Derek Freemanís 1983 attack on Margaret Meadís classic Samoan ethnography, Coming of age in Samoa, aroused an unprecedented level of interest in the world of anthropology and among the educated public. That interest continues, over a decade later, with the publication of a play based on the lives of Mead and Freeman, and a major new book. The issues, of the nature of humankind and human society, are central to our understanding of humanity and the establishment of good relationships among the peoples of the world. Meadís Coming of age in Samoa is probably the best known anthropological work ever written and has had a major influence on popular perceptions of Western society and indigenous cultures. Freemanís claim, that Mead deliberately exaggerated the differences between Samoa and the West in order to advance a particular political agenda, that all human cultures are rooted in a particular biological human nature which is an inheritance from our primate ancestors, and that the study of cultures should have reference to this universal set of human proclivities and tendencies (which different cultural structures and institutions have evolved to guide and restrain) has serious implications for an anthropology which has generally abandoned attempts to explain similarities to concentrate on differences. At this theoretical level there has been much debate about Boasí commitment to physical anthropology. The critical point is surely that a commitment to cultural determinism does not preclude an interest in biological variables. It is a question of which direction of influence is studied. One of Boasí main contributions appears to have been to attempt to prove that even such apparently biological variables as head shape are determined by environmental rather than inherited factors. Unlike the early years of the 20th century, it is now the believers in cultural determinism who are insisting on dramatic differences between different societies and those proposing a greater role for biological factors who are arguing the fundamental unity of the human species.
Coverage and selection criteria
This is a selective bibliography. It is not an exhaustive list of all material related to the controversy. The main aim is to cover major scholarly contributions up to the end of 1996. It also includes a representative sample of Samoan ethnography, concentrating on items written by those who have contributed most significantly to the controversy. Biographical works have not been covered although they may have light to cast on Meadís motivations; nor has background material on theoretical issues in anthropological methodology and understandings of culture and evolution. Many reviews without any substantial original contribution to make have been omitted. Some relatively minor items by New Zealanders have been incorporated.
Annotations concentrate on summarising the arguments and the general aim has been to produce a guide for academics and students from the social sciences (and interested members of the public), which will enable an overview of the literature and guide its readers to key works for initial consideration, material focusing on particular strands in the debate and items which are related to each other. A general idea of the various points at issue in the controversy can also be gained from reading the bibliography as an introductory guide.
Items are arranged in chronological order by year of first publication. This has the advantage of providing an overall view of the course of events and allows the grouping of items which relate to each other. Items from the special sections in American Anthropologist, Pacific Studies and Canberra Anthropology are together and items reviewing or specifically referring to an earlier contribution are placed immediately after that contribution. Items outside these categories are in alphabetical order within their year.
There is a unitary author/title/subject index at the end of the sequence. Journal articles are indexed by journal title not by the title of individual articles. Authors are highlighted in bold type and titles of books and journals are in italics.
The bibliography includes four books which consider the various issues at length - in addition to Freemanís original refutation (Item 12). These provide an obvious place for those unaquainted with the controversy to begin. Lowell D. Holmesí Quest for the real Samoa (Item 47), is a strong defence of Mead as is James Coteís Adolescent storm and stress (Item 70). Martin Oransí Not even wrong (Item 72) and The Samoa reader (Item 61) are biased towards Freemanís views. The Samoa reader contains excerpts from Mead and Freemanís books and other contributions to the debate and also background material on Samoan culture and cultural determinism. Martin Orans extensive survey of Meadís fieldnotes makes his work unique and he also has the advantage of the last word at this stage. The reader is also referred to the three journals publishing special sections on the controversy. The American Anthropologist (Items 17-20), Canberra Anthropology (Items 21-28) and Pacific Studies (Items 29-32). The last two include long replies by Derek Freeman.
The material covered represents only a fraction of the literature generated by the controversy. Many newspapers and popular magazines have featured articles which are not listed here. Early contributions of this kind, to 1983, are included in a select bibliography (237 items) in Canberra Anthropology. (Item 23). I have found no similar lists of more recent material. All the books listed above and most of the journal articles have substantial bibliographies or lists of bibliographical references. Readers are directed to Stephen O. Murray (1991) (Item 65), and Derek Freeman (1990) (Item 64), for bibliographic coverage of the role of cultural determinism in the history of anthropology in particular. The long lists of references supplied by Holmes (1987) (Item 47) and James E.Cote (1994) (Item 70) are also worthy of attention.
I would like to acknowledge the help of Interloans staff at the University of Auckland Library, James Traue, my supervisor, for his useful comments and prompt replies to my questions, and Felicity Stewart for her help with proof-reading.
First published in 1928 under the title Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilisation, this book had gone through 5 printings by 1931. Penguin published it in 1943 and reprinted in 1954 and 1961. It could be said to be one of the most influential books of the twentieth century and many of its assertions about the nature of humankind and the failings of civilization became received wisdom in the Western world.
The 23 year-old Mead was sent to Samoa by her mentor, Franz Boas, to test the hypothesis that the stress associated with adolescence in Western countries was the result of maladaptive cultural factors rather than some underlying problem of human nature faced by all societies. The book is the result of several months work on the island of Taíu in American Samoa with a group of about 50 girls aged from 10 to 18. These girls are pictured at many points as individuals with detailed descriptions of their individual circumstances, experieces and characters. Sexuality is a strong focus with an entire chapter on "Formal sex relations" in a culture with "no neurotic pictures, no frigidity, no impotence...and the capacity for intercourse only once in a night is counted as senility" (p.124). In general Mead paints an idyllic picture of a stress-free life in a tropical paradise of sexual adventure, where "lovers slip home from trysts beneath the palm trees or in the shadow of beached canoes" (p.19). However, one chapter in the appendix sketches the lives of two girls who might be called delinquents and another small group who aspire to education and a life outside the constraints of village life. There are further chapters on the household and the community, maturity and old age, and the role of dance in Samoan society.
"Adolescence represented no period of crisis or stress, but was instead an orderly developing of a set of slowly maturing interests and activities" (p.129). Neuroses caused by premature exposure to childbirth, intercourse and death or being the only child in a "tiny ingrown biological family" are mitigated in Samoa by the familiarity which comes from living in close association with a wider number of people. Mead castigates the lack of sex education in the West and the "fateful policy of sparing children a knowledge of the dreadful truth" about death.
The last quarter of the book
is devoted to "Our educational problems in the light of Samoan contrasts"
and suggestions for improvements. Problems of adolescents in America are
attributed to the range of life choices available, conflicting moral standards
in society, and the nuclear family and the level of ignorance about sex
and life crises it engenders. Solutions are proposed in a more tolerant
attitude to adolescent "sex experimentation" and education for choice.
240pp. No references.
2. Lowie, Robert H. 1929. Review of Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilisation, by Margaret Mead. American Anthropologist 31(3): 532-534.
Praises Meadís work as a
solid contribution to ethnography, which illustrates "a new method of study
bound to find followers and yield an even richer harvest". Finds her picture
of "Polynesian free love" convincing and mentions her vivid pictures of
child life and the doubt her account throws on the universality of the
individual family. However, characterises as "pedagogical sermonising"
her thesis that "the sexually uninhibited Samoan adolescent is thereby
freed from the stress and strain characteristic of our adolescents, hence
these disturbances are not rooted in original nature, but in the repressive
agencies of our society". Notes discrepancies between the picture presented
in the main text and Meadís claim in an appendix (which he quotes at length)
that Samoan society was stricter in the past. Considers that evidence of
sexual licence in an acculturated society, subject to the "blighting contact
of Western civilisation", is on a par with stories about middle-Westerners
in Greenwich Village.
3. Mead, Margaret. 1930. Social organization of Manua. Honolulu: Bernice P. Bishop Museum. Bulletin (Bernice P. Bishop Museum); 76.
Begins with notes on some
aspects of the authorís fieldwork in 1925. The bulk of the book focuses
on social structure and rank, kinship and family relationships and ceremonies
and rituals. Ends with a section about the Tui Manuía and the seven villages
of Manuía. Brief chapters entitled ĎBirthí, ĎChildhoodí, ĎAdolescenceí
and ĎCourtship, marriage and maturityí, the latter set in the past tense,
add little to the material published in Coming of age in Samoa in
this area. A chapter on religion describes traditional Samoan society.
Includes a discussion on discrepancies between the ideal and the real (p.5),
identifying this area as one of the authorís major research concerns, and
a description of cultural evolution in terms of individual temperament
(p.86). Has been extensively mined by many of the protagonists in the controversy
for quotes to support their arguments.
218 pp. Bibliography, pp.215-218.
4. Winston, Ellen. 1934. The alleged lack of mental diseases among primitive groups. American Anthropologist 36(2): 234-238.
Throws doubt on the widespread
assumption that mental disorders and psychoses are more prevalent in Western
societies. Cites several anecdotal accounts of insanity from ethnographical
studies of tribal societies and uses data collected by Mead in Manuía and
Tutuila in an attempt to quantify and compare rates of mental illness in
the United States and Samoa. Compensates for the different age structures
of the two populations.
5. Holmes, Lowell D. 1957. Taíu : Stability and change in a Samoan village. Parts 1and 2. Journal of the Polynesian Society 66(3): 301-338, 66(4): 398-435.
Largely taken from the first
part of the authors dissertation and based on his five months in Taíu with
his wife and daughter in 1954. Covers most aspects of Samoan culture and
society under the chapter headings ĎMaterial culture and economicsí, ĎSocial
organisationí, ĎPolitical organisationí, ĎReligioní, ĎThe life-cycleí and
ĎCultural stability and cultural changeí. Admits most of his data came
from three English-speaking school teachers with supplementary interviews
in halting Samoan. Supports Meadís analysis at various points including
the lack of strong parent/child relationships, the prevalence of adoption,
the smooth transition from adolescence to adulthood and relative sexual
freedom for the young. "Promiscuity is condemned by the church but winked
at by the family" (p.411). Criticises Mead for conflating accounts of contemporary
society with attempted reconstructions of a "traditional" past and virtually
ignoring the role of formal education in the life of her girls. Notes in
passing that attempts to establish a Catholic presence on the island in
1948 led to a house being stoned and preparations for an armed affray,
that punishment of children is often severe, that moetotolo risks bodily
injury and general ostracism if discovered, that the discovery of adultery
usually results in violence and that eloping couples are often subject
to beatings. Represents the taupou institution, tattooing and the pastorís
school as being in abeyance, but supports the thesis of Samoan cultural
conservatism. Emphasises the isolation of Taíu and the lack of outside
Footnotes and 17 references.
6. Mead, Margaret. 1961. Review of Taíu: Stability and change in a Samoan village, by Lowell D. Holmes. American Anthropologist 63(4): 428-429.
Casts doubt on the value
of restudies unless to document social change. Criticises Holmesí methodology,
citation of sources, lack of system, vagueness and failure to analyse kinship
structures. Notes Samoan conservatism in the retention of customs already
disappearing in 1925. Refutes Holmesí criticism that she ignored current
social realities in an attempt to reconstruct the past.
