto base generalizations.Proxe- by G. B. MILNER* thoughtsis a welcomerecognition that micsanalysis must produce more than thereare othersystems of behaviorin the differentiationof "U.S." versus London,England. 17 VII 67 addition to those currentlyenjoying "Arab" or "U.S.." versus "Central Hall's article is very suggestiveand popularity among anthropologists. American"of his examples. shouldlead to a hostof new investiga- Since I agreewholeheartedly with his Fourth,it seemsto me that Hall's tions,not least in our own Western positionI only wishto tryto expand approachdoes not really reflect a deep culture. on it here. knowledgeof photographictechnique If one accepts "proxemics,"what One getsthe feeling that Hall thinks and its possibilities,in its relationto about"proxetics"? That is, how many of space as a ratherstable set of boun- photographingindividuals. My experi- dimensionsof space will one have to dedcircles surrounding each individual. ence over the past 30 years,first as Q recognisebefore one can establishwhat These are presumablylearned as a professionalphotographer and lateras the significantco-ordinates or opposi- distinctsystem, a systemmuch like an anthropologicalfieldworker using tionsare in any one culture?For in- language.By analogy with language photographicequipment, has persuad- stance,in Polynesiaand many other as it has traditionallybeen described, ed me thatit is not thesize of theca- partsof the world,the heightof the thissystem must be made up of "per- meraone operatesthat affects the abi- speaker'shead, above, or level with, ceptualelements", and the job of the lity to derive "natural" photographs or below the head of the personad- proxemicistis merelyto discoverthem of one's subjects,but ratherone's abi- dressed,is significant.Movement (ver- -and to see whetheror not elements lityto "teach" one's subjectsthat one tical, horizontal,etc.) betweenpoints of differentcultures interfere with one will only photographwhat is "na- in space may also have to be con- another,thus effectively stopping pos- tural"and "unposed."It does nottake sidered. siblecommunication. Because different SouthSea islanderslong to learnthis The questionof overcrowding(sub- species live in differentcognitive fact;I suspectthe same would be true jectiveor otherwise)and of its effects worldsas a functionof theirphysio- amongthe people with whom Hall and on animalsand, by extrapolation,on logy,the proxemicistis primarilyin- his studentsworked. Hall probably man is clearly of great importance. terestedin physiologyand perception. will come to agreewith me that it is L6vi-Strausshas evensuggested a pos- My primarycriticism of thisposi- not thesize or brandof camerathat is siblecorrelation between human over- tion is muchthe same as my criticism significant;it is theuse of thatcamera crowdingand racialism.It is instruc- of much of linguistictheory: There that characterizesthe photographer tive to note any specialtechniques by is no doubtin my mindthat particu- who can get the kind of resultsthat means of which overcrowde com- late entities(, morphophone- are required. munities maintain social distance in mes,perceptual entities, etc.) have a In contrastto Hall, I see no needfor spiteof closephysical contact and high kind of reality;but theydo not con- a "specialmethodology" for analyzing densityhousing (e.g., in London,and stitute the entire shared world. A the culturalview and use of space: it New York also perhaps,where in the linguisticanalysis provides an approx- seemsto me thatthis subject is fullyas rush-hourone tendsnot to speak to imationto a languagewhich can be amenableto theanthropologist's obser- peoplein thetube (subway) and where made real by nativespeakers; but it vationas are the patternsof interac- social intercoursegenerally tends to be is not a completedescription, and it tion betweenkinsmen, the utilization morerestricted than elsewhere). Note, yieldsno insightinto how people use of social power,or the otherintangi- howeverthat for certainpolitical, re- it to communicateor to learn about bles whichthose of us workingin the ligiousand athleticactivities, "over- the world whichthe languageis said fieldmust capture, first with our in- crowding"seems to be not only tol- to represent.It is finefor writing dic- tellect,and thenin transpositionwith erated more readily,but deliberately tionaries. pencilor typewriter.Nothing Hall has encouragedand even soughtafter, for It is difficultto escape reifying said in hisarticle persuades me thatthe reasonswhich may be as yet imper- whateversystem one isconcerned with, fieldmethods for proxemics should dif- fectlyunderstood. but the attemptto escapeought to be fersignificantly from the study of other I do not thinkthat an inventoryof made. Still photosare momentaryab- facetsof man'scultural behavior. lexical itemsto goingto be as infor- stractionsfrom life and are usually This particulardifference of view mative as Hall seems to think.The quite differentfrom a movie frame relatesalso to mydisbelief in the"uni- Keesingsused this techniquein their extractedfrom ongoing movement. As queness"of proxemicsor its approach. studyof Elite Communication in Sa- in the studyof language,Hall would The need for"sensitivity" pointed out moa (1956) with somewhatmediocre like to findthe systemand thenadd by Hall seemsto me to be equallyre- results. meaningand contextto the system's

