Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [SACC-L] for Lloyd

Expand Messages
  • Deborah Shepherd
    Lloyd, Fyi, my last three attempts to email you directly over the past 5 minutes have been blocked by your email server--again. Nothing important, though. Was
    Message 1 of 16 , Dec 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Lloyd,

      Fyi, my last three attempts to email you directly over the past 5 minutes have been blocked by your email server--again. Nothing important, though. Was just trying to reply to your last email.

      Deborah
    • George Thomas
      I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of teaching points and teachable-moment-inducing
      Message 2 of 16 , Dec 3, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'. 
        Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries.  Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
        But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5.  Works for me.  Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
        :-)
        G
         
            Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
            Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))

        I think I can shed some light.  In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter.  The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:

        FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
        "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology."  The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper.  John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend.  The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).

        So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991.  I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.

        Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields.  Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate.  Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker.  SACC is just ahead of the curve!

        Lloyd




        On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:

        > Mark — You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
        > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
        > — so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
        >
        > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
        > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
        > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
        > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
        > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
        > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Kaupp, Ann
        > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
        > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
        > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
        >
        > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
        > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
        > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
        > To: List SACC-L
        > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
        >
        > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
        > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
        > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
        > in
        > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
        >
        > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
        > running for a lot of years..
        >
        > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
        > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
        > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
        > meetings in California.
        >
        > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>
        >





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Lloyd Miller
        Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month s AN-- The Future of Anthropology theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop
        Message 3 of 16 , Dec 3, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
          Lloyd


          On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:

          > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'.
          > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries. Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
          > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5. Works for me. Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
          > :-)
          > G
          >
          > Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
          > Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
          >
          > I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
          >
          > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
          > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
          >
          > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991. I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
          >
          > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead of the curve!
          >
          > Lloyd
          >
          > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
          >
          > > Mark � You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
          > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
          > > � so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
          > >
          > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
          > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
          > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
          > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
          > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
          > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
          > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > From: Kaupp, Ann
          > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
          > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
          > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
          > >
          > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
          > >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
          > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
          > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
          > > To: List SACC-L
          > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
          > >
          > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
          > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
          > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
          > > in
          > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
          > >
          > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
          > > running for a lot of years..
          > >
          > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
          > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
          > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
          > > meetings in California.
          > >
          > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>
          > >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • George Thomas
          This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems.  I spent some time, when introducing the fields of anthropology to my
          Message 4 of 16 , Dec 4, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems.  I spent some time, when introducing the "fields" of anthropology to my "cultural" classes, explaining how one might redraw boundary lines among the "official" fields, and even outside the box (even mentioning that it helps if you own the box).
            Still, on tests, impressions came feeding back that they had learned the "four and sometimes five fields" dutifully and by rote, and that they had learned the catechism.
            After l'arning 'em, I got to re-l'arnin and un'l'arning really fast, and I'm sure even then it didn't catch on.
            And what's this alien concept...."disseminating knowledge cooperatively," "cooperation," "cooperativeness", etc?  Unfamiliar..... lost.....
            GT
             
             
                Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                Date: Thu Dec 3, 2009 11:43 am ((PST))

            Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
            Lloyd


            On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:

            > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'. 
            > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries.  Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
            > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5.  Works for me.  Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
            > :-)
            > G

            >     Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
            >     Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
            >
            > I think I can shed some light.  In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter.  The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
            >
            > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
            > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology."  The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper.  John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend.  The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
            >
            > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991.  I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
            >
            > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields.  Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate.  Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker.  SACC is just ahead of the curve!
            >
            > Lloyd
            >
            > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
            >
            > > Mark — You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
            > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
            > > — so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
            > >
            > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
            > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
            > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
            > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
            > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
            > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > From: Kaupp, Ann
            > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
            > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
            > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
            > >
            > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
            > >
            > > -----Original Message-----
            > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
            > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
            > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
            > > To: List SACC-L
            > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
            > >
            > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
            > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
            > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
            > > in
            > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
            > >
            > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
            > > running for a lot of years..
            > >
            > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
            > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
            > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
            > > meetings in California.
            > >
            > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Mark Lewine
            ... From: Lloyd Miller To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4
            Message 5 of 16 , Dec 6, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Lloyd Miller" <lloyd.miller@...>
              To: <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 3:03 PM
              Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.