7. Mead, Margaret.  1975. Blackberry winter: My earliest years. New York: Pocket Book.
Meadís autiobiography covering the years from her birth to the outbreak of the Second World War. Includes 53 pages on her years at university and nineteen pages on her fieldwork in Samoa. Essential to an understanding of the personal attitudes and preconceptions which informed Meadís view of Samoa and Samoan culture - and has been heavily mined by later commentators. Records an upper middle class background of privilege, education and moral fervour for "progressive" causes, including the belief that changes in attitudes and the removal of injustice and prejudice would usher in a better world for all.
Describes the writerís unhappiness at her rejection by the sorority-fraternity circles which dominated her first college in the mid-west and later years of contentment and intellectual engagement at Barnard College, New York, where she came into contact with Boas and Ruth Benedict and absorbed their teachings on society and culture. The Samoan section is briefer with notes on her experiences and the practicalities of fieldwork in a foreign country and language. A large part of the chapter is devoted to her understanding of "primitive" cultures.
The second half of the book
covers her later work in Niugini and Bali and her attempts to synthesize
a general theory of culture and temperament from her experiences. Mentions
several occasions of disagreement with husbands/fellow anthropologists
about the nature of various societies. "It had not yet occurred to us that
the difference in our experiences - Reoís with Dobu and mine with Samoa
- had nearly as much to do with us as individuals, as it had to do with
the nature of the cultures we studied." (p.212).
337 pp. Index
Margaret. 1977. Letters from the field, 1925-1975. New York: Harper
Excerpts of selected letters from the period 1925-1975, with a general introduction by Margaret Mead which ponders both on the implications of the inclusion of the observer within the circle of relevance for ethnographic description, and, more generally, on the difficulties of portraying another culture. Describes the development of an ethnographic methodology of "participant observation". Discusses her own experiences of fieldwork and later developments. The volume is presented as a record of the early development of theory and practice in anthropology. Shorter notes introduce each chapter. .
Includes 37 pages of letters
from Samoa. Backgrounds her work on Taíu and introduces personal responses
and contemporaneous events missing from the ethnographies. Has been studied
and quoted at length by both detractors and defenders. Mentions Faíapuaía
Faíamu several times.
xxii, 343 pp. Index and bibliography
9. Schoeffel, Penelope. 1979. Daughters of Sina: A study of gender, status and power in Western Samoa. Ph.D. diss., Australian National University.
An ethnography based on 18 months residence in a Samoan village. The author, married to an untitled Samoan man, had four children with her during her research. Generally focuses on the roles and status of women from a feminist perspective, and depicts a dualism in female status - respected and valued as co-descendants, subordinate as wives. States that her observations were at a variance with those of Mead and that she will "add my voice to [Freemanís] regarding regarding role strain for Samoan adults" (p.156). Contrasts her findings with those of an earlier study of the same village and postulates a breakdown of community spirit and village unity in the intervening period.
Illustrates chapters on girls and boys, males and females, husbands and wives, sisters and brothers, healers and ghosts, ladies and women with 13 stories about particular events and individuals. These include a banana growing project which ended in recriminations and accusations of misappropriation of funds, a teenage suicide, a man holding up his fingers at a wedding to claim the bride for himself on account of a moetotolo, and an illegitimate pregnancy.
Discusses and analyses the
punishment of children, adolescent female rivalries, rape and moetotolo,
illegitimacy, adultery and adolescents moving in with other families and
critiques Meadís conclusions in these areas. Depicts a society with a double
standard of morality "like any other".
No note on references made.
10. Freeman, Derek. 1981. The anthropology of choice: An ANZAAS presidential address given in Auckland, New Zealand, on 24th January, 1979. Canberra Anthropology 4(1): 82-100.
Traces the course of human
evolution from palaeolithic times and contends that culture is formed as
a result of an enormous series of free choices made by individuals, and
transmitted to succeeding generations by imitation and, after the development
of language, by the learning and teaching of linguistically coded information.
Emphasises a continuity between genetic and cultural evolution but contends
that the second cultural evolutionary system has become dominant over the
original genetic one and that this has ended the ability of sociobiological
theory to account fully for human evolution. Postulates that "culture is
essentially a socially sanctioned accumulation of alternatives that have
been selected from the vast range of human possibility" (p.97). Argues
that this invalidates the doctrine of cultural relativism, that the unforeseen
consequences of past choices may be highly deleterious and anthropology
must be prepared to make a critical approach to cultural practices and
values. Castigates cultural determist anthropology as a superseded science,
noting its tendency to stress the importance of custom, tradition and taboo
at the expense of choice and change. Refers to Meadís ethnography in Samoa
as an example. Concludes that man is a self-defining animal.
11. Shore, Bradd. 1982. Salaíilua: A Samoan mystery. New York: Columbus University Press.
Shoreís major published ethnography.
Reflects the authorís conviction that "the other is profoundly different
from oneself" (p.xiii). Begins with an account of the murder of one of
the two highest ranking chiefs in Salaíilua village by the son of the other.
(Both men were teachers at the local school.) Traces subsequent events
including the efforts of other village leaders at various meetings to avoid
a family feud and restore peace. Considers special factors in the structure
of Salaíilua village which precipitated the murder. Examines aspects of
status and social control in Samoan society more generally, discussing
titles and property, fono and faíalupega, and village law and sanctions.
Attempts to elucidate Samoan understandings of institutions and structures
by examining Samoan terminology. The second half of the book, headed ĎMeaningsí,
considers Samoan concepts of identity, human nature and knowledge, and
the individual and society, postulating a context-oriented Samoan self,
which is focused on multi-faceted social relationships. Describes Samoan
notions of amio and aga which describe behaviour originating in selfish
individual desires and behaviour that is socially approved and required.
Investigates concepts of causation and motivation, crime, guilt and moral
judgement. Develops a dualistic theory of ranked and unranked relationships
and examines them in the context of gift exchanges and male/female relationships.
Emphasises differences from Western cultural categories. Concludes with
a chapter on Samoan dance and a renewed look at the "cultural mystery"
that lies behind the original murder.
xvii, 338pp., notes, bibliography, pp.321-326, and index.
12. Freeman, Derek..  1996. Margaret Mead and the heretic: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth. Ringwood, Vic.: Penguin.
This book is a republication of Derek Freemanís Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth, published in Canberra and New York by the Australian National University Press and Harvard University Press in 1983. A new foreword by the author includes a transcript of the statement made by Faíapuaía Faíamu, one of Meadís chief Samoan informants in 1987, detailing the way she and her friends misled Mead.
Sketches a brief history of the development of Boasian cultural determinism in opposition to the dominant eugenicist ideas in the early twentieth century, and the gradual adoption of an extremist cultural determinist position by Kroeber and Lowie after the First World War. Outlines Meadís career in anthropology, her intellectual debt to Ruth Benedict and the circumstances surrounding her 1925 field-trip to Samoa. Summarizes Meadís depiction of Samoan society and surveys Coming of agesís reception in Western intellectual circles from the enthusiastic response of the 1930s to growing doubts in the 1970s.
The bulk of the book is devoted to a point-by-point refutation of Meadís conclusions about Samoan culture. Freeman draws on his own experiences in Samoa, the writings of other anthropologists, a detailed analysis of various contradictions in Coming of age, and statistical comparisons of crime and deviance in Samoa and various other countries. Various features of Samoan society including rank, aggression, punishment, adolescent delinquence and sexual mores and behaviour are discuussed.
Two final chapters critique
the series of false premises which led Mead astray and point the way to
"a more scientific anthropological paradigm" incorporating advances in
other approaches to the study of human behaviour.
Bibliographical references and index.
13. Barnouw, Victor. 1983. Coming to print on Samoa: Mead and Freeman. The Journal of Psychoanalytic Anthropology 6(4): 425-433.
Summarises the salient features of Meadís ethnographic account and Freemanís refutations. Notes Freemanís failure to cite Ellen Winstonís 1934 article on mental health and primitive societies (q.v.). Notes the authorís impression on rereading Coming of age that Meadís generalisations are not as egregious as Freeman implies. Attributes this to Meadís "unfortunate tendency to make stronger and broader assertions in later works", and notes that a large proportion of Freemanís quotes come from these. Summarizes Freemanís analysis of the reasons for Meadís errors. Notes conflicting evidence about premarital sexuality and various attempts to reconcile the two pictures.
Considers Freemanís analysis
of the development of cultural determinism and expresses scepticism about
his picture of Boas as a cultural determinist and the degree of Boasí influence
over Mead. Supports the picture of Meadís strong belief in the enormous
malleability of human nature, whether derived from Boas or Benedict. Debates
the influence of Freudian psychology on Mead and briefly considers some
implications of a greater role for biological factors in explaining culture.
Note and 14 references.
14. Bock, Philip K. 1983. The Samoan puberty blues. Review of Margaret Mead and Samoa, by Derek Freeman. Journal of Anthropological Research 39(3): 336-340.
Finds Freemanís "main substantive
criticism" convincing, but suggests few anthropologists will be surprised.
Exonerates Freeman from charges of sociobiological extremism but accuses
him of overstating the darker side of Samoan culture and of oversimplification
regarding Boasí motives and theoretical standpoints. Discusses Freemanís
claims about premarital chastity and adolescent crime and violence. Suggests
a cumulative table of ages at first conviction would have been a statistically
sounder method of comparing adolescent crime. Contends that moetotolo is
a very socialised and symbolic form of rape. Is bemused by Freemanís call
for a synthesis of biological and cultural anthropology which he believes
has already taken place.
15. Romanucci-Ross, Lola. 1983. Apollo alone and adrift in Samoa. Reviews in Anthropology 10(3): 85-92.
Summarizes Freemanís contentions.
Asserts that phenomenologies must at least in some basic ways converge
to validation by consensus and accuses some critics of precipitate denunciation.
Notes Meadís fears in 1964, after meeting Freeman in Australia, that he
would prove her wrong, and her puzzlement that another researcher could
have found so much contrary evidence. Discusses her own work in Mexico
where it was three years before she discovered real levels of conflict,
violence and mismatch of moral codes in the face of local evasions and
assertions to the contrary. Suggests Mead was not the most meticulous researcher
and comments on the basic problem-solving orientation of her fieldwork.
The auther worked with Mead in Manus.
Albert. 1983. Three faces of Samoa: Meadís Freemanís and Wendtís. Pacific
(April) 10-14, 69
States how the author first
came into contact with what he calls Meadís romantic, escapist portrayal
of Samoa at an Auckland Training College course in 1958, and, having spent
his own teen years in New Zealand, accepted it as valid. Now accuses Mead
of arrogance and naivety and failing to rise above stereotypes and preconceptions
of "primitive" societies. Praises Freemanís account as the "most important
study of us made this century by a non-Samoan" (p.10) and expresses his
admiration for a man who has studied Samoa for 40 years, has an easy fluency
in the language and has been adopted into a family and granted a matai
title. Suggests that he has been able to divulge some of the "secrets"
which all societies have, finding Freemanís Samoa "similar to the Samoa
I know and have depicted in my fiction." Explores the yearning in industrialised
societies (and among some Polynesians) for a South Seas utopia. Blames
Mead for failing to return to Samoa to correct the harm she had done. Excuses
Freemanís dwelling on a darker side of Samoan society and considers his
depiction shows a society with all the emotions, problems, hopes common
to humanity. Contends, however, that Freeman exaggerates the purity, strictness
and public morality aspect of Samoan culture and downplays the incidence
of premarital sex and adultery. Suggests an element of machismo and bravado
in Samoan society is reflected in the second-class status Samoan women
have always held, and the institutionalisation of moetotolo as a form of
rape. Comments ironically on the influence of Meadís book on sexual mores
in the United States, stating that there is more free love there than there
ever was in Samoa.