104 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY elementsas if they constitutedan Hall: PROXEMICS episystemor metasystemto the basic system.The likelihoodof findingsuch severalyears, attending, among other systems-constitutingtwo termsof my a systemseems minimal. More likely, things,to spatialvariables. The poten- three-wayanalysis). In my opinion, the handling of space, the handling of tial applicationand utilityof portable proxemicsdoes not involvea separate one's body, are intimately a part of videotaping are clear.It onlyremains level of unitsthat combine into struc- one's being, one's language, one's to bringongoing research an teaching turedforms, which then express mean- ability to exist in a complex world. in this area formallyinto graduate ing; rather,units-and-forms together As in linguistics,the assertion that trainingin anthropology,a task which are a level,with meaning as another. one systemis basic or more important is daily beingaccomplished in several In thisrespect, proxemics is, I. think, than others is never substantiatedand outlyinguniversities. like kinesicsor like . remains on the level of "givens." As The suggestionthat "duality of pat- in linguistics,the grammarhas become terning"is "characteristic of all life..." basic, the study of context and mean- by GEORGE L. TRAGER* is anotherinstance of the same mis- ing subordinate. But how and what apprehension.I believe, from what one perceivesat a given momentmight Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. 5 VIl 67 littleI knowabout (not of) molecular reflect a bad job situation as well as This is an excellentreview article by biology,that RNA and DNA involve a particular physiological propensity. theinventor (if one mayuse theterm) units-and-structureat once in their A most fruitfulapproach to the study of proxemics.This culturalsystem or "informationcode" and thus do not of proxemics might well attempt to dimensionis so obvious,when we're have "duality" as Hockettmeant it. build in context as a variable, rather told about it, and yet remainsout- Aside fromthis point, which needs than as an afterthought. side the awarenessof mostpeople, in- muchmore research and analysisbe- On the other hand, Hall's list of cluding most anthropologists.Hall's forebeing fully settled, I wantto com- areas to be investigatedis well thought articleshould do muchin callingthe mend this articleunreservedly. Data out. If they are taken seriously, it is attentionof us all to the field of pertainingto the relatednessof the not hard to see that the study of proxemics. proxemicsand the linguisticsof in- proxemics could constitute a focus I do not necessarilythink that the dividualcultures remain to be gather- around which a general ethnographic term proxemics is the best there is ed, and thiskind of researchseems to approach could be constructed. One for the area of investigation.My ob- offervast possibilitiesfor makingan- of the few missing areas, and one jectionis perhapsbased on the feeling thropologya trulyunified, though di- which would probably be appealing that where thereis an -emics, there verse,data-based discipline. When we to many social anthropologists,is the shouldalso be an -etics-but proxetics have done the neededbasic research, explicit recognitionthat the handling would hardlybe a mellifluousor de- and have the data systematicallydis- of space is intimately tied up with sirable addition to the vocabulary. played,there will be timeenough, for social structure and that proxemics However,since the termproxemics is those interested,to look into history may be directly applicable for dis- beingused by the originatorof work or origins. covering the workings of any social in the field,I shouldjudge thatwe're organization. stuckwith it. (Some yearsago some As the ethologist Glen McBride linguiststried to get rid of the term by ANDREW P. VAYDA* pointed out in a talk at the University linguist-and presumablylinguistics- New York,N.Y., U.S.A. 10 VII 67 of Minnesota thisyear, the wise animal butthe word has remainedin use.) husbandman does not build chicken The only place whereI would sug- I do not understandwhy Hall avoids coops to give each animal so many gestsome restatementis in the treat- even raising the questionsof why square feetof space in order to keep it mentof the relationshipof thespoken thereshould be culturallyspecific dif- content.He gives the community-the languageto proxemics.Hockett's orig- ferencesin "spatial experience,"how social structure- enough space to be inal list of the "design features"of theymight relate to differentcondi- used as the communityorganizes its languageis mostvulnerable in its spe- tions,and how theymight be affected space. cificationof "duality."Actually, lan- whenthe conditions change. He might, Concerning techniquesand methods guagehas trialityrather than duality: forexample, have consideredthe pos- of observation and recording, more the substance(forms) is expressedby sibilitythat population-specific varia- sophisticationand more usable instru- the diacritics(sounds), and functions tionsin the toleranceof crowdingre- mentation now exists than Hall has as meanings-see Trager (1963). I late to variationsin ecological re- claimed. Several of us in Pittsburgh think Hall has somewhatmisappre- quirementsfor populationdispersion (Condon 1966), Birdwhistell et al. in hendedwhat Hockett meant by "dual- in land use. At the very least, such Philadelphia, and now we in Minne- ity" (the independentstructuring of problemsmight have been mentioned in sota have worked with movies for the phonologicaland morphological Hall's listof areasto be investigated.

