Kinship and Family: An Anthropological Reader (review)

Abstract

Robert Parkin & Linda Stone (eds.), and Family: An Anthropological Reader. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2004.496 pp. stated purpose of this collection of readings is to trace ...the development of mainstream kinship theory... (viii) and to provide intellectual genealogy of its treatment. To accomplish this purpose, two original contributions and 22 previously published materials are provided along with a general introduction, four separate section introductions, a glossary, and an index. contributions are organized into two major parts: as Social Structure: and Alliance and as Culture, Process, and Agency. first part primarily concerns anthropological kinship from its inception to the 1970s while the latter focuses upon its decline and subsequent resurgence since then. Each part contains two sections. Part One is divided into Descent and Marriage and Terminology and Affinal Alliance. second part is divided into the sections; The Demise and Revival of Kinship and Contemporary Directions in Kinship. Although loosely organized along historical lines, the readings do not provide the reader with a full historical tracing of influential thoughts and concerns in kinship. selection of materials is fairly restricted. In the first part, the focus is upon descent and alliance theories. Here, early as well as post1970 materials are included to principally provide a critique of these theories. second part principally deals with Schneider's critique of kinship and the contemporary focus upon culture as a symbolic system in understanding fundamental social relations. In this part, the editors see culture ...as a better way of understanding indigenous notions of kinship or 'relatedness' than the more analytical schools of the (ix). There is little attention paid to recent evolutionary biological explanations of human social behavior. In any collection of readings, one expects that editorial decisions to include or exclude materials will not agree completely with those someone else may choose. However, it was still surprising to me to discover that writings of past luminaries such as Morgan, Malinowski, and Radcliffe-Brown, were absent. While the editors have included some interesting readings by authors not as well known, the absence of the writings of important contributors to the history of kinship, Morgan's work, for example, seems inexcusable. editors obviously recognize the importance of his work since there is a detailed discussion of Morgan's contribution to kinship in the general introduction. Approximately 20% of the twenty-page general introduction is directly concerned with Morgan. There are also descriptions of the reactions to his ideas in this introduction. Furthermore, throughout the book there are over three dozen references to Morgan's work and influence. Since Morgan's contribution is clearly significant, why isn't there a sample of his work? Isn't it appropriate for a student to see original material and let it speak for itself? An original document would be preferable to lengthy references to the work by an editor. Isn't the purpose of a Reader to allow the student direct access to the ideas of the original author? editorial role, it seems to me, should be primarily choosing the readings and providing the necessary background for this material. It should not be to write exegeses of the significant contributions to kinship that have been omitted from the collection of writings. Those should be kept for a separate book. reason Morgan's and others' writings have been omitted from the collection of readings can be deduced from the editors' choice of readings for the first section. This section, misleadingly titled Descent and Marriage, begins with a discussion of social groups and a critique of Morgan's evolutionary scheme by Robert Lowie. He, using a range of ethnographic examples, argues that the distribution of matrilineal and patrilineal systems is not due to some simple evolutionary sequence or differences in the intellectual capabilities of people but is the expression of responses to cultural environments. …