17. Holmes, Lowell. 1983. A tale of two studies. American Anthropologist 84(4): 929-935. Special Section: Speaking in the Name of the Real: Freeman and Mead on Samoa.
Agrees with Mead that Samoan
coming of age was "immensely less stressful and traumatic" than in the
West. Comments on the value of restudies in anthropology of which his own
of Taíu was the first. Such studies will show differences because of cultural
change and personal and methodological factors, and should be holistic
analyses. Notes Meadís belief that they will inevitably be done in the
shadow of the original study and will either attempt to confirm or deny
its conclusions. Disparages Freemanís claims to superior insight and puts
forward his own claims to a matai title which he says he never took seriously.
States his own detailed analysis of Meadís material is in his 1957 thesis,
not in his published writings. Attributes the differences between Meadís
(and his own) and Freemanís findings to cultural change over time, and
social disorganisation in the urban areas of Apia and Pago Pago. Notes
Freeman offers no comparative information on adolescence in the United
States in the 1920s and cites passages from contemporary studies suggesting
grief and strife. Questions Freemanís ability, as an elderly white man,
to collect accurate statistics on virginity and claims his experiment in
removing toddlers from their mothers is methodological nonsense. Suggests
psychological tests carried out in Samoa by himself and others show a personality
profile more compatible with Meadís characterisation than Freemanís. Gives
instances of blatant selective quotation by Freeman and attacks the promotion
of the book by the Harvard University Press, saying he is glad his own
restudy has remained quietly on the thesis shelf at Northwestern University.
18. Schwartz, Theodore. 1983. Anthropology: A quaint science. American Anthropologist 84(4): 919-929. Special Section: Speaking in the Name of the Real: Freeman and Mead on Samoa.
Calls for a balanced discussion and sees possibilities for reconciling the protagonistsí views when a proper assessment can be made. Notes other occasions where a restudy has contradicted a classic ethnography and suggests this shows we must respect the complexity of "primitive" cultures. Notes a general failure to distinguish between a genetic and essentially racial or racist determinism, and a generic biological determinism, and notes that neither Mead nor Freeman seek to explain Samoan culture in terms of peculiarities in the Samoan genetic environment. Notes Meadís facility for dramatic distillation, inconsistencies with Meadís own data, and Freemanís "contrariant bias". Agrees with Freemanís views on Meadís motivations and preconceptions but canít believe that the girls were able to create and maintain the fantasy foisted on Mead or that Mead deliberately reported falsely. Suggests a time lapse problem with restudies, doubts the accuracy of both sets of figures on virginity and notes ambivalence in Holmesí views about Meadís accuracy.
Praises Meadís work in Manus
for the knowledge she was able to gain in six months and the vividness
of her descriptions, but notes her resistance to the idea that her informants
were heavily involved in a cargo cult and her remark that if Manus turned
out to be another cultural shambles, a slum culture, she would not write
about it - the world needed a success story. The author worked in Manus
with Mead in 1953.
Notes and 17 references.
19. Shore, Bradd. 1983. Paradox regained: Freemanís "Margaret Mead and Samoa". American Anthropologist 84(4): 935-944. Special Section: Speaking in the Name of the Real: Freeman and Mead on Samoa.
Contends that neither Freeman nor Mead is completely wrong and attempts to reconcile the two versions, claiming that human life is riddled with contradictions, ethnographic accounts are not susceptible to refutation, and Freeman has allowed his obsession with refutation and his fascination with Mead to ruin what could have been a real contribution to Samoan ethnography. Notes, however, long-recognised problems with Meadís picture of Samoan society and suggests that the concept of cultural configuration was instrumental in channelling Meadís observations to conform to a single dominant theme.
Posits a gradual withdrawal
of early attachment by parents leading to a diffuseness of affection and
argues that Freemanís unsophisticated experiments with infants are not
sufficient proof of the opposite. Notes most observers are at odds with
Freemanís observations on residential flexibility for adolescents. Believes
Freemanís comments on Samoan promiscuity are compelling but notes Meadís
essential ambivalence on this issue when read carefully. Considers both
authors on rank and deference and suggests a double socialisation in explanation.
Notes Meadís attribution of liberalisation in the arenas of politics and
sex to Western influences. Points out that the case for culture not nature
does not rest on Samoa alone and asks how Freeman would account for the
many distinctive differences between Samoa and the United States if not
by culture. Notes that Freeman provides little detail about the application
of his interactionist paradigm to Samoan culture.
20. Weiner, Annette. 1983. Ethnographic determinism: Samoa and the Margaret Mead controversy. American Anthropologist 84(4): 908-919. Special Section: Speaking in the Name of the Real: Freeman and Mead on Samoa.
Considers Freemanís work "fails in its history, in its ethnography and as a scientific refutation" and is "badly written and deeply destructive" (p.918). Defends Meadís Samoan researches as sophisticated and innovative. Analyses political and social background to Boasí attack on the eugenicists. Notes widespead belief that genetic factors determined criminality, shiftlessness, prostitution and feeblemindedness and the enactment of laws prescribing sterilisation and restricting immigration. Accuses Freeman of distorting Boasí position on biology and culture and notes Boasí work on the head shapes of immigrant populations.
Argues that Taíu and Western
Samoa are historically and geographically distinct. Suggests a need for
caution in relying on the testimony of Samoans and Trobrianders about their
own societies, especially when sensitive topics are involved. Suggests
Freemanís attacks on Shore should create suspicion. Attacks the source
and accuracy of Freemanís figures on virginity. Suggests virginity and
defloration ceremonies concerned taupou alone and that presentation of
fine mats after elopements implies public recognition of premarital sex
in the same way as presentations after deflorations implied public recognition
of virginity. Contends that, in 1926, "puritanical Christian sexual morality
had not yet pervaded this island" (p.916). Rebuts evidence of Court prosecution
of adulterers on the grounds that the real circumstances are unknown and
that adultery is different from premarital sex. Suggests that evidence
from Malinowskiís work in the Trobriands, where premarital intercourse
was the rule and adolescence free of stress, would equally have provided
Boas with the "negative instance" he sought.
21. Holmes, Lowell D. 1983. On the questioning of as many as six impossible things about Freemanís Samoan study before breakfast. Canberra Anthropology 6(1): 1-15. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy.
Asserts the writerís authority as author of a 1954 methodological restudy of Meadís Taíu. Attacks six of Freemanís unbelievable claims about Boasian determinism and Taíu.
1. That Boas was an absolute
cultural determinist: Quotes assessments of Boas to the contrary and notes
his studies of biological factors. Stresses the prominence of physical
anthropology in the American academic world.
2. That Freeman could not publish his book until now because he did not gain access to certain criminal records on rape and assault in American Samoa until 1981: Notes Freemanís circulation of papers attacking Mead as early as 1968. Attacks validity and reliability of official material in Samoa.
3. That Holmes was so intimidated by Meadís reputation and under the thumb of his Boasian tutor, Melville Herskovitz, that he refrained from attacking Mead and cultural determinism and concentrated instead on an acculturalisation study: States that his critique of Meadís work is in his 1957 thesis not in the summary in the Journal of the Polynesian Society. Affirms the general reliability of Meadís findings and discusses various points of disagreement, notably on the degree of sexual freedom and degree of competitiveness. Corroborates Meadís conclusion that coming of age was easier in Taíu in 1925 than in the United States. Lists contributing factors as diffusion of authority and affection, childhood knowedge of life crises, early involvement in adult tasks, flexibility of residence, lack of conflicting choices and clear limits to sanctioned behaviour.
4. That Taíu is culturally the same as Saíanapu:
5. That data collected from 1940s to 1981 can be compared with data from 1925.
6.That Derek Freeman is a serious scientist: Accuses Freeman of seeking evidence to support a preconceived theory, of selective quotation and of lacking objectivity. Contrasts his own commitment (and that of other Boasians) to cultural relativity as a methodological tool. Criticises inflated statements made by Freeman about the importance of his book and his use of data collected by Boasians, such as himself and Mead, to attack Boasian anthropology. Suggests Freeman should have written a proper ethnography.
22. Jarvie, I.C. 1983. Freeman on Mead. Canberra Anthropology 6(1): 80-85. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy.
Questions the scientific
validity of anthropologyís aversion to restudies and the premium based
on recording as many pre-literate societies as possible "before they disappear".
Discusses reasons for the impact caused by Freemanís book and typifies
Coming of age in Samoa as part of the "large literature of self-reflection
on American society suggesting other societies as models". Finds Freemanís
message depressing that Samoan society is "not noticeably less tense, conflict-ridden
or productive of unhappiness than our own" (p.83). Suggests the need for
an anthropology of anthropologists. Attacks the standard of Meadís fieldwork
and supports Freemanís assertion that her statements are both testable
and refutable. Affirms Meadís place in the growth of knowledge is secure.
23. The Samoa controversy: a select bibliography. 1983. Canberra Anthropology 6(1): 86-97. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy.
Lists 237 items in alphabetical order. The majority are newspaper articles and reviews. Includes a number of contributions by various Samoan citizens. No annotations.
24. Schoeffel, Penelope and Malama Meleisea. 1983. Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman and Samoa: The making, unmaking and remaking of an anthropological myth. Canberra Anthropology 6(1): 58-69. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy.
Ascribes differences in Meadís and Freemanís accounts to the dualism inherent in Samoan culture and confusion between the realms of actual private behaviour and public socially sanctioned norms. Freeman is accused of a tendency to automatically counter Meadís assertions with contrary observations and facts. If Mead presents a picture of the social ideal he presents the actual behaviour and if she describes actual behaviour he asserts the ideal.
Suggests clandestine love affairs are not uncommon but are severely punished if discovered and that female virginity in an ideal aspired to by all families. Describes moetotolo as covering circumstances ranging from rape to romance. The male will be severely beaten if he is caught, regardless of any compliance on the part of the female. Later he may boast about it to his friends and the girl may be humiliated by gossip. Moetotolo often occurs in a situation where families are in conflict, or in an attempt to force an elopement.
Attacks Freemanís statistics on female virginity - in particular his reliance on membership of the Ekalesia as evidence of virginity. Supports Meadís contention of "passive acceptance" by the Church of pre-marital sex, but only because the Church cannot act until the matter has become public. Similarly brothers are constrained in beating their sister for having an affair, because it would be confirming her sexual delinquency in the eyes of the world and contributing to the collective dishonour. Supports Meadís findings on adolescent mobility between homes with several personal examples, but notes that formally such moves should only be a result of arrangements between adults.
Contends major social changes between 1925 and the 1960s render much of Freemanís data suspect. Alludes to major changes in the community studied by Penelope Schoeffel between 1971 and 1976-1982 and ascribes them to the power vacuum left by the aging of several powerful chiefs. Notes that universal school attendance has removed the housework labour force from the home and speaks vaguely of other examples of economic, social and cultural strain.