umweltof theirauthors, just as the I am awarethat the taskI have set myself Reply originalarticle reflects my own par- makesexcessive demands upon my pen. It ticularworld view. is almostimpossible to portrayin words by EDWARD T. HALL the functioningof a systemin whichevery In the processof review of these partis relatedto everyother in sucha way I want to thankthose colleagues who statementsI was remindedof a dis- that each has a causal influenceon the took thetrouble to read and comment tinction popularized by Marshall others.Even if one is onlytrying to explain on thisbrief and necessarilyincomplete McLuhan (1963, 1964); namely,that a gasolineengine it is hardto knowwhere summaryof my recentwork. The ob- thereis sucha thingas linearand non- to begin,because the personto whomone servationswere helpfuland represent seeksto explainit can onlyunderstand the linearthinking. In general,English and natureof the crankshaftif he has first a particulartype of record.It was in- relatedlanguages lend themselvesto graspedthat of the connectingrods, the terestingto note the degreeto which the former.Since it is difficultto im- pistons,the valves, the camshaft, and so on. the individualcomments reflect the prove on Conrad Lorenz's statement Unlessone understandsthe elements of a interests,biases, and to someextent the (1966), I am quotingit: completesystem as a whole, one cannot

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 105 understandthem at all. The more complex suspect,however, that as anthropolo- sometimeslead to ways of clarifying the structureof a systemis, the greaterthis gistsreared in culturesother than my what Sullivan(1947) called paratoxic difficultybecomes-and it must be sur- own learnto use thissystem that they communication. mountedboth in one's researchand in one's teaching.Unfortunately, the working struc- would,in so doing,modify the system My pointis thatin orderto under- ture of the instinctiveand culturallyacquir- and that the modificationsthat they standall but the simplestcommunica- ed patternsof behavior which make up the makewill tellus somethingof culture. tions (as in Chomsky's"kernel" sen- social life of man seems to be one of the I have foundmyself in a position tences[1957]) one mustbe situation- most complicatedsystems we know on this analogousto ShirleyJackson's when ally programmedin advance.The de- earth. the "Lottery"appeared in the New gree to which two or more implicit Yorker. Therewas littleagreement as programsvary determinesthe para- The pointis thatI have describedthe to just what it was in Miss Jackson's toxic content(culturally engendered basicstructure of a system(in thesense articlethat evoked such strongreac- noise) of a communication.The para- thatLorenz [ibid] uses the term)for tions in her readers.There was no toxicelement increases as a functionof revealinga restricted,but apparently doubt,however, that she had strucka bothcomplexity (number of levelsas in relevantaspect of behaviorthat re- nerve.It is thissort of eventthat in- Trager'scomment [p. 105] and cul- mainsreasonably stable because it func- terestsme. tural distance.In general,therefore, tions out-of-awareness.In so doing, I havelaid a greatemphasis on what I would say that the indeterminacy thereis no implicationthat other sys- people do (even anthropologists)and principleapplies to the examination temsare not valid pointsof entryinto notso muchemplhasis on theideas they of culturalevents just as it does to cultures.In fact,it is justthe opposite. have about theirsubject. People who the sub-atomicworld (Hall 1959); It is also quite evidentthat different interactacross cultural lines are con- that is, one can be ratherspecific in culturalsystems (social, linguistic, eco- stantly and inadvertentlytouching the examinationof any given level nomic,temporal, and the like) inte- eachother's sore spots. Often they can- of culture, but that specificityis grate,in waysas yetinadequately des- not bringthemselves to admitthis. I gained at the expenseof clarityon cribed,into the largersystem of cul- have foundthat explorations of these other levels. One would hope, of tureas a whole.Some of thecomments sensitiveareas not only tell me some- course,that this would not alwaysbe relate to the integrativerelationship thingof the hiddenstructure of my thecase, and thatat somefuture date -betweensystems. I do not know the own cultureand provide a way of writersof Englishwould not be tied degreeto whichthe proxemic,system gettingat the details of the specific to such a linearsystem (cf. McLuhan is applicableto all cultures.I would eventsI am studying,but also they 1959).