              I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after
              taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I
              reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology
              Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:

              FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
              "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent
              developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year
              added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes
              on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U
              (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay
              C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein
              (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).

              So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991.
              I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or
              whose idea it was first.

              Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still
              seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to
              change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't
              acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most
              legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead
              of the curve!

              Lloyd




              On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:

              > Mark - You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
              > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
              > - so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
              >
              > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
              > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
              > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
              > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
              > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
              > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: Kaupp, Ann
              > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
              > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
              > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
              >
              > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
              > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
              > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
              > To: List SACC-L
              > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
              >
              > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
              > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
              > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
              > in
              > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
              >
              > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
              > running for a lot of years..
              >
              > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
              > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
              > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
              > meetings in California.
              >
              > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > Find out more at our web page
              > :http://webs.anokaramsey.edu/sacc/Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
              >



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              ------------------------------------

              Find out more at our web page :http://webs.anokaramsey.edu/sacc/Yahoo!
              Groups Links
            • Mark Lewine
              This debate of four or five fields partly reflects the strange preoccupation in the US with linear lists... top ten , and being first or second or third...in
              Message 6 of 16 , Dec 6, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                This debate of four or five fields partly reflects the strange preoccupation in the US with linear lists..."top ten", and being first or second or third...in Cleveland we get some perverse pleasure (and sometimes more chances of greater share for public funds) when we are labeled "#1 poverty city in the US".

                The specific issue in anthropology of legitimizing "fields" was taken extremely seriously by those who identify with the subfield and category of 'applied anthropology'...Marietta "Metta" Baba wrote a serious paper on Applied as a Fifth Field and delivered it to a SACC sponsored Five Fields Symposium when I was an organizer of same, which is what I remembered, but whether that was the 'first' or 'second' time is silly as the substantive debate continues, as it did in one of the sessions I just attended at AAA Many anthros really do think that if you give 'applied' its own field that you somehow are not allowed to have an applied aspect within each of the other four! Meanwhile, those in applied are smarting from what they perceive as a low prestige ranking system within the fields given to applied. Furthermore, applied folks actually think its important to distinguish themselves from 'practicing' anthropologists, because applied has 'theory' behind it, and 'practice' does not! But wait, since the NAPA folks have been so successful (and get paid so much as consultants when they are hired) they are now being favored and catered to in the august AAA! So, I now declare (and did so in two sessions at AAA) that all teachers of anthropology are "practioners". (and should then be paid more and given free leases for cool cars)
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: George Thomas
                To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:08 AM
                Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.



                This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems. I spent some time, when introducing the "fields" of anthropology to my "cultural" classes, explaining how one might redraw boundary lines among the "official" fields, and even outside the box (even mentioning that it helps if you own the box).
                Still, on tests, impressions came feeding back that they had learned the "four and sometimes five fields" dutifully and by rote, and that they had learned the catechism.
                After l'arning 'em, I got to re-l'arnin and un'l'arning really fast, and I'm sure even then it didn't catch on.
                And what's this alien concept...."disseminating knowledge cooperatively," "cooperation," "cooperativeness", etc? Unfamiliar..... lost.....
                GT


                Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                Date: Thu Dec 3, 2009 11:43 am ((PST))

                Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
                Lloyd

                On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:

                > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'.
                > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries. Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
                > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5. Works for me. Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
                > :-)
                > G
                >
                > Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                > Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
                >
                > I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
                >
                > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
                > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
                >
                > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991. I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
                >
                > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead of the curve!
                >
                > Lloyd
                >
                > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
                >
                > > Mark — You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
                > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
                > > — so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
                > >
                > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
                > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
                > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
                > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
                > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
                > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
                > > ----- Original Message -----
                > > From: Kaupp, Ann
                > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
                > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
                > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                > >
                > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
                > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
                > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
                > > To: List SACC-L
                > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                > >
                > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
                > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
                > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
                > > in
                > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
                > >
                > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
                > > running for a lot of years..
                > >
                > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
                > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
                > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
                > > meetings in California.
                > >
                > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Lynch, Brian M
                This discussion has led me to reflect on my own exposure to applied anthropology. In a recent post in fact I noted one of the touchstone books I relate to my
                Message 7 of 16 , Dec 6, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  This discussion has led me to reflect on my own exposure to "applied" anthropology. In a recent post in fact I noted one of the touchstone books I relate to my early exposure to anthropology (I'm going to show my relatively young age here!) It was Hymes' Reinventing Anthropology. I recall the sense it gave me of the renewed relevance of anthropology to the social/political climate of the mid-1970's. Laura Nader's work struck me especially in that collection, as her brother Ralph was such a role model at that the time of doing serious research into the pressing consumer/social/political issues of the day; Laura's connection with anthropology made so much sense... toward "studying up"... with purpose. (Ah! Practical anthropology!)
                  My return to anthro. in the late 1980's for grad work and PhD studies put me in contact with a number of people at UConn. who each had different takes on "Practicing Anthropology" and "Applied Anthropology." The applied folks were doing "action research"...in Hartford (community research, health and community related)...some were prominent in nutrition and health (oral rehydration therapy, among other things). "Practicing Anthropology" people (who actually had a paper/newsletter of the same name) seemed to be more "critical anthropology" oriented, with a broader critique of society behind their practical emphasis.
                  Ferraro's Cultural Anthro.:An Applied Perspective was the first text I saw that seemed to integrate things well in the mid-late 90's.

                  Brian

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Mark Lewine
                  Sent: Sun 12/6/2009 8:38 PM
                  To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.

                  This debate of four or five fields partly reflects the strange preoccupation in the US with linear lists..."top ten", and being first or second or third...in Cleveland we get some perverse pleasure (and sometimes more chances of greater share for public funds) when we are labeled "#1 poverty city in the US".

                  The specific issue in anthropology of legitimizing "fields" was taken extremely seriously by those who identify with the subfield and category of 'applied anthropology'...Marietta "Metta" Baba wrote a serious paper on Applied as a Fifth Field and delivered it to a SACC sponsored Five Fields Symposium when I was an organizer of same, which is what I remembered, but whether that was the 'first' or 'second' time is silly as the substantive debate continues, as it did in one of the sessions I just attended at AAA Many anthros really do think that if you give 'applied' its own field that you somehow are not allowed to have an applied aspect within each of the other four! Meanwhile, those in applied are smarting from what they perceive as a low prestige ranking system within the fields given to applied. Furthermore, applied folks actually think its important to distinguish themselves from 'practicing' anthropologists, because applied has 'theory' behind it, and 'practice' does not! But wait, since the NAPA folks have been so successful (and get paid so much as consultants when they are hired) they are now being favored and catered to in the august AAA! So, I now declare (and did so in two sessions at AAA) that all teachers of anthropology are "practioners". (and should then be paid more and given free leases for cool cars)
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: George Thomas
                  To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:08 AM
                  Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.



                  This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems. I spent some time, when introducing the "fields" of anthropology to my "cultural" classes, explaining how one might redraw boundary lines among the "official" fields, and even outside the box (even mentioning that it helps if you own the box).
                  Still, on tests, impressions came feeding back that they had learned the "four and sometimes five fields" dutifully and by rote, and that they had learned the catechism.
                  After l'arning 'em, I got to re-l'arnin and un'l'arning really fast, and I'm sure even then it didn't catch on.
                  And what's this alien concept...."disseminating knowledge cooperatively," "cooperation," "cooperativeness", etc? Unfamiliar..... lost.....
                  GT


                  Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                  Date: Thu Dec 3, 2009 11:43 am ((PST))

                  Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
                  Lloyd

                  On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:

                  > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'.
                  > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries. Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
                  > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5. Works for me. Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
                  > :-)
                  > G
                  >
                  > Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                  > Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
                  >
                  > I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
                  >
                  > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
                  > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
                  >
                  > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991. I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
                  >
                  > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead of the curve!
                  >
                  > Lloyd
                  >
                  > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
                  >
                  > > Mark - You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
                  > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
                  > > - so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
                  > >
                  > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
                  > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
                  > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
                  > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
                  > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
                  > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
                  > > ----- Original Message -----
                  > > From: Kaupp, Ann
                  > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
                  > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
                  > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                  > >
                  > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
                  > >
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
                  > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
                  > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
                  > > To: List SACC-L
                  > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                  > >
                  > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
                  > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
                  > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
                  > > in
                  > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
                  > >
                  > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
                  > > running for a lot of years..
                  > >
                  > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
                  > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
                  > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
                  > > meetings in California.
                  > >
                  > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • George Thomas
                  Ferraro s Applied Perspective take on cultural anthro could join that paper presented by Marietta Baba as a slam-dunk justification for glorified social
                  Message 8 of 16 , Dec 7, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ferraro's "Applied Perspective" take on cultural anthro could join that paper presented by Marietta Baba as a slam-dunk justification for glorified social work..... I mean applied anthro's annointment as Field Five.  Clearly we are setting ourselves up for weighty arguments over whether it's really archaeology that should be relegated to "Last Position" in our pedagogical pantheon, as Mark suggests.  Speaking of archaeology, an image of buried hatchets comes to mind.  I hope this doesn't involve direct association -- that is, hatchets found embedded in split skulls.
                    I agree that Ferraro's text (a new edition seemingly each year, and now co-authored by Susan Andreatta) treats the interrelated nature of our "subfields" very well. Large acreage of his text seem no more anthropological than most journalism features or magazine articles, but he then surprises the reader with an interesting concept or observation, and some perspectives that haven't graced many intro textbooks before. I felt compelled to add a lecture on socialization, because Ferraro's text had no such chapter, and one missed out on so much early childhood "stuff" that accounts for learned cultural knowledge that we assume to be instinctive. Otherwise this intro text goes quite a long way toward supporting applied anthro as a serious subfield. The biasing influence of the anthropologist's presence in the field is enough to start this justification thing rolling. 
                    Mark L., I missed out on that Marietta Baba paper.  Do you have access to it for emailing/snail-mailing?
                    GT
                     
                        Posted by: "Lynch, Brian M" blynch@... bdlqvcc
                        Date: Sun Dec 6, 2009 6:05 pm ((PST))


                    This discussion has led me to reflect on my own exposure to "applied" anthropology. In a recent post in fact I noted one of the touchstone books I relate to my early exposure to anthropology (I'm going to show my relatively young age here!) It was Hymes' Reinventing Anthropology.  I recall the sense it gave me of the renewed relevance of anthropology to the social/political climate of the mid-1970's.  Laura Nader's work struck me especially in that collection, as her brother Ralph was such a role model at that the time of doing serious research into the pressing consumer/social/political issues of the day; Laura's connection with anthropology made so much sense... toward "studying up"... with purpose. (Ah! Practical anthropology!) 
                    My return to anthro. in the late 1980's for grad work and PhD studies put me in contact with a number of people at UConn. who each had different takes on "Practicing Anthropology" and "Applied Anthropology."  The applied folks were doing "action research"...in Hartford (community research, health and community related)...some were prominent in nutrition and health (oral rehydration therapy, among other things).  "Practicing Anthropology" people (who actually had a paper/newsletter of the same name) seemed to be more "critical anthropology" oriented, with a broader critique of society behind their practical emphasis. 
                    Ferraro's Cultural Anthro.:An Applied Perspective was the first text I saw that seemed to integrate things well in the mid-late 90's.

                    Brian

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Mark Lewine
                    Sent: Sun 12/6/2009 8:38 PM
                    To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.