Ascribes differences in Meadís and Freemanís accounts to different perspectives. Meadís age gave her informal access to the views and concerns of youth, while Freemanís accession to chiefly rank was a barrier to such confidences and experiences. Records that Meadís depiction has always been distasteful to Samoans and Freemanís is congenial to adult Samoans. Accuses him, however, of creating "a new myth about virginity and reinforcing old myths about the Ďequilibrium of cultureí" (p.68).
Malama Meleisea is a Samoan
born in 1948 and brought up in Samoa and Penelope Schoeffel carried out
research there on the status of women in the late 1970s.
Notes and 13 references.
25. Shankman, Paul. 1983. The Samoan conundrum. Canberra Anthropology 6(1): 38-57. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoan Controversy.
Concedes Freemanís success
in "staggering the establishment", eroding Meadís credibility and transforming
the image of Samoa, but criticises his imprecision, his overstatement and
his failure to prove any of his major contentions. States his criticisms
of Mead are not new. Discusses Freemanís account of Meadís preconceptions
and gullibility, her residence at the naval dispensary and her fluency
in Samoan and defends her competence and accuracy. Quotes Robert Maxwell
and Joseph Theroux on the difficulties of obtaining reliable information
about sex in Samoa and Samoan ideas of appropriate audiences and places.
Defends Meadís appreciation of Samoan conventions on the basis of the consistency
of her appendix data on menarche and heterosexual experience. Suggests
Freemanís use of the same data to refute Mead invalidates his claims about
her unreliability. Quotes Holmesí assessment that Meadís research was remarkably
reliable. Downplays the validity of Freemanís statistics and accuses him
of failing to account for the variety of culturally determined ways in
which adolescent aggression and sexuality are displayed. Discusses, in
particular, Samoan patterns of rape, and argues that Freemanís explanations
are as cultural as Meadís and that any futher understanding of the variables
involved depends on a closer understanding of cultural conceptions of sexuality.
Claims Freeman ignores the dramatic cultural changes in Samoa since 1925,
citing emigration and remittances, commercialisation, American largesse
and economic problems, which have contributed to increased delinquency,
youth suicide and possibly sexual permissiveness. Raises questions about
Freemanís delay in publishing , calling attention to a 50 page manuscript
circulating privately in 1968, and speculating about Meadís knowledge of
it. Considers it unfortunate that Freeman has subordinated his ethnography
to his critique of Mead and fears the effect of negative stereotypes on
Notes and 31 references.
Bradd. 1983. Paradox regained: Freemanís Margaret Mead and Samoa. Canberra
6(1): 17-37. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy.
Generally defends Meadís ethnography while acknowledging various deficiencies which anthropologists and Samoanists have long been aware of. Argues that Meadís cultural configurationalism led her to oversimplify and stress unidimensional themes. Supports Freemanís book as a useful corrective to a false popular mythology of the South Seas but accuses him of methodological sloppiness and of sacrificing subtlety and complexity to his efforts to discredit Mead. Disputes ethnological validity of Popperian refutation as human life is riddled with contradictions and incompatible values.
Compares the two accounts as ethnographies dismissing differences in time and place as unimportant. Criticises Freemanís experiments with mothers and babies as unsophisticated and supports Meadís thesis of a greater Samoan diffuseness of attachments. Postulates a "distinct Samoan ecology of emotion" and a "characteristically Polynesian social self" which Freeman has failed to understand and attacks his insistence on residential stability in childhood and the significance of the biological family.
Discusses the issue of sexual promiscuity noting Meadís simplistic and misleading generalizations but defending some of the more penetrating observations in her appendices. Notes that Meadís and Freemanís statistics on virginity are not dramatically different. Enlarges on the conflict between brother/sister and boyfriend/girlfriend relationships, noting that bilateral descent makes any girl a potential sister and suggesting that an act of violence may be needed psychologically to transform the relationship to an erotic one.
Discusses Meadís and Freemanís accounts of hierarchy, obedience and the respect accorded to chiefs, and postulates a double socialisation, in which attitudes of respect and rebellion are both appropriate, as the key to reconciling their views. Notes Meadís negative comments about traditional society in her appendix which contradict the conventional view which associates the darker side of Samoa with Westernisation.
Argues that the theory of
the importance of culture in shaping human life cannot, in any case, be
refuted by disproving one example and suggests that differences between
Samoa and America or England can only be explained by cultural factors.
Notes and 33 references.
27. Strathern, Marilyn. 1983. The punishment of Margaret Mead. Canberra Anthropologist 6(1): 70-79. Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy
Discusses Freemanís intentions
in attempting to falsify Meadís thesis. Examines some of his contentions
and finds it difficult to know what weighting to give the negative instances
he produces. Critiques Freemanís examples of how an interactionist paradigm
might apply. Discusses the Culture and Personality school in anthropology
and compares Meadís and Freemanís understandings of the relation between
impulse and culture and finds them very similar. Discusses their representations
of Samoan sexuality and rape and attempts to rconcile the two accounts
within a wider Polynesian context. Argues that Freemanís male and chiefly
viewpoint colours his appreciation of the realities of Samoan society.
Contends that Freeman exaggerates anthropologyís commitment to cultural
28 Freeman, Derek. 1983. Inductivism and the test of truth: A rejoinder to Lowell D. Holmes and others. Canberra Anthropology 6(2): 96-192. . Special Volume: Fact and Context in Ethnography: The Samoa Controversy
Defends his position on various issues raised in the preceding issue of Canberra Anthropology and replies to individual critics, accusing them of succumbing to inductivism. Proposes Popperian falsificationism as the remedy. Reiterates his understanding of Meadís main theoretical conclusion and its ready acceptance by Boas, Benedict and mainstream anthropology. Accuses Mead of suppressing contrary evidence - discussing the 1926 hurricane, political strife with the American administration and the stoning of a pastorís house while she was on Taíu. Denies his refutation is an alternative ethnography or a general critique of Meadís ethnography. Details his contacts with Mead and Holmes. Asserts the temporal and geographical homogeneity of Samoan society and the prevalence of residential stability in adolescence. Marshals evidence against Meadís depiction of Samoa as a society practising free love. Defends his data on virginity and recounts anecdotal evidence of the premium placed on virginity by Samoans. Asserts the criminality of moetotolo, citing two Court cases from the 1920s and providing an interactionist analysis of the practice. Considers the widespread Samoan belief that Mead was duped but denies advancing it as his own contention. Discusses Holmesí 1954 research and notes passages contradicting Meadís account. Quotes a letter from Holmes stating, "Mead finds pretty much what she wants to find.... I was forced by my faculty advisor to soften my criticism..." (p.134).
Discusses Boasí understanding of genetic heredity and biological evolution, noting critical discoveries of the mechanisms involved in the 1930s. Explores Boasí defence of Lamarckian inheritance, his belief in cultural determinism and his antipathy to cultural evolution and genetics.
Attacks Holmes objectivity and his selective use of quotations. Defends his own use of Court records and notes the frequency of reported rape in rural areas has been the same as in Apia.
Criticises Bradd Shoreís Salaíilua as an inductivist attempt to substantiate a theoretical assumption of culture as a symbolic system. Notes the authorís failure to interview the murderer and considers that the structuralist explanations advanced obscure such factors as the extreme levels of drunkenness involved. Accuses Shore of getting aga and amio mixed up. Savagely criticises Shoreís attempts to reconcile alternative accounts of Samoa and dismisses his theory of double socialisation. Defends his own experiments with maternal deprivation. Claims underlying similarities in diverse cultures require an explanation in terms of a universal evolved primate nature.
Attacks Schoeffel and Meleiseaís characterisation of the 1920s as a period of stagnation. Argues his youth (younger than Mead when he arrived in Samoa in 1940) and his manaia title facilitated a wide range of friendships with young women. Accuses Schoeffel and Meleisea of making ideologically inspired conjectures and practising a "sociology of ignorance". Rejects the label of a Hobbesian pessimist.
Takes issue with Strathern
over infant bonding and punishment and asserts the necessity of falsificationism
in the social sciences. Records Jarvieís support and discusses the context
in which Meadís Coming of age and Malinowskiís Sex and repression
in savage society became mainstays of the doctrines of cultural relativism
and cultural determinism. Notes the recent publication of refutations of
List of contents, pp.98-99, notes, pp.169-182, and references pp.184-192.
29 Alaíilima, Fay. 1984. Review of Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth, by Derek Freeman. Pacific Studies 7(2): 91-92.
Avers that no-one could doubt
the existence of both Samoas (those depicted by Mead and Freeman). Expresses
unhappiness at Freemanís one-sided focus on the darker side of Samoa. Notes
that Meadís stories lured many young Americans (herself included) to Samoa.
30. McDowell, Nancy. 1984. Review of Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth, by Derek Freeman. Pacific Studies 7(2): 99-140.
Attacks Freemanís depiction as Boas as a cultural determinist, his attempts to refute Meadís conclusions about juvenile delinquency and premarital sex in Samoa, and his inaccurate and selective use of quotations. Claims anthropologists generally agree that human behaviour depends on both biology and culture. Notes Freemanís citation of cultural factors in child socialisation to explain various aspects of Samoan culture and his failure to give more than one example of an interactionist explanation. Dismisses this example (of Samoan respect language as a development to inhibit potentialities for conflict in fono) as demeaning the complexities of behaviour and failing to account for cultural diversity. Argues that biological (physical) anthropology has always been regarded as important in America. Cites research by Boas on head shapes of immigrant children and biological factors affecting longevity as evidence that he was not a cultural determinist but had an abiding interest in biological factors.
Questions the relevance of
Freemanís 1940s research in Western Samoa to Meadís findings. Notes the
contradictory nature of Meadís evidence about premarital sex and ascribes
it to the gap between the ideal and the actual. Attacks Freemanís figures
on virginity and his use of British and Samoan statistics on rates of juvenile
delinquency. Notes Meadís attribution of maladjustment to fundamental discrepancies
between individual temperaments and their cultures as evidence that she
did not discount biological variables. Quotes Shore in conclusion - that
Mead and Freeman are both right and wrong, because culture is complex and
full of contradictions, and different male and female perspectives will
inevitably produce differing accounts.
Notes and 32 references.
31. Wendt, Tuaopepe Felix S. 1984. Review of Margaret Mead and Samoa: the making and unmaking of an anthropological myth, by Derek Freeman. Pacific Studies 7(2): 92-99.
Describes his own reactions to Coming of age, which he had read three or four times by the time he was 17, finding great difficulty in recognising in it any aspects of his own upbringing in a strict religious household. His conclusion was that many things in it were incorrect and that it had been based on superficial and shoddy research.
Observes that Freemanís work
is an able refutation but expresses reservations about the atmosphere of
evangelical puritanism, authoritarianism and punishment he depicts, as
being recognisable but one-sided . Asserts that alofa is the overiding
ethos of Samoa and Freeman should have given a more balanced account. Attacks
Freeman as a pseudo-Samoan and another disenchanted palagi academic in
exile from his own society, portrays his book as a betrayal of his adoptive
country and fears its effects will be negative. Records his personal view
(shared by most Samoans) that Margaret Mead was duped.