BONNER, JOHN T. 1963. How slime molds CHRISTIAN, JOHN J. 1960. Factors in mass ReferencesCited communicate.Scientific American 209(2): mortalityof a herd of Sika deer (Cervus 84-86. nippon). Chesapeake Science 1:79-95. BURKE, KENNETH. 1966. "The thinkingof 1963. The pathologyof overpopula- ABRAMS, CHARLES. 1965. The city is the the body," in Language as symbolkc tion. MilitaryMedicine 128:571-603. frontier.New York: Harper & Row. action, pp. 308-43. Berkeley and Los CHRISTIAN, JOHN J., VAGH FLYGER, and ALLEE, WARDER C. 1958. The social life Angeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress. DAVID E. DAVIS. 1961. Phenomena as- of animals. Boston: Beacon Press. [DH*] sociated with population density.Proceed- Science ARGYLE, M. and J.DEAN. 1965. Eye-contact, BYERS, PAUL. 1966. Cameras don't take ings of the National Academy of distance, and affiliation.Sociometry 28: pictures.Columbia UniversityForum 9. 47:428-49. DAVIS. 289-304. [ARD*] CALHOUN, JOHN B. 1950. The studyof wild CHRISTIAN,JOHN J., and DAVID E. 1964. Social and endocrine factors are AUDEN, W. H. 1965. About the house. New animals under controlled conditions. integratedin the regulationof growthof York: Random Annals of the New York Academy of House. [WL*] mammalian populations. Science 146: BAIN, A. D. 1949. Dominance in the Great Sciences 51:113-22. ---. 1962a. "A behavioral sink," in Roots 1550-60. Tit, Parus Major. ScottishNaturalist 61: COLLIER, JOHN,JR. 1967. Holt, Rinehart, & 369-472. of behavior. Edited by Eugene L. Bliss, 295-316. New York: Harper & Winston. In press. BARRY, HERBERT, III. 1957. Relationships pp. Brothers. CONDON, W. S. 1967. A segmentationof between child training and the pictorial behavior.MS. arts. Journal of 1962b. Population densityand social Abnormal and Social CONDON, W. S., and W. D. OGSTON. 1966. Psychology54:380-83. [JLF*] pathology.Scientific American 206:139- 46. Sound film analysis of normal and BATESON, GREGORY. 1948. "Sex and cul- CARPENTER,C. R. 1958. "Territoriality:A pathological behavior patterns. The ture," in Personal characterand cultural review of concepts and problems," in Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease milieu, 94-107. Ann pp. Arbor: Edwards Behavior and evolution.Edited by A. Roe 143(4) :338-47. Brothers. and G. G. Simpson, pp. 224-50. New DEEVEY, EDWARD S. 1960. The hare and BERELSON, BERNARD, and GARY A. STEINER. Haven: Yale UniversityPress. the haruspex: A cautionary tale. Yale 1964. Human behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. CARPENTER, EDMUND, FREDERICK VARLEY, Review, Winter. tIRDWHISTELL, RAYMOND L. 1952. Introduc- and ROBERT FLAHERTY. 1959. Eskimo. DIEBOLD, A. R., JR. 1967. "Anthropology tion to kinesics. Louisville: Universityof Toronto: Universityof TorontoPress. and the comparativepsychology of com- Louisville Press. CHOMBART DE LAUWE, PAUL. 1959a. municative behavior," in Animal com- BLACK, MAX. 1962. Models and metaphors: Famille et habitation.Paris: Editions du munication: Techniques of study and Studies in language and philosophy. CentreNational de la RechercheScientifi- resultsof research.Edited byT. A. Sebeok. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. que. Bloomington:Indiana UniversityPress. In press. [ARD*] [JEM*] ---. 1959b. Le milieu et l'etude sociologi- BLOOMFIELD, LEONARD. 1933. Language. que de cas individuels. Informations DORNER, ALEXANDER. 1958. The way New York: H. Holt. Sociales 2:41-54. beyond art. New York: New York Uni- BOAs, FRANZ. 1911. "Introduction," in CHOMSKY,NOAM. 1957. SyntacticStructures. versityPiess. Handbook of AmericanIndian Languages. The Hague: Mouton & Co. EIBL-EIBESFELDT, I. 1961. The fighting Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 1959. Review of: Verbal behavior, behavior of animals. ScientificAmerican 40. by B. F. Skinner.Language 35:26-56. 205(6):112-22. BOLINGER, DWIGHT L. 1961. Generality, [MD, JEM*] ERRINGTON, PAUL. 1956. Factors limiting gradience,and theall-or-none. The Hague: -1965.Aspects of the theoryof syntax. higher vertebrate populations. Science Mouton. [JLF*] Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. [MD*] 124:304-7.

