又是博阿斯和博阿斯派

IF 0.2 Q4 ANTHROPOLOGY

Reviews in Anthropology Pub Date : 2022-05-27 DOI:10.1080/00938157.2022.2074431

S. Kan

{"title":"又是博阿斯和博阿斯派","authors":"S. Kan","doi":"10.1080/00938157.2022.2074431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present review discusses two recent works dealing with Franz Boas: a biography by Rosemary Lévy Zumwalt and a book on Boas and several members of his school by Charles King. The information presented in Zumwalt’s biography is compared with the one found in an earlier one by Douglas Cole as well as in various books and articles on the specific aspects of Boas’s life and career. King’s book is commended for its depiction of Zora Neil Hurston’s ethnographic work but criticized for paying too much attention to Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict at the expense of several other key Boasians, such as Alexander Goldenweiser","PeriodicalId":43734,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Anthropology","volume":"51 1","pages":"68 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Boas and Boasians, once again\",\"authors\":\"S. Kan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00938157.2022.2074431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The present review discusses two recent works dealing with Franz Boas: a biography by Rosemary Lévy Zumwalt and a book on Boas and several members of his school by Charles King. The information presented in Zumwalt’s biography is compared with the one found in an earlier one by Douglas Cole as well as in various books and articles on the specific aspects of Boas’s life and career. King’s book is commended for its depiction of Zora Neil Hurston’s ethnographic work but criticized for paying too much attention to Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict at the expense of several other key Boasians, such as Alexander Goldenweiser\",\"PeriodicalId\":43734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews in Anthropology\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"68 - 79\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews in Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2022.2074431\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00938157.2022.2074431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本综述讨论了最近两部关于弗朗茨·博厄斯的作品：罗斯玛丽·莱维·祖姆沃特的传记和查尔斯·金关于博厄斯及其学派几位成员的书。朱姆沃尔特传记中提供的信息与道格拉斯·科尔早期传记中以及关于博厄斯生活和职业特定方面的各种书籍和文章中发现的信息进行了比较。金的书因其对佐拉·尼尔·赫斯顿的民族志作品的描绘而受到赞扬，但因过于关注玛格丽特·米德和露丝·本尼迪克特而牺牲了其他几位重要的博阿人，如亚历山大·戈尔登维瑟而受到批评

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Boas and Boasians, once again

Abstract The present review discusses two recent works dealing with Franz Boas: a biography by Rosemary Lévy Zumwalt and a book on Boas and several members of his school by Charles King. The information presented in Zumwalt’s biography is compared with the one found in an earlier one by Douglas Cole as well as in various books and articles on the specific aspects of Boas’s life and career. King’s book is commended for its depiction of Zora Neil Hurston’s ethnographic work but criticized for paying too much attention to Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict at the expense of several other key Boasians, such as Alexander Goldenweiser

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Reviews in Anthropology ANTHROPOLOGY-

CiteScore

0.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Reviews in Anthropology is the only anthropological journal devoted to lengthy, in-depth review commentary on recently published books. Titles are largely drawn from the professional literature of anthropology, covering the entire range of work inclusive of all sub-disciplines, including biological, cultural, archaeological, and linguistic anthropology; a smaller number of books is selected from related disciplines. Articles evaluate the place of new books in their theoretical and topical literatures, assess their contributions to anthropology as a whole, and appraise the current state of knowledge in the field. The highly diverse subject matter sustains both specialized research and the generalist tradition of holistic anthropology.