32. Freeman, Derek. 1984. Response [to Alaíilima, Wendt and McDowell]. Pacific Studies 7(2): 140-196.
Replies briefly to Alaíilima and Wendt , stressing the importance of the truth and reiterating his love and admiration for the people of Samoa. Depicts McDowell as a cultural determinist and and admirer and associate of Mead. Argues dominance is a part of human ethology in defence of his interactionist explanation of respect language. Contends that physical or biological anthropology may have been a part of American anthropology but it has always been carefully segregated from cultural anthropology. Produces evidence from publications of Boas and his students to support his claims that Boas believed in Lamarckian inheritance, was antipathetic to biological evolution and skeptical about Mendelian heredity, particularly as it applied to humankind.
Defends the cultural unity of Samoa and dismisses the time gap as a factor, claiming that in any case the primary evidence for his refutation comes from Meadís own data and from contemporary historical records. Comments on his alleged lack of understanding of the ideal/actual question and refutes several of Meadís generalizations about the ideal. Outlines the methodology he employed in collecting data on virginity in Saíanapu. Maintains his 20-40% figure for sexual experience represents illicit behaviour which encounters social disapproval and punishment. Defends his use of comparative statistics from other countries as approximate but illuminating. Quotes Holmesípersonal comments to him and claims Holmes really disagrees with many of Meadís conclusions.
Devotes considerable space to Meadís claim that the idea of forceful rape is completely foreign to the Samoan mind. Affirms that rape has always been relatively common in Samoa (including American Samoa in the 1920s), is severely punished, and is a major cause of stress for unmarried Samoan women. Notes what he calls McDowellís bizarre attempt to claim Samoan rapists may only be trying to obtain wives. Claims moetotolo involves force not just deceit. Describes occasions when he has personally been part of groups of young men exchanging information on techniques for rape and moetotolo. Records that adultery was a crime in Samoa in 1926 and claims that punishments were severe and often enforced. Denies claiming that Mead was duped - only that this is the common Samoan view. Criticises arguments for different male and female vantage points claiming close friendships with many Samoan women.
Attacks McDowellís claim
that Bradd Shore shows a better understanding of Samoan culture in his
book Salaíilua. Depicts Shore as a cultural determinist "purporting
to explain an impetuous and violent murder by one drunken chief of another
in terms of Ďcultural structureí". Considers his understanding of amio
and aga (nature and culture) is completely back to front. Cites the 1926
journal of A.F. Judd about an affray in Taíu which Mead knew about but
ignored because it didnít conform with her thesis. Cites the suspension
of an American Samoan chief by the American naval government as evidence
that people did suffer for their convictions. Denies claiming he has proved
adolescence is equally stressful in all cultures, only that Samoa can no
longer be cited in support of the cultural determinist claim that biological
variables are of no significance in the etiology of adolescent behaviour.Defends
charges of devious misquotation at length, accusing McDowell of pedantry
Notes and 85 references.
33. Appell, G.N. 1984. Freemanís refutation of Meadís coming of age in Samoa: The implications for anthropological inquiry. The Eastern Anthropologist 37(3): 183-214.
Unreservedly supports Freemanís
refutation and his arguments for an interactionist paradigm for anthropology.
Affirms Freemanís conclusions in the areas of competition, aggression,
religion, punishment, childrearing, Samoan character and sexual mores and
his explanations of the sources of Meadís errors. Discusses "organic/configurationalist"
versus "repressive" interpretations of cultures and the contention that
anthropologistsí depictions of societies reflect their pre-existing biases
and assumptions but rejects it in the present instance on the grounds that
the Mead/Freeman argument is about facts not interpretations. Criticises
Mead for allowing personal and ideological biases to interfere with her
scientific objectivity. Mentions internal contradictions between her data
and interpretations and notes various pre-World War II criticisms of her
ethnographic reliability. Adduces various reasons for the unprecedented
hostility of American anthropologists to the publication of Freemanís critique,
including Meadís status as a culture heroine and mythic figure, the ideological
nature of cultural determinism and its role in underpinning cultural relativism
and the confusion of Freemanís stance with sociobiology. Attacks American
anthropology for inferior standards, lack of development and according
divinity status to culture. Concludes by outlining his understanding of
interactionism and the possibilities it opens up for evaluating different
sociocultural systems, postulating correlations between biological factors
such as life expectancy and adaptional effectiveness.
Notes and 49 references.
34. Caton, Hiram. 1984. Margaret Mead and Samoa: In support of the Freeman critique. Quadrant (March): 28-32.
Criticises responses from
the anthropological profession and disparages what he calls Meadís transparent
island paradise myth. Postulates the German historical school with its
emphasis on the uniqueness of national experience in the formation of national
culture and mentality as the progenitor of cultural determinism and accuses
anthropology of degenerating into a search for the exotic, uninformed by
any general theory to describe and explain what is common among cultures.
Suggests cultural determinism requires a cultural paradise if it is to
be at the same time a doctrine of hope - that reform is possible by removing
repression in childrearing. Locates Coming of age within the broad
stream of Wilsonian reform politics. Claims anthropologists must now accept
Freemanís interactionist paradigm or defend Meadís fantasy with vilification
and obscurantism. Contends anthropology cannot uphold the myth of manís
infinite diversity without attacking every other science of man. Notes
Freemanís appointment as Professor of Anthropology and Pro-Vice-Chancellor
at the University of Samoa.
35. Levy, Robert I. 1984. Mead, Freeman and Samoa: The problem of seeing things as they are. Ethos 12(1): 85-92.
Discusses the impact of Freemanís
book at a time of soul-searching for anthropology and expresses some disappointment
at his analysis of cultural determinism. Suggests Popper, as a non-Positivist,
held a more restricted notion of the domain of science than Freeman. Indicates
a preference for a reconciliation of the two accounts of Samoa as representing
the differing viewpoints of adolescents and the guardians of religious
and political order. Canvasses Samoan and Melanesian responses to Meadís
and Freemanís anthropology. Constructs an argument in support of different
levels of awareness of oneís own culture, foreshadowed by Gregory Bateson
in his theory of third level learning but rejects any implication of radical
relativism. Typifies many of the communities studied by anthropologists
as total institutions in the sense defined by Erving Goffman (1961) and
contrasts these with more sophisticated and literate cultures in cultural
self-awaremess. Argues for anthropology as a science.
Notes and 13 references.
36. Nardi, Bonnie A. 1984. The height of her powers: Margaret Meadís Samoa. Feminist Studies 10(2): 323-337.
Denounces Freeman for his attempt to sully Margaret Meadís reputation when she is no longer able to defend herself. Views Freemanís book as an underhand attack on feminism and a "celebration of societyís abhorrence of sexual and intellectual freedom for women".
Refers to a general awareness among anthropologists of Meadís errors and limitations and considers Freeman is basically correct on Samoan competition for rank and status, on significant levels of violence and jealousy and the parental and societal prohibitions on premarital sex. Accuses both anthropologists of over-generalisation. Dismisses cultural change in the interim as an explanation and focuses instead on the different sections of the Samoan population under study. Maintains that Samoan girls are not granted sexual freedom but assert it on their own, that there are considerable opportunities for sex, and many illegitimate children. Claims Samoan women are not prudish about sex. Dismisses Freemanís claims about Samoan male attitudes to rape as an ethnic slur and accuses Freeman of displaying excessive interest in the details of the cases he describes. Denounces his statistics on rape as misleading in that they are not age-adjusted and donít take into account the high levels of non-reporting in both Samoa and the United States. Considers Freemanís speculation about whether Mead was hoaxed as "the lowest blow", and attacks him for ageist and sexist bias in not believing the information that girls gave Mead about their own lives.
Contends Freemanís attempt to link his refutation of Meadís ethnography with a general attack on cultural determinism is dishonest, and accuses him of making common cause with sociobiologists. Notes the lack of any real evidence in support of his interactionist theory.
The author spent a year in
a Samoan village in 1980, studying reproductive decision-making.
37. Scheper-Hughes, Nancy. 1984. The Margaret Mead controversy : Culture, biology and anthropological inquiry. Human Organization 43(1): 85-93.
Examines Freemanís claims to have refuted Meadís ethnography and finds they fail on theoretical grounds, no such refutation being possible in anthropological enquiry. Compares the controversy with reactions to her own published research on rural Ireland, which stressed economic, psychological and social problems and contradicted earlier authoritative ethnography. Notes similarities in Freemanís and Meadís approaches - for example, the culturalist nature of Freemanís claim that corporal punishment produces hostility and aggression in Samoan men. Decries his failure to deliver on promises of a new interactionist paradigm, referring to it as a tired and outmoded stratigraphic model where culture is seen as a veneer covering deeper passions and emotions. Considers that the expression of emotion is as much cultural as the mechanisms of social control. Suggests moetotolo is better translated as marriage by capture in many cases and should not be included statistically with rape. Attacks Freemanís description of primary mother-child and nuclear family bonds in Samoa as manifestations of a universal biological instinct, referring to various cultures and situations where such feelings do not exist. Contends that ethnographical accounts cannot be separated from the anthropologist who wrote them and that Mead, as a young women and Freeman, as a middle-aged man would inevitably have different and unreconcileable perspectives.
Regrets loss of authority
for social scientists generally as one result of the controversy and praises
Meadís role in getting "culture" accepted as the basic reason for human
differences, in widening opportunities for women, in the civil rights and
anti-war movements and, together with Dr Spock, in creating a climate encouraging
communication and permissiveness in childrearing among her parentsí generation.
38. Ember, Melvin. 1985. Evidence and science in ethnography: Reflections on the Freeman-Mead controversy. American Anthropologist 87(4): 906-910.
Attacks Freemanís claims
to have refuted Meadís observations on the basis that their studies were
carried out in different places at different periods. Decries the lack
of objective evidence in both ethnographies, claiming that only systematic
random sampling of behaviours by a number of different information gatherers
can produce statistically significant data. Describes variations he found
in three Samoan villages in his own fieldwork in 1955-56 (researching correlations
between remoteness, commercialisation and political autonomy). Suggests
increasing commercialisation and urbanisation as reasons for Meadís and
Freemanís divergent conclusions. Accuses Freeman of being authoritarian
and aggressive in accusing both himself and Mead of being ignorant of certain
facts about Polynesia. Contends people are receptive to genetic explanations
of cultural differences when they want to justify social inequalities.
Fears anthropology has been made to look foolish and suggests Freemanís
book should not have been published.
Notes and 6 references.
39. Freeman, Derek. 1985. A reply to Emberís reflections on the Freeman-Mead controversy. American Anthropologist 87(4): 910-917.
Claims Ember is defending
his 1973 anthropology textbook which endorsed Meadís conclusions. Defends
the scientific nature of his attack on Mead by quoting Popper on verificationism
versus the critical method of error elimination. Notes the relative ease
of falsification as opposed to verification in relation to several of Meadís
more extreme generalisations about rape, jealousy and war in Samoa - quoting
from official statistics and Court records of American Samoa. Maintains
one primary source of refutation is found in Meadís own data. Argues that
Taíu and Saíanapu were similar enough to justify comparison and that Meadís
historical generalisations can be refuted by reference to historical texts.
Cites 1967 statistics of rape and "criminal aggression" in Western Samoa
to refute suggestions that this type of crime is predominantly an urban
phenomenon. Examines Meadís pre-existing knowledge of Western Polynesian
cultures in 1926. Details pre-publication support for his book from Samoan
academics and publishing offers from other academic presses.
Notes and 36 references.