106 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY , 1957. Of men and marshe.s.New Hall: PROXEMICS York: The Macmillan Company. 1961. Muskrats and marsh manage- communication,"in The ethnographyof petence," in Research planning con- ment. Harrisburg: Stackpole Company. communication.Edited by American An- ferenceon language developmentin dis- FISCHER, J. L. 1961. Art styles as cultural thropologist66(6), part 2.154-63. advantaged children, pp. 1-16. New cognitive maps. American Anthropologist --. 1964b. "Silent assumptionsin social York: Yeshiva University. [DH*] 63.79-93. [JLF*] communication,"in Disorders of com- JAMMER, MAX. 1960. Concepts of space. FRAKE, CHARLES 0. 1960. "Family and kin- munication XLII. Edited by Rioch and New York: Harper. ship in EasternSubanun," in Social struc- Weinstein, pp. 41-55. Baltimore: Re- JOOS, MARTIN. 1962. The fiveclocks. Inter- ture in Southeast Asia. Edited by G. P. search Publications Association for Re- national Journal of American Linguistics Murdock, pp. 51-64. Viking Fund Pub- search in Nervous and Mental Disease. 28(2):Part V. licationsin Anthropologyno. 29. --. 1966. The hidden dimension. New KEESING, FELIX M., and MARIE M. FRIED, MARC. 1963. "Grieving for a lost York: Doubleday. KEESING. 1956. Elite communicationin home,' in The urban condition. Edited HALL, EDWARDT., and GEORGE L. TRAGER. Samoa: A study of leadership. Stanford by Leonard J. Duhl. New York: Basic 1953. The analysis of culture. Washing- AnthropologicalSeries no. 3. Books. ton, D.C.: American Council of Learned [GBM*] FRIED, MARC, and PEGGY GLEICHER. 1961. Societies. KEITER, FRIEDRICH. 1966. Verhaltensbiolo- Some sources of residentialsatisfaction in HALL, EDWARD T., and WILLIAM F. WHYTE. gie des Menschen auf kulturanthropolo- an urban slum. Journal of the American 1960. Inter-culturalcommunication. Hu- gischerGrundlage. Munchen-Basel. Instituteof Planners27:305-15. man Organization19(1):5-12. [BB*] GANS, HERBERT. 1960. The urban villagers. HALLIDAY,M. A. K., ANGUS MCINTOSH and KILPATRICK, FRANKLIN P. Editor. 1961. Ex- Cambridge:The MI.T. Pressand Harvard PETER STREVENS. 1964. The linguistic plorations in transactional psychology. UniversityPress. sciences and language teaching. London: New York: New York UniversityPress. GERBNER, GEORGE. 1966. On defining Longmans. [DH*] LA BARRE, W. 1964. "Paralinguistics, communication:still another view. The HALLOWELL, A. IRVING. 1955. "Cultural kinesics, and ,"in Journalof Communication16:99-103. factorsin spatial orientation,"in Culture Approachesto semiotics.Edited by T. A. [DH*] and experience,pp. 184-202. Philadel- Sebeok, A. S. Hayes, and M. C. Bateson, GIBSON, JAMES J. 1950. The perceptionof phia: Universityof PennsylvaniaPress. pp. 191-220. The Hague: Mouton. the visual u'orld. Boston: Houghton HARRIS,ZELLIG. 1951. Structurallinguistics. [WL*] Mifflin. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press. LANTIS, MARGARET. 1960. Vernacular cul- GIBSON, J.J. and A. D. PICK. 1963. Percep- [MD*] ture. American Anthropologist62:202- tion of anotherperson's looking behavior. HAYES, ALFRED S. 1964. 'Paralinguistics 16. American Journal of Psychology76:386- and kinesics: Pedagogical perspectives,"in LEACH, EDMUNDR. 1965. Cultureand social 94. [ARD*] Approachesto semiotics.Edited by T. H. cohesion: An anthropologist's view. GIEDION, SIGFRIED. 1962. The eternal Sebeok and A. S. Hayes. The Hague: Daedalus, Winter,pp. 24-38. present: The beginningsof architecture. Mouton. LtVI-STRAUSS, CLAUDE. 1966a. The scope Vol. II. New York: BollingenFoundation, HEDIGER, H. 1950. Wild animals in of anthropology. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY PantheonBooks. caphivitv.London: Butterworth. 7:112-23. GILLIARD, E. THOMAS. 