Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Wyatt HilyardM. ScogginANTH 4102/15/2013                                        Annotated Bibliography       Some of the a...
Appadurai, Arjun. “Putting Hierarchy in Its Place.” Cultural Anthropology 3.1 (1988): 36–49. Web. 15       Feb. 2013. <htt...
George Ayittey on Cheetahs Vs. Hippos. Video on TED.com. Film.         <http://www.ted.com/talks/george_ayittey_on_cheetah...
the famous bonobo, Kanzi, and his ability to understand spoken English and communicate back by useof graphic symbols. She ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

410 annotated bibliography

751 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

410 annotated bibliography

  1. 1. Wyatt HilyardM. ScogginANTH 4102/15/2013 Annotated Bibliography Some of the articles in this bibliography were drawn from items of interest from previousclasses, others were not. My work as an anthropologist is, up until this point, purely academic. I havenot yet done any field work in my area of interest, primatology, though I hope to continue onto fieldschool or some other form of field work. As such, many of my articles are primate-based. I have alwaysfound Sue Savage-Rumbaughs work interesting, though I had not had any real direct knowledge of herpublications until recently. One of Karen Striers books was used as the textbook for my primatologyclass, which prompted me to research her work more in-depth. Though Frans de Waal is somewhatcontroversial within anthropology due to his data collection methods (his bonobo field work was donealmost exclusively in captivity) I included him because he has been gaining traction in the popularmedia over the last few years. Athough my main interest is primatology, I do have quite a few cultural sources. I actuallysurprised myself at how many cultural articles I found myself drawn to, particularly George Ayittey andvarious critiques of his work. In a class last year, we watched the TED Talk I included and I loved hisideas of internal mending for the continent of Africa. It was interesting to read reviews of his work;there are many criticisms of his ideology and methodology.
  2. 2. Appadurai, Arjun. “Putting Hierarchy in Its Place.” Cultural Anthropology 3.1 (1988): 36–49. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/656307>.Discusses hierarchy in an ethnographic sense. It is largely a critique and modernization of variousanthropologists work, focusing on Dumont. Appadurai presents three different angles by which tothink about hierarchy in a specific culture.Appadurai, Arjun. “Theory in Anthropology: Center and Periphery.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 28.2 (1986): 356–361. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/178976>.A critique of the concept of cultural relativism, and plays with the idea that “some others are moreother than others.” He uses Ortners work quite a bit to compare and contrast.Ayittey, George B.N., The Fund for Peace, and Pauline H. Baker. “Africa Fails Again.” Foreign Policy 174 (2009): 14–16. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/20684908>.This is a publication of two articles: Ayitteys initial article and Bakers reply. Ayitteys perspective isfrom an internal lens (hes Ghana-born) and he believes the continent has too many “educatedbuffoons” in power that dont know how or dont want to distribute wealth and power fairly. Hissummation of the continents fate is “gloomy” according to Baker, who cites several resolved conflictsand steps in the right direction.Bermudez, Esmeralda. “In L.A., Speaking ‘Mexican’ to Fit In.” Los Angeles Times 3 Nov. 2008. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/03/local/me-salvadoran3>.A newspaper article, but an important reminder that aspects of racism and social issues that culturalanthropologists discuss are, in fact, real world issues. Sometimes anthropology gets a little too“armchair” and forgets that real people are being affected daily by social issues.Boas, Franz. “Individual, Family, Population, and Race.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 87.2 (1943): 161–164. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/985093>.Lays out Boass definitions of the title terms. I felt a Boas entry was important because of hiscontribution to the field of cultural anthropology and the fact that some of his ideas still live on inmodern theories.Clapham, Christopher. Review of Ayitteys “Africa in Chaos.” International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-) 75.1 (1999): 181–182. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2625527>.For the most part, Clapham agrees with Ayitteys views on Africas problems and their causes. He takesissue with the anecdote-based nature of the original article, and the fact that his assumptions are basedon an idealized view of African pre-colonial history.de Waal, Frans B. M. “The Communicative Repertoire of Captive Bonobos (Pan Paniscus), Compared to That of Chimpanzees.” Behaviour 106.3/4 (1988): 183–251. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4534707.>.Compares and contrasts the modes of communication of captive bonobos against those of chimpanzees.Has some great tables of the time budgets of the individuals he was studying.de Waal, Frans B. M. “Complementary Methods and Convergent Evidence in the Study of Primate Social Cognition.” Behaviour 118.3/4 (1991): 297–320. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4534969>.Covers the state of primate social cognition studies at the time. Includes some interesting methodologyand theory.
  3. 3. George Ayittey on Cheetahs Vs. Hippos. Video on TED.com. Film. <http://www.ted.com/talks/george_ayittey_on_cheetahs_vs_hippos.html>.Ayitteys main point is that Africa, as a continent, needs to stop accepting foreign aid and start fixingitself from the inside. He claims that those in power are not doing anything/enough to help their people,and the trickle-down method does not work.Just, Peter. “Time and Leisure in the Elaboration of Culture.” Journal of Anthropological Research 36.1 (1980): 105–115. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/3629555>.Discusses the importance of leisure time in hunter-gatherer societies. He postulates that as the act ofsubsistence took more time to accomplish, the time that was left became more precious and valuable.King, Barbara J. “Is Fieldwork Feminine?” The Women’s Review of Books 8.9 (1991): 19–20. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4021030.>.A critique of a book on the “Leakeys Angels.” The books author claims the three women had adifferent approach to primatology than their male contemporaries. King generally agrees with theauthor that improving the ways in which humans interact with and endanger animals and theirenvironments was more important to those three women than social status or scientific recognition.Lemarchand, Rene. Review of Ayitteys “Africa in Chaos” African Studies Review 41.2 (1998): 188– 190. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/524854>.A very interesting, very critical review of Ayitteys article and work. He takes the hole in data thatClapham saw and runs with it. He claims that Ayittey picks and chooses examples that fit his view ofthe “vampire state” and completely ignores all the examples against it. Lemarchands last linewonderfully sums up his thoughts of Ayittey: “Whether he himself qualifies as an intellectual is whatremains in doubt.”McGrew, W. C. “New Wine in New Bottles: Prospects and Pitfalls of Cultural Primatology.” Journal of Anthropological Research 63.2 (2007): 167–183. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/20371148>.Focuses on the issues that arise when studying cultural primatology, specifically with chimpanzeepopulations. Tackles the issues of essentially ethnographic research on another species, and speculatesthat over time we may be able to hone methodology and theory to properly deal with those subjects.Rabinow, Paul. “Beyond Ethnography: Anthropology as Nominalism.” Cultural Anthropology 3.4 (1988): 355–364. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/656482>.Rodman, P. S. “Whither Primatology? The Place of Primates in Contemporary Anthropology.” Annual Review of Anthropology 28 (1999): 311–339. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/223397>.Provides another view of primatologys place in anthropology. Provides the same kind of history thatStrier does, but adds sections of interesting ecology data. Covers almost all aspects of primate life anduses examples of specific species.Savage-Rumbaugh, E. Sue et al. “The Capacity of Animals to Acquire Language: Do Species Differences Have Anything to Say to Us?” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 308.1135 (1985): 177–185. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2396292>.Starts by covering the history of attempting to teach apes language. She overviews her own research of
  4. 4. the famous bonobo, Kanzi, and his ability to understand spoken English and communicate back by useof graphic symbols. She stresses that apes do not have the vocal chord range to actually speak languageas humans do.Savage-Rumbaugh, E. Sue, and Duane M. Rumbaugh. “Ape Language Research Is Alive and Well: A Reply.” Anthropos 77.3/4 (1982): 568–573. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/40460489.>.In this very well structured response article, Savage-Rumbaugh and Rumbaugh provide individualresponses to eight assertions made in the original Umiker-Sebok/Sebok article. The original article usedthe Clever Hans experiments to make broad assumptions about the concept of teaching animals tocommunicate with humans. The authors of the reply demonstrate that their research is much morescientifically valid and serious than the earlier explorations.Silk, Joan B. “Using the ‘F’-Word in Primatology.” Behaviour 139.2/3 (2002): 421–446. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4535929>.Critiques the use of anthropomorphic terms in primatology. The F-word referred to in the title, andthroughout the article, is friendship. I assumed she would be against anthropomorphizing, but sheseems to be for it given there is closer attention paid to methodology.Strier, Karen B. “Primate Behavioral Ecology: From Ethnography to Ethology and Back.” American Anthropologist 105.1 (2003): 16–27. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1525/aa.2003.105.1.16/abstract>.In-depth coverage of primatologys history and ethnographic roots. Very good basis for primatologistsabout their field.Strier, Karen B. “Why Anthropology Needs Primatology.” General Anthropology 18.1 (2011): 1–8. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1939- 3466.2011.00002.x/abstract>.Defends the discipline of primatology within the umbrella of anthropology; helps answer the questionof why non-humans should be included in a field that studies humans. Provides an interesting history ofprimatology as a biological science.Wadley, Reed L., Carol J. Pierce Colfer, and Ian G. Hood. “Hunting Primates and Managing Forests: The Case of Iban Forest Farmers in Indonesian Borneo.” Human Ecology 25.2 (1997): 243– 271. Web. 15 Feb. 2013. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4603238>.Contains some very detailed data about the hunting patterns of Iban farmers. The focus of the article ison primates, and how often they are singled out as opposed to other large mammals.

×