40. Hooper, Antony. 1985. Review of Margaret Mead and Samoa: The making and unmaking of an anthropological myth, by Derek Freeman. Oceania 55(3): 224-225.
Suggests the special review
sections in American Anthropologist, Pacific Studies and
Canberra Anthropologist as the best means of informing oneself about
the points at issue in the controversy. States Freeman has made no headway
with his interactionist paradigm and contends his positivist approach to
social facts means he ignores the most interesting current debates in social
theory. Praises Freeman for drawing attention to Meadís shortcomings and
avers that his own views about Samoa are closer to Freeman than Mead. Deplores
Freemanís adversary tactics and hopes he will produce a more rounded ethnography
in the future.
References not noted.
41. Reyman, Jonathan E. and Joyce D. Hammond. 1985. Some comments on the Freeman-Mead controversy. American Anthropologist 87(2): 393-394.
Attacks Freemanís failure
to distinguish between Ďidealí and Ďrealí culture. Claims a cult of virginity
prevailed at the ideal level in the United States in the 1950s and early
1960s, while in reality premarital sexual intercourse was a fact of life
for most. Similarly, studies indicate that in the majority of marriages
at least one partner engages in extramarital sexual activity.
42. Freeman, Derek. 1985. Response to Reyman and Hammond. American Anthropologist 87(2): 394-395.
Refers Reyman and Hammond
to page 239 of his book, claiming he is fully aware of the distinction.
Quotes Holmes, Shore, Schoeffel and Meleisea, and Wendt in support of his
contention that Samoa has always prohibited premarital and extramarital
sex as an ideal. Notes that Meadís survey showed over 50% of the girls
in her sample were virgins. Outlines the methods and assumptions he used
in his own survey which found a figure of 73%. Quotes assertions by Mead
(1959) and Honigman, J.J. (1963) about Samoan sexuality which he considers
are totally at variance with the ethnographic facts.
Notes and 9 references.
43. Young, R.E. and S. Juan. 1985. Freemanís Margaret Mead myth: The ideological virginity of anthropologists. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology 21(1): 64-81.
Generally supports Freemanís refutation of Meadís account of Samoa but claims it fails conspicuously as an argument about the nature of anthropology. Suggests anthropologists were already well aware of problems with Meadís work and that the proper audience for the book is rather the educated public. Outlines Freemanís contentions about the development of anthropology and the genesis of Meadís Samoan fieldwork and succinctly summarizes his ethnographic evidence in contradiction of her findings. Attacks Freemanís depiction of mainstream anthropology as supporting cultural determinism, citing the widespread interest in physical anthropology in American universities. Quotes from anthropological textbooks on the effects of culture on genotype and from Kroeber and Boas on the importance of hereditary factors. Quotes Mead in rejection of cultural relativism. Records various criticisms of Mead from the 1930s on. Argues Boasí influence on Mead has been exaggerated.
Cites other examples of studies
proving aggression is caused by cultural factors and notes that disproving
a single instance does not disprove a theory. Criticises Freemanís use
of statistics and overstatement and suggests the book will appeal to proponents
of various right-wing doctrines. Suggests (absolute) cultural determinism
is a "straw man" and the proper debate is about the degree to which biological
and cultural explanations should be stressed with one position being that
of cultural maximalism.
44. Patience, Allan and Joseph Wayne Smith. 1986. Derek Freeman and Samoa: the making and unmaking of a biobehavioral myth. American Anthropologist 88(1): 157-162.
Attempts to show that Freemanís
refutation is based on a misapplication of an in any case fundamentally
unsound Popperian metascience and criticises his biobehavioral model of
culture. Suggests a comprehensive cross-cultural comparison of family life
would be necessary to falsify Meadís thesis that coming of age in Samoa
was easier than in the United States. Argues for reconciling both representations
of Samoan sexuality, suggesting different rules for taupou and commoners
and noting differences in time and place. Emphasises that refuting Mead
does not logically invalidate Boasian cultural determinism. Discusses Popperian
assertions about scientific truth and rejects Popperian epistemology as
rationally unacceptable. Criticises Freemanís interactionist paradigm as
unreconcileable with Popperian requirements and considers his notion of
a biobehavioral basis to behaviour quite resistant to falsification.
45. Freeman, Derek. 1986. Rejoinder to Patience and Smith. American Anthropologist 88(1): 162-167.
Asserts that Meadís principal
conclusion was that biological variables are of no significance in the
etiology of adolescent behaviour, not that coming of age was easier in
Samoa. Denies the possibility of reconciling his and Meadís views on sexuality.
Denies concluding that Meadís informants must have lied but notes this
view is widely held in Samoa. Affirms the cultural uniformity of Samoa.
Denies claiming his refutation of Mead disproves Boasian cultural determinism,
contending only that Meadís researches can no longer be cited in support
of it. Accuses Mead of making claims which could have been readily contradicted
by reference to contemporary newspapers and court records and historical
accounts. Defends Popperian theories of criticism and scientific progress
as deriving from a long tradition. Denies advocating a biobehavioral paradigm,
but affirms the importance of both biological and cultural variables in
human behaviour. Describes the ideological position of absolute cultural
determinism embraced by Boas, Lowie and Mead and laid out in Kroeberís
eighteen professions of 1915.
Notes and 57 references.
46. Rappaport, Roy A. 1986. Desecrating the holy woman: Derek Freemanís attack on Margaret Mead. The American Scholar. 55(3): 313-347.
annoyance at disproportionate media interest in a controversy about two
books of little real importance to theoretical debates within the discipline.
Affirms that Coming of age in Samoa contained errors had long been
known among anthropologists. Explores Meadís real significance in the twentieth
century as a generator of myth in the most positive sense. Examines the
nature of myth as an idealised picture of the world as it should be and
suggests that myth has its own type of truth, invulnerable to falsification
but susceptible to withdrawal of acceptance. Links Meadís mythmaking to
the sexual emancipation of women and the struggle against racism and compares
it to the ugly eugenicist myths of the inter-war geneticists. Denies Boas
and Kroeber were absolute cultural determinists and attacks Freemanís motives,
methods and conclusions, describing his chapters on Boas in particular
as muddled, perverse and mischievous misrepresentations. Argues that the
vague generalisations of anthropology are not susceptible to formal Popperian
falsification. Aligns Freeman with the eugenics movement, the Ku Klux Klan
and Adolf Hitler, viewing his "interactionist" paradigm as calling for
the re-attribution of cultural differences to biological variance among
races. Concludes with an outline of the contemporary anthropological consensus
about evolution, culture and heredity, with culture being a constructed
and accepted order of phenomena based upon symbols which creates meaning
and a basis for organising human action, and evolution revealing a human
brain essentially unchanged biologically despite the vast elaboration of
culture in the last 40,000 years
References not noted.
47. Holmes, Lowell D. 1987. Quest for the real Samoa: The Mead/Freeman controversy & beyond. South Hadley, Mass.: Bergin & Garvey.
Holmes spent 9 months in Manuía and Taíu in 1954 doing fieldwork for a restudy of Margaret Meadís conclusions from 1926. The book is a sustained rebuttal of Freemanís depictions of Boasian determinism and Samoan society and a qualified defence of Meadís original conclusions.
Details methods used to gather information and limitations imposed by language and informant reticence on sensitive issues. Describes the Samoan society he saw in 1954 with particular attention to rank and village councils, Christianity and childcare. Rejects the counter-hypothesis of significant cultural change in the period 1926-1954. Assesses Meadís findings in the light of his own research, concluding that "the validity of her Samoan research is remarkably high". Expresses reservations, however, about the degree of sexual freedom and the lack of competition portrayed by Mead. Postulates that Meadís youth and sex gave her a different viewpoint in these areas.
Briefly summarizes a number of psychometric studies of Samoan character. Assesses Freemanís critique of Mead and finds it deficient in numerous areas. Contends that much of Freemanís evidence is taken from other, more urbanised parts of Samoa and from a different era and is therefore irrelevant to any discussion of Taíu in 1926. Attacks Freemanís motives, methods, scholarship, integrity and conclusions and accuses him of ethnocentric bias as a New Zealander. Comments on various Samoan responses to Freemanís depiction of Samoa.
A postscript by Eleanor Leacock
entitled The problems of youth in contemporary Samoa ascribes more
recent levels of juvenile crime and suicide (factors used by Freeman to
support his claims of universal difficulties in adolescence) to colonisation,
unemployment and the breakdown of traditional social control mechanisms.
x, 209pp. Index and bibliography, pp.195-201.
48. Freeman, Derek. 1987. Comment on Holmesís "Quest for the real Samoa". American Anthropologist 89(4): 930-935.
Claims Holmes basically ignores
his refutation of Meadís major conclusions in the area of adolescent disturbances
and social environment. Focuses on rape, sexuality and intervillage strife
and cites examples of Holmes contradicting his own conclusions and selectively
altering the wording of critical sections of the book lifted from his dissertation
to bolster his defence of Mead. Criticises Holmesí lack of Samoan language
and the briefness of his stay in the islands. Notes that he (Freeman) was
younger than Mead when he first arrived in Samoa in 1940 and speaks of
his leadership of the Saíanapu Ďaumaga and his close friendships with several
Samoan girls. Quotes Albert Wendt and Aiono Dr Fanaafi Le Tagaloa as Samoan
expert evidence in his favour. Dismisses as fatuous Holmesí claims that
his relations with Samoans were jeopeardised by his New Zealand nationality.
Accuses Holmes of failing to understand the nature and purpose of scholarly
refutation. Dismisses Eleanor Leacockís postscript as the product of only
10 weeks in Samoa.
Notes and 31 references.
49. Freeman, Derek. 1987. Review of Quest for the real Samoa: The Mead/Freeman controversy and beyond, by Lowell D. Holmes. Journal of the Polynesian Society 96(3): 392-395.
Claims Holmesí book is an
example of the "Festinger reaction" or the response of a believer "when
prophecy fails". Accuses Holmes of selective quotation and ignoring Meadís
own data on deviant and maladjusted individuals. Notes evidence from Holmes
Ph.D. dissertation which contradict some of Meadís generalizations about
Samoan sexuality and aggression. Claims Holmes has misunderstood the nature
of a refutation.
50. Laing, Patricia Kinloch. 1987. Review of Quest for the real Samoa: The Mead/Freeman controversy and beyond, by Lowell D. Holmes. Journal of the Polynesian Society 96(3): 395-400.
Compares the Mead/Freeman
controversy to a Samoan faíatau in which talking chiefs try to outdo eachother
for the honour of being chosen as the best orator. Denies the concept of
a single "real Samoa" or a single real version which can be discovered
scientifically and questions the utility of quibbles over ethnographic
detail. Notes ethnographic bias and the role of the observer as important
factors in anthropological understanding and criticises Popperian notions
of science which donít take these factors into account. Contrasts "scientific"
attempts at standardisation, reliability and validity with an acceptance
of multicultural diversity, imspiration and creativity.
51. Bargatzky, Thomas. 1988. Review of Quest for the real Samoa: The Mead/Freeman controversy and beyond, by Lowell D. Holmes. Pacific studies 11(3):131-151.
Finds the book disappointing
and depressing, "a desperate attempt to buttress earlier conclusions".