1962. On the breed- 1955. Studies of the psychologyand 1966b. Anthropology: Its achieve- ing behavior of the Cock-of-the-Rock behavior of captive animals in zoos and ments and future. CURRENT ANTPROPOL- (Aves. Rupicola rupicola). Bulletin of the circuses.London: Butterworth. OGY 7:124-27. American Museum of Natural History 1961. "The evolution of territorial LISSMAN,H. W. 1963. Electric location by 124:31-68. behavior," in Social life of Early Man. fishes.Scientific American 208(3):50-59. 1963. Evolution of bowerbirds. Edited by S. L. Washburn, pp. 34-57. LITrLE, KENNETHB. 1965. Personal space. ScientificAmerican 209(2):38-46. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropol- Journalof ExperimentalSocial Psychology GLEASON, H. A., JR. 1965. Linguisticsand ogy no. 31. 1:237-47. English grammar. New York: Holt, HELLERSBERG,ELIZABETH F. 1950. Adapta- 1967. Value congruenceand inter- Rinehart, and Winston. [DH*] tion to realityof our culture.Springfield: action distances.Journal of Social Psychol- GOFFMAN, ERVING. 1959. The presentation C. C. Thomas. ogy. In press. of self in everyday life. New York: --. 1966. Spatial structuresand images in LORENZ, KONRAD. 1963. On Agression.New Doubleday. Japan, a key to culture understanding. York: Harcourt,Brace & World. 1961. Encounters. Indianapolis: MS. 1964. Das sogenannte Bose; zur Bobbs-Merrill. HINDE, R. A., and NIKO TINBERGEN. 1958. naturgeschichteder Agression (the biology GOODENOUGH, WARD H. 1963. Cooperation "The comparativestudy of species-specific of aggression). Vienna: Dr. G. Borotha- in change. New York: Russell Sage behavior," in Behavior and evolution. Schoeler. Foundation. [DH*] Edited by A. Roe and G. G. Simpson,pp. LYND, ROBERT S. 1948. Knowledge for GROSSER, MAURICE. 1951. The painter's 251-68. New Haven: Yale University what? Princeton: eye. New York: Rinehart. Press. Press. HALL, EDWARD T. 1955. The anthropology HOCKETr,CHARLES F. 1958. A course in McBRIDE, GLEN. 1964. A general theoryof of manners.Scientific American 192:85- modern linguistics. New York: Mac- social organizationand behavior.St. Lucia, 89. millan. Australia: Universityof QueenslandPress. 1956. "A microculturalanalysis of ---. 1960. The origin of speech. Scientific MCCLELLAN, JAMES E. 1966. Skinner's time." Proceedings of the Fifth Inter- American 203:338--96. philosophy of human nature. Studies in national Congressof Anthropologicaland HOWARD, H. E. 1920. Territoryin bird Philosophyand Education4:307-32. EthnologicalSciences, Philadelphia, Sept. life. London: Murray. MCCULLOCH, WARREN S. 1948. Teleological 1-9, 1956, pp. 118-22. HYMES,DELL. 1964. "Introduction:Toward mechanisms.Annals of the New Ycrk 1959. The silent language. Garden ethnographies of communication," in Academyof Sciences 50:259-77. City: Doubleday. The ethnography of communication. 1964. "Reliable systems using un- 1960a. The madding crowd. Land- Edited by John Gumperz and Dell reliable units," ' in Disorders of Corr scape, Autumn,pp. 26-29. Hymes, pp. 1-34. Washington, D.C.: munication XLII. Edited by Rioch and --. 1960h. ICA participantEnglish lan- AmericanAnthropological Association. Weinstein. Baltimore: Research Publica- guange requirementguide, part I. Wash- [DH*] tions Associationfor Researchin Nervous ington,D.C. 1966. "Two types of linguistic re- and Mental Disease. --. 1963a. "Proxemics-The study of lativity," in Sociolinguistics. Edited by MCCULLOCH, WARREN S., and WALTER man's spatial relations and boundaries," William Bright,pp. 114-58. The Hague: PITTS. 1947. How we know universals; in Man s image in medicine and anthro- Mouton. [DH*] the perception of auditory and visual pology, pp. 422-45. New York: Inter- 1967a. "The anthropologyof com- forms.Bulletin of MathematicalBiophysics national UniversitiesPress. munication," in Human communication 9:127-47. --.1963b. A systemfor the notationof theory. Edited by Frank X. W. Dance, MCHARG,IAN. 1963 "Man and his environ- proxemic behavior. American Anthropol- pp. 139. New York: Holt, Rinehart,and ment,"in The urban condition.Edited by ogist 65:1003-26. Winston. [DH*] Leonard J.Duhl. New York: Basic Books. --.1964a. "Adumbrationin intercultural --.1967b. "On communicative com- MCLuHAN, MARSHALL. 1963. The Guten-