                    This debate of four or five fields partly reflects the strange preoccupation in the US with linear lists..."top ten", and being first or second or third...in Cleveland we get some perverse pleasure (and sometimes more chances of greater share for public funds) when we are labeled "#1 poverty city in the US".

                    The specific issue in anthropology of legitimizing "fields" was taken extremely seriously by those who identify with the subfield and category of 'applied anthropology'...Marietta "Metta" Baba wrote a serious paper on Applied as a Fifth Field and delivered it to a SACC sponsored Five Fields Symposium when I was an organizer of same, which is what I remembered, but whether that was the 'first' or 'second' time is silly as the substantive debate continues, as it did in one of the sessions I just attended at AAA  Many anthros really do think that if you give 'applied' its own field that you somehow are not allowed to have an applied aspect within each of the other four!  Meanwhile, those in applied are smarting from what they perceive as a low prestige ranking system within the fields given to applied. Furthermore, applied folks actually think its important to distinguish themselves from 'practicing' anthropologists, because applied has 'theory' behind
                    it, and 'practice' does not!  But wait, since the NAPA folks have been so successful (and get paid so much as consultants when they are hired) they are now being favored and catered to in the august AAA!  So, I now declare (and did so in two sessions at AAA) that all teachers of anthropology are "practioners". (and should then be paid more and given free leases for cool cars)
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: George Thomas
                      To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:08 AM
                      Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.


                       
                      This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems.  I spent some time, when introducing the "fields" of anthropology to my "cultural" classes, explaining how one might redraw boundary lines among the "official" fields, and even outside the box (even mentioning that it helps if you own the box).
                      Still, on tests, impressions came feeding back that they had learned the "four and sometimes five fields" dutifully and by rote, and that they had learned the catechism.
                      After l'arning 'em, I got to re-l'arnin and un'l'arning really fast, and I'm sure even then it didn't catch on.
                      And what's this alien concept...."disseminating knowledge cooperatively," "cooperation," "cooperativeness", etc?  Unfamiliar..... lost.....
                      GT
                       
                       
                          Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                          Date: Thu Dec 3, 2009 11:43 am ((PST))

                      Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
                      Lloyd

                      On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:

                      > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'. 
                      > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries.  Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
                      > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5.  Works for me.  Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
                      > :-)
                      > G
                      > 
                      >     Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                      >     Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
                      >
                      > I think I can shed some light.  In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter.  The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
                      >
                      > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
                      > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology."  The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper.  John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend.  The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
                      >
                      > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991.  I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
                      >
                      > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields.  Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate.  Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker.  SACC is just ahead of the curve!
                      >
                      > Lloyd
                      >
                      > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
                      >
                      > > Mark - You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
                      > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
                      > > - so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
                      > >
                      > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
                      > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
                      > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
                      > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
                      > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
                      > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
                      > > ----- Original Message -----
                      > > From: Kaupp, Ann
                      > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
                      > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
                      > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                      > >
                      > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
                      > >
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
                      > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
                      > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
                      > > To: List SACC-L
                      > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                      > >
                      > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
                      > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
                      > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
                      > > in
                      > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
                      > >
                      > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
                      > > running for a lot of years..
                      > >
                      > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
                      > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
                      > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
                      > > meetings in California.
                      > >
                      > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Kaupp, Ann
                    Some schools like the Univ. of Maryland have an applied degree. I agree that anthros in any of the fields could be doing applied. An advantage of having five
                    Message 9 of 16 , Dec 7, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Some schools like the Univ. of Maryland have an applied degree. I agree that anthros in any of the fields could be doing "applied." An advantage of having five fields it gives us an opportunity to have another speaker.

                      From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Lewine
                      Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 8:19 PM
                      To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.



                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Lloyd Miller" <lloyd.miller@...<mailto:lloyd.miller%40mchsi.com>>
                      To: <SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>>
                      Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 3:03 PM
                      Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.

                      I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after
                      taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I
                      reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology
                      Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:

                      FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
                      "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent
                      developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year
                      added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes
                      on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U
                      (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay
                      C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein
                      (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).