Attacks Holmes for republishing earlier material and ignoring Freemanís
subsequent replies to various charges, and notes inaccuracies in his ethnography
and prehistory. Accuses Holmes of self-contradiction, omission and evasion
and repeats the story that he refrained from criticising Mead for fear
of losing grants.. Quotes from Holmesí own ethnography to refute his agreement
with Mead on sexual freedom in Samoa. Criticises him for misrepresenting
Freemanís interactionism as sociobiology. Denounces the use of Napoleone
Tuiteleleapagaís statements in support of Meadís ethnology in the light
of Holmesí earlier reports on his deviousness and unreliability. Defends
the genuineness of Freemanís Samoan title. Attacks Holmesí attempts to
portray Taíu as culturally isolated from the rest of Samoa, asserting a
comparable degree of isolation for Saíanapu (site of Freemanís study) in
1941-43. Comments on the unprecedented levels of opprobrium and vilification
directed at Freeman and attempts to deny him effective reply to his critics.
Criticises cultural relativism as self-contradictory and ethically dangerous.
Notes and 57 references.
52. Appell, G.N. and T.N. Madan, eds. 1988. Choice and morality in anthropological perspective: Essays in honour of Derek Freeman. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
A festschrift from Freemanís students for his 70th birthday. A 22 page introduction, by G.N. Appell, entitled Derek Freeman: Notes towards an intellectual autiobiography, states the case for the "interactionist paradigm", which rejects cultural relativism for a science that will "evaluate cultural behaviour in terms of its cognitive accuracy in mapping reality and its adaptive value, which focuses on the discovery of universal principles of cultural dynamics and sees customs as adaptational innovations for dealing with pre-existing emotional and behavioural proclivities of human beings". The introduction continues with an outline of Freemanís fieldwork in Samoa and Borneo, his academic career at A.N.U., his disillusionment with current anthropological theory, his studies in ethology, evolutionary biology, primatology, neurosciences, psychology and genetics and the development of interactionism as a new approach.
The remainder of the book
consists of ethnological essays on various societies in Papua-Niugini and
xv, 248 pp. Index and references.
53. Feinberg, Richard. 1988. Margaret Mead and Samoa: "Coming of age" in fact and fiction. American Anthropologist 90(3): 656-663.
Argues that a careful reading of Coming of age does not corroborate the view that Mead saw Samoa as a romantic paradise. Suggests a discrepancy between the popular perception and Meadís actual account. Considers Freeman has performed a useful service in making the educated public aware of the inaccuracies in Meadís glib generalisations.
Quotes passages painting
an idyllic image and accuses Mead of a tendency to exaggerate and oversimplify.
Considers sections and claims conflicting with this image chapter by chapter
- in relation to competition among men for rank, the burdens of the taupou,
the isolation of certain individuals, sexual relations out of wedlock,
personality and stress, and Meadís specific examples of deviance and maladjustment.
Suggests that Coming of age is really two books - one an ethnography
and the other a message to parents and educators. Attributes Meadís inconsistencies
to oversimplification as a result of writing for a popular audience, a
general bias in ethnography to reporting the startling and different rather
than the expected and mundane, and Meadís sense of mission. Argues, however,
that critical readers should have been able to find sufficient information
in the ethnographic portions of the book.
Notes and 8 references.
54. Foerstel, Lenora. 1988. Margaret Mead: From a cultural/historical perspective. Central Issues in Anthropology 8:25-35.
Describes the intellectual
background to Boasí, Benedictís and Meadís fight against racist ideologies
in the early 20th century, and stresses the Freudian origins of the ideas
of instinct and frustration. Discusses wartime applications of cultural
personality theories of culture in studies of Japanese and German societies
by Benedict and others, which saw particular child-rearing practices as
producing anti-democratic personality characteristics in these countries.
Portrays a Western ethnography studying the third world through a distorting
individualist lens. Notes inaccuracies in Meadís description of Tchambuli
culture and ascribes them to her limited and seasonal acquaintance with
the society. Mentions allegations of racism against Mead from "rising new
scholars" of Papua-Niugini for her depiction of the Manus as a society
unique in the region in its ability to adapt to the impact of the 20th
century, and for her unfavourable comments about other groups. Notes an
indigenous view of anthropologists as "co-conspirators in neo-colonialism".
The author did fieldwork with Mead in Manus in 1953.
56. Leacock, Eleanor. 1988. Anthropologists in search of a culture: Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman and all the rest of us. Central Issues in Anthropology 8:3-23.
Lists previous criticisms
of Freemanís work, including misrepresentation of Boas, selectivity in
citation, ignoring the effects of capitalist penetration and colonization,
ignoring other instances of untroubled and sexually permissive adolescence.
Accuses him of an ideologically motivated attack on a leading female scholar
and of substituting a negative stereotype about Samoans for a positive
one, insensitively ignoring possible harmful effects on Samoan emigrant
communities. Criticises Mead for failing to see tensions below the surfaceof
Samoan society, and ignoring colonialism. Admits a degree of romanticisation
in Meadís depiction but excuses it as a useful counter to Western ethnocentricity.
Sees any role for biological determinism as racist and as providing a basis
for renewed Western hegemonic claims. Criticises Freemanís portrayal of
the impact of Christianity and asserts a different model, backed with extracts
from missionary accounts, which emphasises successful Samoan resistance
to Victorian mores and ethics. Contrasts a traditional anthropology, often
unwittingly committed to maintaining the status quo, with an applied, advocacy
anthropology, which works with the oppressed for social change - incidentally
gaining thereby much greater acceptance in the community under study. Raises
the problem of traditional inequalities but notes that, in Samoa, women
can appeal to tradition in asserting status and rights, as male domination
is a Western norm. Calls for a historically oriented, advocacy-linked anthropology
to be carried out in collaboration with the local people, that sees culture
as multi-faceted and flexible, and a resource to be drawn on in relation
to contemporary needs
Notes and 31 references.
57. Mageo, Jeannette Marie. 1988. Malosi: A psychological exploration of Meadís and Freemanís work and of Samoan aggression. Pacific Studies 11(2): 25-65.
Critiques Meadís and Freemanís
views of Samoan culture in the light of her own knowledge of Samoa. The
author is married to a Samoan and has lived in Samoa for 6 years. Begins
with a semantic analysis of relevant Samoan words and attitudes to violence
and force. Succinctly outlines Meadís conclusions about Samoa, stressing
Meadís theoretical roots in Freudian psychology. Generally agrees with
Freemanís contentions but attacks him on a number of points - that he mistakenly
aligns Mead with behaviorism in psychology, his ethological position on
human aggression. Supports Freeman in locating the origins of aggression
in heavy-handed punishment of children. Repudiates Leacockís general contentions
about the deleterious effects of Christianity and Western civilization,
but cites a number of sociological explanations for increasing problems
in recent years. Discusses the expected submission/dominance, humility/authority
relationship between child and parent, elder and younger sibling, wife
and husband. Explores the theme of dominance/submission in adult life in
the quest for rank and titles. Considers aspects of punishment, rejecting
Freemanís depiction of it as capricious because in Samoan terms the insubordinate
attitude is more important than the magnitude of the offence. Notes that
punishment confirms the status of the punisher. Comments on peer group
rivalry and inter-group conflict. Illustrates her contentions with examples
from her own experience.
Notes and 56 references.
58. Paxman, David B. 1988. Freeman, Mead, and the eighteenth century controversy over Polynesian society. Pacific studies 11(3):1-19.
Argues that the disagreement
between Mead and Freeman over the nature of Samoan society is only the
latest development in a debate which first began in the eighteenth century,
and is ultimately unresolvable, given the problems of subjectivity, interpretation
and the reliability of informants. Suggests that speculation about the
nature of humankind in the light of cultural differences will always reflect
the predispositions of the observer. Presents extracts from eighteenth
century sources locating the causes of cultural difference in environmental
and climatological factors. Attacks the validity of Popperian falsification
in ethnography. Notes that the refutation of a theory of cultural uniformity
is easy because a single example of diversity will suffice. A theory of
diversity/anomaly is much more difficult to disprove because a uniformity
in one instance doesnít affect the possibility of diversity in every other
59. Freeman, Derek. 1989. Holmes, Mead and Samoa. American Anthropologist 91(3): 758-762.
Attacks Holmesí "starkly
illogical stance" and accuses him of trying to defend an untenable position.
Quotes Meadís letters to her publisher and Coming of age in Samoa
to affirm that Mead saw her work in Samoa as an experiment and asserts
that Mead and Boas were unqualified cultural determinists in this respect
anyway. Quotes the transcript of a 1987 interview with Frank Heimans, where
Holmes says that the "kind of aggressive rape that occurs in the Western
world" does not occur in Samoa and if it does it is due to recent social
disorganisation. Gives details of some particularly violent rapes from
Court records of the period. Claims that Holmes, when Freeman met him in
1987, had "not even a rudimentary command of the Samoan language". Notes
Holmes shared a house in Samoa with the later Governor of American Samoa,
A.P.Lutali who claims to have objected to an account of Samoan sexuality
based on Meadís research, at the University of Hawaii in 1948 (interview
with Frank Heimans, 1987). Presents evidence of Faíapuaía Faíamu that she
and her friend deliberately misled Mead as a joke.
Notes and c.40 references.
60. Freeman, Derek. 1989. Faíapuaía Faíamu and Margaret Mead. American Anthropologist 91(4): 1017-1022.
Cites three written sources which mention the Samoan story that Mead was the victim of fibbing pranks "tau faíaseíe" or "tau faíalili" as explanation for her accounts of Samoan sexual mores. Outlines Faíapuaía Faíamuís background and her 1926 friendship with Mead as an English-speaking companion on various trips to other villages. Gives a transcript (in English and Samoan) of a sworn statement she made to the Secretary of Samoan Affairs in the Government of American Samoa in 1987, claiming she was "just joking" (ula i ai) and "fibbed and fibbed" (o le pepelo, pepelo a i ai matou) about what she "did at nights", that Mead never checked or challenged the stories they told, and that, in reality, sexual morality was very strict.
Affirms the veracity of the
testimony on the basis of it being made in public to a high chief and sworn
on the Bible by a devout Christian. Claims there is now a convincing explanation
for Meadís account being so much at odds with others.
Notes and 17 references.
61. Caton, Hiram, ed. 1990. The Samoa reader: Anthropologists take stock. New York: Lanham.
Presents a large number of excerpts from most of the significant books and journal articles about the Mead/Freeman controversy and background material on theories of cultural and biological determinism. . Sections cover theories of culture, Samoan ethnography and ethnographic method, the history of the controversy and professional ethics in anthropology. Most of the excerpts are from 3 to 6 pages in length and each section begins with a slightly longer introductory essay by the editor. Derek Freeman contributes several special essays in response to various criticisms, comments on his relationships with Margaret Mead and Lowell D. Holmes and publishes correspondence with the latter and with Alexander Kohn.
Most of the extracts are taken from scholarly articles in anthropological journals but other, more personal material conveys something of the emotional side of the controversy . The overall impression is generally sympathetic to Freeman but opposing vewpoints are also presented. Contributors include Margaret Mead, Phyllis Grosskurth, Bradd Shore, Robert I. Levy, Alfred Kroeber (his "eighteen professions" of 1914), Clifford Geertz, Roy A. Rappoport, Robin Fox, George N. Appell, Jeanette Mageo, Marvin Harris, Lowell D. Holmes, Thomas Bargatzky, Mary Lefkowitz, Robert Levy, Hiram Caton, Nancy McDowell, Lola Romanucci-Ross, Richard Goodman, Allan Patience, Sir Edmund Leach, Annette B. Weiner, Ivan Brady, Bradd Shore and Richard Basham.