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 107 burg galaxy. Toronto: Universityof --. 1938. Why cultural anthropology Study.Thomas A. C. RennieSeries in Toronto.Press. needs the psychiatrist.Psychiatry 1:7-12. Social Psychiatry.New York: McGraw- -, 1964. UitderstandingMedia. New [DH*] Hill. York:McGraw-HilL 1949. Selected writingsof Edward SULLIVAN,HARRY STACK. 1947. Conceptions MEAD, MARGARET. 1961. Anthropology Sapir in language, culture,and person- of modern psychiatry. Washington: among the sciences.American Anthropol- ality. Edited by David Mandelbaum. William Alanson White Psychiatric ogist 63:475-82. Berkeley: Universityof California Press. Foundation. MURDOCK,G. P. 1957. Worldethnographic SCHAFER, WILHELM. 1956. Der kritische THIEL, PHILIP. 1961. A sequence-experience sample. American Anthropologist 59: raum und die kritischesituation in der notation for architectural and urban 664-87. [JLF*] tierischensozietat. Frankfurt:Kramer. space. Town Planning Review, April, pp. OsMoND,HUMPHREY. 1957. Functionas SCHLESINGER,ARTHUR M., JR. 1965. A 33-52. the basis of psychiatricward design. thousanddays. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. TINBERGEN, NnKo. 1952. The curious Mental Hospitals (ArchitecturalSupple- [WL*] behavior of the Stickleback. Scientific ment)April, pp. 23-29. SEBEOK,T. A. 1963. Review of: Porpoises American 187(6):22-26. [ST*] PARKES,A. S., and H. M. BRUCE. 1961. and sonar, by WinthropN. Kellogg - 1958. Curious naturalists.New York: Olfactorystimuli in mammalianreproduc- (Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, Basic Books. tion.Science 134:1049-54. 1961) and Communicationamong social TRAGER,G. L. 1963. Linguistics is lin- PORTMANN,ADOLF. 1959. Animalcamou- hees, by Martin Lindauer (Cambridge: guistics.Studies in Linguistics:Occasional flage.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan HarvardUniversity Press, 1961). Language Papers, no. 10. [GLT*] Press. 39:448-66. [MD*] UEXKULL,J. VON.1926. Theoreticalbiology. REuscH, JURGEN.1961. Therapeuticcom- SELYE, HANS. 1956. The stressof life. New New York: Harcourt,Brace. [WL*] munication.New York:Mouton. York: McGraw-Hill. WALLACE, ANTHONYF. C. 1961. Culture ROE, ANNE, and GEORGE G. SIMPsON. SNYDER, ROBERT. 1961. Evolution and and personality.New York: Random Editors.1958. Behaviorand evolution. integrationof mechanismsthat regulate House. [DH*] New Haven:Yale UniversityPress. population growth.National Academy of WATSON,MICHAEL, and THEODOREGRAVES. ROSENBLITH,WALTER A. 1961. Sensory Sciences47:449-55. 1966. An analysisof proxemicbehavior. communication.New York: The M.I.T. SPIrz, RENA A. 1964. The derailmentof AmericanAnthropologist 68:971-85. Pressand JohnWiley & Sons. dialogue. Stimulusoverload, action cycles, WHORF, BENJAMINLEE. 1956. Language, SAPIR, EDWARD. 1929. The statusof lin- and the completiongradient. Journal of thought, and reality. New York: The guisticsas a science.Language 5:207- the American PsychoanalyticAssociation TechnologyPress and JohnWiley & Sons. 214. 12:752-75. WYNNE-EDWARDS,V. C. 1962. Animal ---. 1931. Conceptualcategories in primi- SROLE, LEO, et al. 1962. Mental health in dispersion in relation to social behavior. tivelanguages. Science 74(578). [DH*] the metropolis:The Midtown Manhattan New York: Hafner.

