Abstract
ABSTRACT In Sex and Temperament (1935), Margaret Mead depicted the Mountain Arapesh as a nurturing, peace‐loving people. But Mead's second husband and fieldwork partner, Reo Fortune, disagreed with this in a 1939 article, “Arapesh Warfare,” which presented evidence that before pacification Arapesh society countenanced warfare. Here we show that “Arapesh Warfare” also contains a submerged argument against Mead's personal integrity and ethnographic authority. Sex and Temperament had its own personal subtext, and Fortune responded to it by mobilizing rhetorical strategies drawn from an Arapesh framework of speaking. Our analysis provides insight into Fortune's position in an anthropological disagreement that has been seen primarily from Mead's perspective—when it has been seen at all. Fortune's peculiar approach also speaks to a limitation on reflexivity in anthropology: the illegitimacy of criticizing personal motives in cases of ethnographic dispute, although we know scholarly works are always suffused with their authors’ personal histories and perspectives.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
