Instructor: Terri Castaneda
Monday Evening: 6-8:45 pm (Spring 2005)
Mendocino Hall 4003
Office Hrs: Wed/Fri 10-11 (and by appt.)
Email: tac@csus.edu
Faculty Web page: www.csus.edu/indiv/c/castanedat
I. Catalog
Description
ANTH 205. Ethnology.
Seminar is designed for students to develop a working knowledge of
anthropological approaches to a number of major issues in ethnology. The focus
is on the analysis of case studies. 3 units.
II. Required
Texts
Buckley, Thomas
2002 Standing
Ground: Yurok Indian Spirituality, 1850-1990.. Berkeley: U of California Press.
Darian-Smith, Eve
2004 New Capitalists: Law, Politics, & Identity Surrounding Casino Gaming on Native American Land. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Nagel, Joane
1997 American Indian Ethnic Renewal. Oxford U Press.
Niezen, Ronald
2003 The
Origins of Indigenism. Berkeley: University of California.
Sarris, Greg
1994 Mabel McKay: Weaving the Dream. Berkeley: U of California Press.
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai
2002 Decolonizing Methodologies: Research & Indigenous Peoples. Zed Books.
Warren, Kay and Jean Jackson
2003 Indigenous Movements, Self-Representation and the State in Latin America. Austin: U of Texas Press.
Recommended Texts
Mihesuah, Devon
1998 Natives and Academics. Lincoln: U of Nebraska Press.
Hinton, Leanne
1994 Flutes of Fire: Essays on California Indian Languages. Berkeley: Heyday Books.
Greymorning, Stephen
2004 A Will to Survive:
Indigenous Essays on the Politics of Culture, Language & Identity.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
This course explores the contemporary politics of identity and indigeneity. We will begin with a theoretical discussion of the global indigenous rights movement; examine the contemporary confluence of ethnohistory, postcolonialism, and the state among indigenous peoples in a variety of cross-cultural contexts; and end with a case study focused upon contemporary Native California. This course has three broad objectives. It is designed to 1) introduce students to a wide-range of concepts, theories, and debates in contemporary socio-cultural anthropology, 2) familiarize students with the postcolonial articulation of culture, history and power in Native California, and 3) provide students with experience researching, evaluating, and integrating ethnohistorical documents into cultural analysis and interpretation.
IV. Course
Format & Evaluation
This is a seminar course grounded in intensive reading, discussion, and writing. There will be no lecture, as graduate seminars are designed to introduce you to process of analyzing and producing scholarship. Each of you is expected to make timely and consistent appearances in class; to complete the assigned readings in full and to produce notes that can aid in your synthesis and review of the readings; to make meaningful contributions to each and every class discussion; and to respect both your peers and the corpus of scholarly material with which the class is engaged.
Evaluation will be based on three components:
|
A. Class Participation 30 % |
B. Essays 30 % |
C.
Group Ethnohistory/ e-Guide
Project 40% |
|
Notes & in-class discussion 15% |
Midterm essay 15% |
Project 30% |
|
Seminar Facilitation 15% |
Review essay 15% |
Individual Presentation 10% |
A. CLASS
PARTICIPATION
Notes & in-class discussion: each student will prepare for weekly class discussion by taking notes that outline, sketch, summarize or otherwise define core arguments, themes, concepts and terminologies central to the assigned readings. These may be either typed or hand-written, and must be duplicated (either by photocopy or by printing a second copy) before coming to class. These will be collected at the start of every class. I will not be examining these for length, grammar, or formality. These will merely serve to facilitate and demonstrate your preparation. In concert with your in-class discussion for that week, these will be marked according to the following rubric: + (excellent); P+ (good); P (adequate); — (poor). See section VIII.
Seminar facilitation: each student will also lead (either alone or paired with another student) a one-hour seminar session. This will involve a summary of the reading assignments for that week and the moderation of class discussion. Assignments will be made the first day of class and presentations will begin on Jan. 31. You will be required to hand in a typed abstract (approx. two-three pages in length) that synthesizes the corpus of readings under a single theme. Your oral presentation should include this material, but should also address some of the following points:
§ Who are the authors? What are their academic backgrounds and current positions? What are their other scholarly interests and/or achievements?
§ What is their central thesis? From what position of authority do they write?
§ Whose work do they cite in support of their own argument? Are they in dialogue with the critics of their own work (or, for that matter, with the work of other authors we have read in this class), or is the matter of differing interpretation/analysis/evidence absent or elided? What questions are left unanswered?
§ Finally, how does this work articulate with, clarify, or challenge works we have read (or films we have seen) in earlier weeks?
Do NOT plan to use PowerPoint. You may use the board if you need to make a graphic representation of some concept or idea, you may use handouts or other supplementary materials, and you may certainly discuss other media ideas with me. You should plan to sit (or stand, if you prefer) at the head of the seminar table and address your insights and remarks to your peers. I am looking for substantively rich, rather than tech-savvy or aesthetically pleasing presentations. You will be required to make a more formal, media-based presentation for your group project (see section IV C.).