veryinteresting, particularly numbers 1) possiblerelationship between a set OUR READERS WRITE of linguisticdata and a setof ethnolog- (Continued frompage 82) ical and social data; 3) dependency of linguisticborrowing on cultural Insteadof devotinga singlearticle to anatomists,palaeontologists (see D.F. diffusion;and 4) synthesisof linguistic influencesof several factorson -con- Robertsin AJPA, #2, 1966) or will principlesas a science(including the temporaryfamily life, as suggestedby we remainan adjunctto cultural?They Americanschool, the Prague Circle, PhilippeGarigue (CA 8:145), a more need us, but can we affordto need and the Soviet School). Regarding satisfactoryevaluation may be one them,and still do creative,publish- No. 1, it would be very useful to reviewarticle for one or two related able researchon a scholarlylevel consultProf. J. L. Fischerof Tulane factorsexerting such influence. whichwill satisfythe demandsof the University.To deal withNo. 4, a CA institutionfor eminence in the field? panel should be set up. (A case in L. K. MAHAPATRA Will thesynthesizer be sufficientlyre- point is the concept of "American Orissa,India cognizedto survive?Also, what about School" which does not appear to the positionof womenin anthropol- exist.) OLGA S. AKHMANOVA A review article dealing with the ogy, esp. physical anthropology,in cultural dynamics of population ourlarger institutions? Moscow,U.S.S.R. migration(immigration, emigration, internalmigration, etc.). It would be CHARLOTTE M. OTTEN It wouldbe usefulif CA wouldpublish especiallyinteresting to consider:(1) DeKalb, Ill.. U.S.A. a listof Foundationsand othergrant- quantitativeaspects (scales & trajec- givingagencies that will accept ap- toriesof migratoryflow over the past I like Ritchie'sidea (CA 8:145) of an plicationsfrom individuals. Too many 50-60 years); (2) qualitativeaspects assessmentof the Human Relations only concernthemselves with large (major culturechange factors related Area Files. It could includereferences sums for institutions,whereas an- to significanthuman migrations, con- to booksand good articlesfrom those thropologyis stillone of thedisciplines temporaryand historical);(3) special who have successfullyused thefiles in whereuseful work can be done on a attentionto world areas, countries, research,to guidethose who could use one man basis. societiesin whichmigration is or has suggestionson applicationsof thefiles. JAMES H. CHAPLIN beena prominentfactor in culturalre- Uganda organizationand/or specific kinds of RALPH S. RIFFENBURGH "development." Pasadena,California, U.S.A. JOHN B. CORNELL A full scale appraisal of the origin U.S.A. of domesticatedcorn (maize) with Austin,Tex., Although I disagree with Roberto botanistsand archaeologistsmating Escalante'sgeneral appreciation of van theirdata. I would like to see a discussionof the der Merwe'sarticle (I have no doubt NoRMAN B. TINDALE ptlaceof physicalanthropology (human that CA was rightto publishit), I Adelaide,Australia iology)in the disciplineas a whole: thinkEscalante's suggestions (See CA are we going to become geneticists, 7:491) forpossible linguistic topics are (Continuedon page224)

108 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY