 |
 |
Interesting, what you say about TL's undamaged reputation in USA, whereas in my (limited) experience UK folklorists/anthropologists disapproved of her being so tolerant towards the outlooks and practices she described --- exactly the opposite reason to that given by some participants in theis list! As a friend of mine used to say, 'If you walk down the middle of the road you're probably on the right track, but you do get shot at from both sides.' Jacqueline --- Sabina Magliocco <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I'm afraid I have to disagree with Al, who wrote: > > Apparently a number of scholars felt she got too > personally involved > >and lost her objectivity. > > > > You know she won't have anything to do with this > field of study now, right? > > Luhrmann's study was fairly well-received by > academic anthropologists. I don't recall reviews > attacking her objectivity. She has not left this > field of study at all, if what you mean by that is > the anthropological study of religion; in fact, she > went on to produce a study of American psychiatry as > a kind of religion, and a study of Hindu religiosity > and ritual in India. She is one of the most highly > regarded anthropologists of religion in the US; she > holds a tenured professorship at the University of > Chicago, a bastion of great anthropological > scholarship; she chaired the 2004 American > Anthropological Association meetings in Atlanta; and > she was head of the Anthropology of Religion > subsection of the AAA. So her study of Witchcraft > has hardly damaged her career or reputation. > > Please note that I am not justifying her research > ethics. In these post-"Darkness in Eldorado" days, > I believe they would be held to higher scrutiny by > her peers; but PotWC was published in 1989. > > BB, > Sabina > > > ---- Original message ---- > >Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:35:46 -0800 > >From: Al Billings <[log in to unmask]> > >Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Persuasions of > the Witch's Craft > >To: [log in to unmask] > > > >heliade wrote: > >> Hi, this is a question that might be best > answered by the anthropologists here... You know > Tanya Luhrman's "Persuasions of the Witch's Craft"? > Well, I know that many, or is it most, of the > Witches and Magicians that she studied felt that she > hadn't represented them corectly, or that she was > sarcastic or otherwise betrayed them. > >> > >> Is this the only complaint about her methods / > book? How is it seen academically? Is it considered > to have been done 'correctly'? In other words, was > her only 'crime' to - in journalistic terms - burn > her sources? Or was there something else wrong with > or objectionable about her work? > >> > >> (I used to own the book, lent it out, never got > it back, and I've just re-ordered it from amazon). > >> > > > > Apparently a number of scholars felt she got too > personally involved > >and lost her objectivity. > > > > You know she won't have anything to do with this > field of study now, right? > > > >Al > Sabina Magliocco > Associate Professor > Department of Anthropology > California State University > 18111 Nordhoff St. > Northridge, CA 91330-8244 > ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com