                      So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991.
                      I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or
                      whose idea it was first.

                      Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still
                      seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to
                      change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't
                      acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most
                      legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead
                      of the curve!

                      Lloyd

                      On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:

                      > Mark - You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
                      > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
                      > - so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
                      >
                      > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...<mailto:mlewine%40wowway.com>> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
                      > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
                      > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
                      > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
                      > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
                      > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: Kaupp, Ann
                      > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:%27SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>'
                      > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
                      > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                      >
                      > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
                      >
                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com<mailto:SACC-L%40yahoogroups.com>] On
                      > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
                      > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
                      > To: List SACC-L
                      > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                      >
                      > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
                      > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
                      > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
                      > in
                      > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
                      >
                      > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
                      > running for a lot of years..
                      >
                      > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
                      > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
                      > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
                      > meetings in California.
                      >
                      > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Find out more at our web page
                      > :http://webs.anokaramsey.edu/sacc/Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                      ------------------------------------

                      Find out more at our web page :http://webs.anokaramsey.edu/sacc/Yahoo!
                      Groups Links



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Lloyd Miller
                      Marietta Baba s paper is in SACC Notes, Vol. 6, No. 1, March 1999. You can access it on AnthroSource. I think this paper is the longest we ve ever published.
                      Message 10 of 16 , Dec 7, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Marietta Baba's paper is in SACC Notes, Vol. 6, No. 1, March 1999. You can access it on AnthroSource. I think this paper is the longest we've ever published. It was before we set guidelines and length limits. It's a good one, though, maybe even seminal, in that a number of subsequent Five-Fields applied anthropology presenters have referenced her paper in their own presentations.
                        Lloyd


                        On Dec 7, 2009, at 10:40 AM, George Thomas wrote:

                        > Ferraro's "Applied Perspective" take on cultural anthro could join that paper presented by Marietta Baba as a slam-dunk justification for glorified social work..... I mean applied anthro's annointment as Field Five. Clearly we are setting ourselves up for weighty arguments over whether it's really archaeology that should be relegated to "Last Position" in our pedagogical pantheon, as Mark suggests. Speaking of archaeology, an image of buried hatchets comes to mind. I hope this doesn't involve direct association -- that is, hatchets found embedded in split skulls.
                        > I agree that Ferraro's text (a new edition seemingly each year, and now co-authored by Susan Andreatta) treats the interrelated nature of our "subfields" very well. Large acreage of his text seem no more anthropological than most journalism features or magazine articles, but he then surprises the reader with an interesting concept or observation, and some perspectives that haven't graced many intro textbooks before. I felt compelled to add a lecture on socialization, because Ferraro's text had no such chapter, and one missed out on so much early childhood "stuff" that accounts for learned cultural knowledge that we assume to be instinctive. Otherwise this intro text goes quite a long way toward supporting applied anthro as a serious subfield. The biasing influence of the anthropologist's presence in the field is enough to start this justification thing rolling.
                        > Mark L., I missed out on that Marietta Baba paper. Do you have access to it for emailing/snail-mailing?
                        > GT
                        >
                        > Posted by: "Lynch, Brian M" blynch@... bdlqvcc
                        > Date: Sun Dec 6, 2009 6:05 pm ((PST))
                        >
                        > This discussion has led me to reflect on my own exposure to "applied" anthropology. In a recent post in fact I noted one of the touchstone books I relate to my early exposure to anthropology (I'm going to show my relatively young age here!) It was Hymes' Reinventing Anthropology. I recall the sense it gave me of the renewed relevance of anthropology to the social/political climate of the mid-1970's. Laura Nader's work struck me especially in that collection, as her brother Ralph was such a role model at that the time of doing serious research into the pressing consumer/social/political issues of the day; Laura's connection with anthropology made so much sense... toward "studying up"... with purpose. (Ah! Practical anthropology!)
                        > My return to anthro. in the late 1980's for grad work and PhD studies put me in contact with a number of people at UConn. who each had different takes on "Practicing Anthropology" and "Applied Anthropology." The applied folks were doing "action research"...in Hartford (community research, health and community related)...some were prominent in nutrition and health (oral rehydration therapy, among other things). "Practicing Anthropology" people (who actually had a paper/newsletter of the same name) seemed to be more "critical anthropology" oriented, with a broader critique of society behind their practical emphasis.
                        > Ferraro's Cultural Anthro.:An Applied Perspective was the first text I saw that seemed to integrate things well in the mid-late 90's.
                        >
                        > Brian
                        >
                        > -----Original Message-----
                        > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Mark Lewine
                        > Sent: Sun 12/6/2009 8:38 PM
                        > To: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: Re: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                        >
                        > This debate of four or five fields partly reflects the strange preoccupation in the US with linear lists..."top ten", and being first or second or third...in Cleveland we get some perverse pleasure (and sometimes more chances of greater share for public funds) when we are labeled "#1 poverty city in the US".
                        >
                        > The specific issue in anthropology of legitimizing "fields" was taken extremely seriously by those who identify with the subfield and category of 'applied anthropology'...Marietta "Metta" Baba wrote a serious paper on Applied as a Fifth Field and delivered it to a SACC sponsored Five Fields Symposium when I was an organizer of same, which is what I remembered, but whether that was the 'first' or 'second' time is silly as the substantive debate continues, as it did in one of the sessions I just attended at AAA Many anthros really do think that if you give 'applied' its own field that you somehow are not allowed to have an applied aspect within each of the other four! Meanwhile, those in applied are smarting from what they perceive as a low prestige ranking system within the fields given to applied. Furthermore, applied folks actually think its important to distinguish themselves from 'practicing' anthropologists, because applied has 'theory' behind
                        > it, and 'practice' does not! But wait, since the NAPA folks have been so successful (and get paid so much as consultants when they are hired) they are now being favored and catered to in the august AAA! So, I now declare (and did so in two sessions at AAA) that all teachers of anthropology are "practioners". (and should then be paid more and given free leases for cool cars)
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: George Thomas
                        > To: sacc-l@yahoogroups.com
                        > Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:08 AM
                        > Subject: [SACC-L] Re: Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                        >
                        >
                        > This gets a whole lot more counterintuitive and mixed up than it often seems. I spent some time, when introducing the "fields" of anthropology to my "cultural" classes, explaining how one might redraw boundary lines among the "official" fields, and even outside the box (even mentioning that it helps if you own the box).
                        > Still, on tests, impressions came feeding back that they had learned the "four and sometimes five fields" dutifully and by rote, and that they had learned the catechism.
                        > After l'arning 'em, I got to re-l'arnin and un'l'arning really fast, and I'm sure even then it didn't catch on.
                        > And what's this alien concept...."disseminating knowledge cooperatively," "cooperation," "cooperativeness", etc? Unfamiliar..... lost.....
                        > GT
                        >
                        >
                        > Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                        > Date: Thu Dec 3, 2009 11:43 am ((PST))
                        >
                        > Re. our arbitrary boundaries, several good articles in this month's AN--"The Future of Anthropology" theme section--argue that anthropologists should stop obsessing about disciplinary boundaries and anthropology's identity and start producing and disseminating knowledge cooperatively with other disciplines (my words; they said it better).
                        > Lloyd
                        >
                        > On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:30 AM, George Thomas wrote:
                        >
                        > > I would suggest that all the indecision on this petty manner (although really lots of fun, and full of "teaching points" and "teachable-moment-inducing suggestions") has already been swallowed up. If conventional cultural anthropology textbooks can be subtitled, "An Applied Perspective," I guess we "five-fields" activists oughta get crackin'.
                        > > Not only do we teach routinely about the biasing influence of "participant observers" presuming to do "pure research," we are also reminded of the sometimes arbitrary nature of those field boundaries. Like linguistics and the really quite arbitrarily-defined nonsense symbols I'm feeding into this processor of binary codes, we assign meaning based on the patterns with which we've all been hopelessly programmed. (Words are FUN!).
                        > > But hey, I'm all for assigning Applied A. as field #5. Works for me. Either I've accepted uncritically the old Prussian pegagogical device of coercing order in conventional schooling, or I've agreed to the need for heuristic aids for keeping things straight.
                        > > :-)
                        > > G
                        > >
                        > > Posted by: "Lloyd Miller" lloyd.miller@...
                        > > Date: Wed Dec 2, 2009 12:03 pm ((PST))
                        > >
                        > > I think I can shed some light. In the first SACC Notes I put out after taking over the editorship from Tom Stevenson in the fall of 1991, I reprinted SACC's section column from AAA's (then named) Anthropology Newsletter. The headline and a portion of the first paragraph is:
                        > >
                        > > FOUR FIELDS UPDATE BECOMES FIVE
                        > > "The SACC sponsored symposium at the annual AAA conf which presents recent developments in anthropology's four traditional subdisciplines this year added a fifth, the subdiscipline of applied anthropology." The column goes on to summarize each participant's paper. John Cavallo, Rutgers U (archaeology) was unable to attend. The others were Serena Nanda (John Jay C-CUNY--cultural), Susan Philips (Arizona--linguistics), Richard Klein (Chicago--physical), and Aaron Podolefsky (U of N Iowa--applied).
                        > >
                        > > So, our first Five Fields symposium was at the AAA annual meetings of 1991. I can't remember where, nor can I remember exactly how it came about or whose idea it was first.
                        > >
                        > > Interestingly, the more common reference outside of community colleges still seems to be FOUR fields. Maybe the university leadership is just slower to change, or maybe the world of anthropology scholarship still doesn't acknowledge applied as legitimate. Personally, I think applied is a most legitimate endeavor and like the "five fields" moniker. SACC is just ahead of the curve!
                        > >
                        > > Lloyd
                        > >
                        > > On Dec 2, 2009, at 10:56 AM, anthony balzano wrote:
                        > >
                        > > > Mark - You have done so many things but this was not one of them!
                        > > > Five Fields was already established by 1992; it was Four Fields in 1989
                        > > > - so 5-fields must have started in either 1990, 1991 or 1992.
                        > > >
                        > > > >>> "Mark Lewine" <mlewine@...> 12/01/2009 11:09 PM >>>
                        > > > Actually, I remember changing the name when I was Immediate Past-Pres.
                        > > > to Five Fields from Four Fields, I think in 1996-97, because of Marietta
                        > > > Baba's strong paper on Applied Anthropology as a fifth field. She showed
                        > > > that it had theory, history, pedagogy, just like the other fields, so I
                        > > > simply added it and added an invited speaker.
                        > > > ----- Original Message -----
                        > > > From: Kaupp, Ann
                        > > > To: 'SACC-L@yahoogroups.com'
                        > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 2:59 PM
                        > > > Subject: RE: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                        > > >
                        > > > Thank you, Chuck and congratulations. Ann
                        > > >
                        > > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > > From: SACC-L@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SACC-L@yahoogroups.com] On
                        > > > Behalf Of Chuck & Gail Ellenbaum
                        > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:32 PM
                        > > > To: List SACC-L
                        > > > Subject: [SACC-L] Beginning of 4 Field Update at AAA.
                        > > >
                        > > > I found an old letter dated 6/4/86 asking for copies of the papers
                        > > > from our "Four Subfields" session. Our SACC newsletter (Volume 6,
                        > > > Number 1-no date) talks about a SACC Sponsored "Recent Developments
                        > > > in
                        > > > Four Subfields of Anthropology" at the 1983 AAA meetings in Chicago.
                        > > >
                        > > > I hope this helps set a date for this session which we have been
                        > > > running for a lot of years..
                        > > >
                        > > > On a personal note, I am being ordained a Deacon in the Anglican
                        > > > Church in North America on 12/3/09 and will be ordained a priest in
                        > > > the coming summer. Take care and Gail and I hope to see you at the
                        > > > meetings in California.
                        > > >
                        > > > Chuck Ellenbaum ><>
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >



                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.