B. ESSAYS
A midterm essay (7-10 pp.) will be due on March 14. Questions will be
distributed on February 28. On April 25, you will hand in a review essay (10-12
pp.) addressing three written works—one drawn from the list of required books
and two drawn from the bibliography in section IX (at least one of which must
be required reading). Details will be provided under separate cover, but this
assignment will follow the format for review essays appearing in American
Ethnologist, Ethnohistory, and American Anthropologist (see,
for instance, *Black 2001, *Field 2003 or *Paci 2001). See sections VI. and
VII. for further remarks about writing.
C. Group Project
This class will undertake a pilot project funded by a CSUS Pedagogy Enhancement Grant. The project entails digitizing ethohistorical documents and developing related curricular materials (published as electronic or e-guides) in order to enhance and historically contextualize material culture classically deployed in the teaching and representation of California Indian history and society. I applied for this grant in order to provide you with the experience of 1) working with ethnohistorical archives and material culture and 2) grappling with the poetics and politics of cultural synthesis and representation in an indigenous, post-colonialist era. Research for this project will begin in March. Three teams (each of which will produce a separate product) will be created in the early part of the semester, so they can begin to formulate their own schedules and processes (i.e. delegating components or working more collectively). This project incorporates scholarly research and interpretation, writing, digitization, and creativity. It will also require that some sessions be held at other venues: my house, the State Library, D-Q University, and the Anthropology Museum. There may also be opportunities/reasons for some team members to visit the Pacific Regional Branch of the National Archives (or to rely upon my own visits to provide them with archival documents). Each group will make a final presentation to both an outside audience and to the class. Curricular materials will be published on the Anthropology Department web page.
V. Course Schedule (Note: readings marked with an asterick (*) are supplementary; this schedule is subject to change.)
Jan 24—Introduction & Film
Jan 31—Neizen (2003)
Feb 7—Warren and Jackson (2003)—Chpts. 1, 4, 6, 7 and 8; *French 2004
Feb 14—Smith (2002); Turner (2002); Behrendt (2004) & Film, *Bourgois (1991)
Feb 21— Nagel (1997)—Chpts.1,2,3,5,7,and 9; Lassiter (2000); Venne (2004); Mihesuah (1998); Champagne (1998).
Feb 28— Simmons (1988), Barber & Berdan (1998), Carmack (1972), Krech III (1991), *Carson (2002)
Midterm essay question distributed.
March 7—Churchill (2004) Povinelli (2002) Field (1999); MacCannell (2002); *Haley et al. (1997).
March 14—Midterm essay due. Work w/ethnohistorical documents & related materials.
March 21—Spring Break
March 28— Recessed for meetings at State Library and other research venues (exact dates & times TBD).
April 4—Buckley (2002) *Anderson et al. (1997); *Simmons (1997)
April 11—Laverty (2003); Field and Leventhal (2003) Field w/Muwekma Ohlone Tribe (2003) Hinton (1994) *Brooks (2002)
April 18—Darian-Smith (2004); Goldberg and Champagne (2002); Bodinger de Uriarte (2003) * Davis (2001) *Campisi and Starna (2004).
April 25—Review essay due. Sarris (1994.)
May 2—Film and final discussion
May 9—Team Presentations
May 16—Final Projects due on CD-ROM in fully edited form, 6 pm.
VI. Use the American Anthropological Association’s style guide: http://www.aaanet.org/pubs/style_guide.pdf. This is a 14-page document. I suggest that you print it out and begin to familiarize yourself with it well before your first written assignment is due. I will grade your written work for both content and style. I will occasionally make stylistic suggestions to help you improve your writing and will mark mechanical and grammatical errors.
VII. Consult this abbreviated guide to proofreaders marks: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~opa/pubs/ed_style_guide/proofread.html.
If you go on to the doctoral level and/or publish your work professionally (or write an MA thesis for me) you’ll be seeing them again. The Chicago Manual of Style has a more complete set of marks, which you may find useful in the future, as either an author or an editor.
IX. Bibliography of Required and Supplementary Articles–asterisk (*) denotes supplementary readings.
For books beyond those required in class, see section
X.
*Anderson, M. Kat, Michael G. Barbour, and Valerie Whitworth
1997 A World of Balance and Plenty: in Contested Eden, Gutierrez and Orsi, eds., California History 76:12-47.
Barber, Russell J., and Frances F. Berdan
1998 The Scope of Ethnohistory. Chapter 1 (pp. 5-32) of The Emperor's Mirror: Understanding Culture Through Primary Sources. Tucson: U. of Arizona Press.
Behrendt, Larissa
2004 Eualeyai: The Blood that Runs Through My Veins, in A Will to Survive, Stephen Greymorning, ed., Pp. 32-44. New York: McGraw-Hill.
*Black, Liza
2001 The Predicament of Identity. Ethnohistory 48:338-350.
Bodinger de Uriarte, John J.
2003 Imagining the Nation with House Odds: Representing American Indian Identity at Mashantucket Ethnohistory 50: 549-565.
*Bourgois, Phillipe
1991 Confronting the Ethics of Ethnography: Lessons from Fieldwork in Central America, in Decolonizing Anthropology, Faye V. Harrison, ed. Pp. 110-126. Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association.
*Brooks, James F.
2002 Life Proceeds from the Name: Indigenous Peoples and the Predicament of Hybridity, in Clearing a Path: Theorizing the Past in Native American Studies. Nancy Shoemaker, ed. Pp. 181-205. New York: Routledge.
2004 Another View on “Ethnogenesis of New Houma Indians.” Ethnohistory 51: 779-791 (a response to Davis 2001; see below).
Carmack, Robert M.
1972 Ethnohistory: A Review of Its Development, Definition, Methods, and Aims. Annual Review of Anthropology 1:227-246.
*Carson, James Taylor
2002 Ethnogeography and the Native American Past. Ethnohistory 49:769-788.
Champagne, Duane
1998 American Indian Studies is for Everyone in Natives and Academics: Researching and Writing about American Indians, D.Mihesuah, ed.
Pp. 81-89. Lincoln: U. of Nebraska Press.
Churchill, Ward
2004 A Question of Identity, in A Will to Survive, Stephen Greymorning, ed. Pp. 59-94. New York: McGraw-Hill.
*Davis, Dave D.
2001 A Case of Identity: Ethnogenesis of the New Houma Indians. Ethnohistory 48: 473-494. (Also see Campisi & Starna)
Field, Les
1999 Complicities and Collaborations. Current Anthropology 40: 193-209.
*2003 Dynamic Tensions in Indigenous Sovereignty and Representation: A Sampler American Ethnologist 30: 446-453..
Field, Les and Alan Leventhal
2003 “What Must it Have Been Like!”: Critical Considerations of Precontact Ohlone Cosmology as Interpreted through Central California Ethnohistory. Wicazo Sa Review 18:95-126.
Field, Les (with the Muwekma Ohone Tribe)
2003 UnAcknowledged Tribes, Dangerous Knowledge: The Muwekma Ohlone and How Indian Identities are “Known.” Wicazo Sa Review 18:79-94.
*French, Jan Hoffman
2004 Mestizaje and Law Making in Indigenous Identity Formation in Northeastern Brazil: “After the Conflict Came the History” American Anthropologist 106: 663-674.
Goldberg, Carole and Duane Champagne
2002 Ramona Redeemed? The Rise of Tribal Political Power in California. Wicazo Sa Review 17: 43-61.
*Haley, Brian D. (et al)
1997 Anthropology and the Making of Chumash Tradition Current Anthropology 38: 761-795.
Hinton, Leanne
1994 “Introduction” and “Ashes, Ashes,” in Flutes of Fire: Essays on California Indian Languages. Berkeley: Heyday Books.
Krech III, Shepard
1991 The State of Ethnohistory. Annual Review of Anthropology 20:345-375.
Lassiter, Luke Eric
2000 Commentary: Authoritative Texts, Collaborative Ethnography, and Native American Studies. American Indian Quarterly 24: 601-614.
Laverty, Philip
2003 The Ohlone/Coastanoan-Esselen Nation of Monterey, California: Dispossession, Federal Neglect, and the Bitter Irony of the Federal Acknowledgment Process. Wicazo Sa Review 18:41-78.
MacCannell, Dean
2002 Geographies of the Unconscious: Robert F. Heizer versus Alfred Kroeber on the Drawing of Territorial Boundaries. Cultural Geographies 9:3-14.
Mihesuah, Devon
1998 Commonality of Difference: American Indian Women and History, in Natives and Academics: Researching and Writing about American Indians, D. Mihesuah, ed. Pp. 36-54. Lincoln: U. of Nebraska Press.
*Paci, Christopher Hannibal
2001 Narratives of Natives: Deconstructing Postcolonialism through Colonial Eyes Ethnohistory 48: 352-356.
Povinelli, Elizabeth
2002 Mutant Messages (Chpt. 1, pp. 34-69), in The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Simmons, William S.
1988 Culture Theory in Contemporary Ethnohistory Ethnohistory 35:1-14.
*1997 Indian Peoples of California, in Contested Eden, Gutierrez and Orsi, eds, California History 76:48-77.
Turner, Stephen
2002 Sovereignty, or the Art of Being Native. Cultural Critique 51:74-100.
Venne, Sharon
2004 She Must be Civilized: She Paints her Toenails, in A Will to Survive, Stephen Greymorning, ed. Pp. 127-139. New York: McGraw-Hill.
X. Bibliography
of Supplementary Texts
Stay tuned.
XI. A sample of links, listservs, and other relevant Internet sources
http://www.archives.gov/facilities/ca/san_francisco/holdings_guide_03.html