Skip to main content

Home/ gcanth103cspring2013/ What are the major questions concerning the Darness in El Dorado controversy?
J Scott Hill

What are the major questions concerning the Darness in El Dorado controversy? - 72 views

questions

started by J Scott Hill on 31 Jan 13
  • Katherine Coppe
     
    I found a large theme in these articles to be power. I believe that the power caused many issues. Napoleon Chagnon seems the overwhelming need to show his dominance over the Yanomami. In the New Yorker article a tribe member was quoted as saying that Chagnon would fire his pistol every time he entered the village to prove he was fiercer than the Yanomami. Rather than adapting his ways to live with the people, Chagnon bribed and manipulated the people to do as he wanted. The anthropologist took advantage of what he had and what the Yanomami were lacking to get the results he wanted. James Neel used the power of his knowledge from the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission to literally get away with murder. Within the tribe the men express their power over the women by beating them and making the tribal decisions.
  • John Miller
     
    After reading this article, I found that the ideas of preconception and prejudice came into mind frequently. Chagnon went into Venezuela thinking that he was going to refute the topics that he was taught at the University of Michigan, which were that the world was poisoned by industrialization and that anthropologists should quest to find "noble savages" that had not been corrupted by the rapid economic expansion in the west. I feel that his shaped his view enough to cause him to exaggerate the negative aspects of the Yanomami culture and ignore many of the positive ones, which gives basis to the basic idea that anthropologists need to go into cultures with an open, more emic perspective. How was Chagnon regarded in the anthropological community after his incongruities were brought to light? Or was Chagnon actually correct in his observations and the next anthropologists who came to study the Yanomami were studying a reformed people?
  • Stefany Laun
     
    The article raises question not only to the moral standings of the anthropologists brought to attention in this article, but those all around the world. What other wrongs are committed against natives as they are being studied or documented? The article also highlights the concept of social Darwinism and eugenics and assumptions made by anthropologists as to their potential workings in native cultures such as the Yanonami. Neel and Chagnon seemed to work under the impression that the Yanonami people would be immune to diseases that affected people that they were used to dealing with. Neel was also, according to the article, a firm believer that Darwin's "survival of the fittest" theory would be much more prevalent in the Yanonami people than in his own society because there were far fewer of them, and they were used to fighting for survival and so the people left were the most fit and dominant. This then brings to question the harm in making assumptions about groups of people and how this affects them in turn. Other questions that come to mind that may be interesting to research include those revolving around the facts read in one New Yorker article on the issue: do we know for certain that this is exactly what happened to the Yanonami people? External sources of information will be helpful.
  • blonabocker
     
    From reading Tierney's article "Darkness in El Dorado" the main problems is in how Chagnon conducted his research. He has been accused of using bribery and questionable trade tactics in order to obtain information from the Yanonami people. Much of this information, such as names of dead relatives, was seen as taboo in the culture, and many villagers had to go against their customs in order to do this. Chagnon states that he is going into these villages in order to only observe the peoples and their customs, however he seems to be doing a lot of instigating and causing more problems. Tierney puts out many different accusations, many of which may be exaggerated, but if there is some truth in his research than Chagnon has definitely overstepped his boundaries with the Yanonami.
  • Andrew La Fontaine
     
    Some issues that arose when reading this article was the impact of anthropologists on the culture's that they are visiting. I found it interesting/concerning to see the anthropologists different takes on their description of the Yanonami. In true anthropology research I feel that all of the findings should be the same or at least similar. The probable cause for these difference in findings was Chagnon's approach to doing the research. He used tactics such as bribery and trade manipulation in order to find out about the Yanonami culture. In turn, this may have skewed his research compared to other anthropologists because his questionable tactics and influence in the culture caused the Yanonami to act differently around him. This raises the question of what exactly is the right approach when trying to go about observing a culture.
  • Emily Foley
     
    After reading 'Darkness in El Dorado' , I find it intriguing that Chagnon was permitted to stay for as long as his did in the Yanomami community. Why did thousands of Yanomami people let an outsider, who poked and prodded them and bribed them using machetees and other mechanical instruments, stay for months at a time? It is undeniable that Chagnon exagerrated most of his findings, a fact that has been proven my numerous anthropologists who have also studied the Yanomami. In regard to the measles vaccine, this raises the question how just how far can an anthropologist go before violating the rights of humans? Chagnon and his team, in their unrelenting research, took things to the extreme more often than not. Ethics and anthropology seem to be very closely related in this controversy, and more information on this topic will help.
  • Michael Savery
     
    I think the whole point of the article was to not only bring attention to Chagnon and Neel's flawed vaccination program but bring to light potential atrocities that other anthropologists have committed against tribes or native people across the world. While anthropology as a study is important to understand lesser known populations, all too often the native people are taken advantage of in order to shape them into what the First World feels they should be. the blame on what happened to the Yanomami people should not be placed on their tribe or community, just as the blame for the devastation of communities in the Amazon or Africa cannot be placed on those peoples. These people were told their lives would be bettered by the intrusion of Westerners and unfortunately their trust in two people failed them.

To Top

Start a New Topic » « Back to the gcanth103cspring2013 group