Notable individual items
include an outline, by the editor, of Freemanís intellectual development
and career in anthropology, a 1929 article by Mead in Parentsí magazine
about adolescence in Samoa, an anonymous refereeís report on Freemanís
Margaret Mead and Samoa and a letter from Margaret Mead to Richard
Goodman commenting on Samoan vulnerability to small insults and slights
in the light of the experience of host nations of Samoan communities abroad
and on the sheltered, alcohol-free position of Taíu in 1926.
xii, 351pp. Index and bibliographies pp. 333-345.
Stephen O. 1990. Problematic aspects of Freemanís account of Boasian culture.
Current Anthropology 31(4): 401-407.
Accuses Freeman of using
selective quotation to misrepresent the views on heredity, culture and
evolution held by Boas, Lowie, Kroeber, Sapir and other American anthropologists
and to exaggerate their closeness as a group. Emphasises Meadís non-acceptance
by mainstream American anthropology and contends Freeman has inflated her
real importance. Lists disagreements on fundamental issues between those
labeled Boasians by Freeman, and Boasí isolated position in the profession
during the war years. Denies a pivotal role for Boas in setting Meadís
research agenda and contends Ogburn and Wissler may have been more influential.
Claims the doctrine of cultural determinism was generally accepted by 1926
and Boas was not particularly interested in Meadís proposed fieldwork.
Notes skepticism about Meadís research and findings on the part of Lowie,
Kroeber and other anthropologists of the 1930s and argues Freemanís claims
of uncritical acceptance are unfounded. Notes Meadís stronger theoretical
links with Benedictian cultural configurationalism and mentions with surprise
the uncritical acceptance of Meadís Coming of Age by British Empire Oceanists
who should have known better.
Notes and 71 references.
63. Weimer, Donna S. 1990. A rhetorical analysis of a scientific controversy: Margaret Mead versus Derek Freeman in cultural anthropology. Ph.D. diss., Pennsylvania State University.
Analyses Margaret Mead
and Samoa using Burkeís method of entitlement, cluster-agon analysis
and structure. "Entitlement reveals the primary agon to be between two
agents, Mead and Freeman, rather than two sets of evidence. The cluster-agon
analysis reveals Freemanís god-term to be Ďscienceí. He associates [Meadís]
research with Ďdepictioní, Ďerrorí,...íromantic notionsí, Ďideologyí, and
Ďyouthí.... The structure reveals that despite the quantity of evidence
Freeman adduces to suport his claims, the evidence is fragmented and decontextualized."
Concludes that the form of Freemanís refutation is "dissatisfying" and
supports claims of anthropologists that their resistance results from an
ethnographically problematic text. A final chapter reviews the scholarly
response and summarises some of the questions raised.
Derek. 1991. On Franz Boas and the Samoan researches of Margaret Mead.
Current Anthropology 32(3): 322-330.
Reiterates his belief that
Mead was sent to Samoa by Boas to study the influence of culture and biology
on adolescent stress levels, noting Meadís many published statements to
this effect and Murrayís reliance on a truncated version of Boasí letter
to Mead outlining her research agenda. Defends his characterisation of
Boas and other anthropologists as a group in their professional collaboration
and shared convictions about culture as the most important determinant
of human behaviour. Acknowledges published reservations and skepticism
from Lowie and others but contends none of it questioned her extreme environmentalist
conclusions, nor did it prevent Coming of age from attaining classic
status with the educated public, becoming a set text for tens of thousands
of students and having its conclusions uncritically incorporated into anthropological
textbooks, encyclopedias and other literature. Lists scholars accepting
and repeating Meadís assertions and asserts the bulk of them had doctorates
from American universities.
Notes and 130+ references.
Stephen O. 1991. On Boasians and Margaret Mead: Reply to Freeman.
Current Anthropology 32(4): 448-452.
Objects to Freemanís representation
of the history of anthropology and accuses him of further selective quotation.
Stresses Lowieís critical review of Coming of age (q.v.) and less
than favourable reaction to some of her later books by Sapir and others.
Accuses Freeman again of overrating the importance of Meadís research and
findings to Boasian cultural determinism, which was already generally accepted.
Reports that only 11 of 27 pre-1983 anthropological textbooks for students
incorporate Meadís conclusions about Samoan sexuality. Contends that Meadís
global characterisations of the ethos of Samoan culture are the antithesis
of the hypercautious particularism of Boasian ethnography. Agrees Mead
spent little time in Samoa studying adolescents, that she followed her
own agenda and her conclusions were hastily researched and erroneous, but
suggests this is because she paid too little attention to her ostensible
mentor, not too much. Concludes that it is a legitimate scientific enterprise
to challenge Meadís conclusions but not to give the impression that leading
Boasians accepted and incoporated them.
Notes and 46 references.
66. Freeman, Derek. 1991. Thereís tricks ií thí world: An historical analysis of the Samoan researches of Margaret Mead. Visual Anthropology Review 7(1): 103-128.
Considers the genesis and
context of Meadís Samoan fieldwork using published material and unpublished
letters and reports from Mead, Boas and Benedict. Comments on Meadís probable
preconceptions about Polynesian promiscuity. Gives a detailed account of
events over the 9 months of Meadís sojourn in Samoa. Suggests that Mead
spent most of her time engaged in general ethnographical research at the
expense of her prescribed study of adolescence. Describes the relationship
betweeen Mead and Faíapuaía Faíamu and the circumstances which the author
believes led to an excessive reliance on Faíapuaía and a second informant.
Speculates on the conjunction of factors which led to the anthropologistís
willing acceptance of the stories she was told. Concludes with a savage
attack on a review by Adam Kuper of Frank Heimansí film about the controversy.
References not noted.
67. Cote, James E. 1992. Was Mead wrong about coming of age in Samoa?: An analysis of the Mead/Freeman controversy for scholars of adolescence and human development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 21(5): 499-527.
Condenses Meadís reasons
for the absence of adolescent difficulties in Samoa to the homogeneity
of Samoan culture and the casual nature of Samoan culture. Emphasizes the
isolation and smallness of Taíu in 1925. Outlines Meadís own defence of
her research from the introductory material to later editions of Coming
or age and The social organization of Manuía - the "temporary
felicitous relaxation" and "little Margaret among the children" theses.
Postulates a complex, multifaceted and flexible culture defying easy definition.
Accuses Mead of inappropriate generalisation in chapters written at her
publisherís request. Defends Meadís understanding of the role of biological
factors and quotes recent research proving the minor role played by such
factors in explaining variance in adolescent behaviour. Attacks Freemanís
characterisation of Meadís downward deviants as delinquents and his misuse
of official statistics on juvenile crime. Blames Western influences for
Samoan crime rates. Quotes Alaíilima and Holmes in support of Mead. Concludes
with qualified support for the accuracy of Meadís observations but criticism
for her overgeneralisation and unsubstantiated speculation. Notes Samoan
resentment of Freemanís negative portrayal and Christian Samoan resentment
of Meadís claims about promiscuity.
68. Freeman, Derek. 1992. Paradigms in collision: The far-reaching controversy over the Samoan researches of Margaret Mead and its significance for the human sciences. Canberra: Australian National University.
First given as a public lecture
at A.N.U. in 1991. Freeman records his conviction that the scientific paradigm
that "all human behaviour is the result of social conditioning" is giving
way to a new recognition of the importance of a phylogenetically-given
primate nature. Represents the vocal and ad hominem opposition of anthropologists
to his refutation of Meadís findings as typical of the persistence of outmoded
dogma in scientific enquiry and asserts that the evidence of Faíapuaía
Faíamu regarding her fibs to Mead in 1926 places his contentions beyond
doubt. Briefly discusses developments in the fields of DNA analysis of
evolutionary divergence, ethology and primatology, noting discoveries of
genetic origins of diseases with behavioural components and research on
monozygotic twins. Asserts the unity of humankind and its close relationship
with certain primates, notes the existence of numerous universal factors
in human culture and behaviour and posits a phylogenetically-given human
nature coexisting with cultural institutions which have developed from
the exercise of the human faculty of choice.
69. Marshall, Mac. 1993. The Wizard of Oz meets the wicked witch of the East: Freeman, Mead and ethnographic authority. American Ethnologist 20(3): 604-617.
Analyses Freemanís rhetoric
and lexical devices in chapters 2 and 3 of Margaret Mead and Samoa
and finds that Mead and her work are overwhelmingly described in negative
terms, other researchers in neutral terms and Freeman in positive terms.
Gives frequencies for various words. Suggests Freeman has harmed his cause
with rhetorical overkill.
Notes and 34 references.
70. Cote, James E. 1994. Adolescent storm and stress: An evaluation of the Mead-Freeman controversy. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Attacks Freeman and defends
Meadís thesis of Samoan society (or at least Taíuan society in 1926) as
the "negative instance" of a culture without adolescent stress. Accuses
Freeman of misrepresenting the views of cultural determinists such as Mead
and Boas but tends to present Freemanís own position as that of a narrow
biological determinist ignoring arguments based on cross-cultural constants
and universal human biological imperatives. Refutes Freemanís major accusations
point by point, including Faíapua Faíamuís statements that she and her
friends deliberately misled Mead. Argues that Meadís Taíu of 1926 was unique
in its isolation and that the lifestyles described by Mead reflected a
traditional and superior, non-Christian past. Contends that Freemanís perspective
as a male and a confidant of chiefs cut off any access to the experiences
and views of young women. Paints a picture of Freeman as too close to the
society he writes about and concerned, as a man and a Samoan (honorary)
matai with friends in matai circles to uphold an idealised picture of Samoan
society. Discusses early accounts of Samoa and postulates that sexual practices
were very different in the pre-contact period and that missionary influence
has imposed "Victorian" values conducive to wage-labour and capital accumulation.
Examines the current position of Samoan youth in the light of statistics
on suicide and criminal offending and concludes that Western influences
have led to cultural disenfranchisement and the eradication of a semi-autonomous
sexuality. The author, a sociologist, has no personal knowledge of Samoa
but has made an extensive study of the literature.
xiv, 186pp. Bibliography and indexes.
71. Grant, Nicole J. 1995. From Margaret Meadís field notes: What counted as "sex" in Samoa? American Anthropologist 97(4): 678-682.
Suggests that female autonomy
and power influenced the social organisation of what counted as "sex" in
traditional Samoa, with penetrative intercourse being proscribed, but manual
and oral sexual practices being freely engaged in outside marriage. Adept
lovers were expert at having sex without the risk of pregnancy and this
type of sex was more conducive to female pleasure than intercourse - indeed
virtually assured it. Western influences gradually introduced a new cultural
construction of sexuality. Mead was describing a transitional period in
Taíu in 1926. Uses several excerpts from Meadís field notes to support
her hypothesis. Suggests retraction of her original oral testimony by Faíapuaía
Faíamu must be viewed in the context of social change in this area. .
72. Orans, Martin. 1996. Not even wrong: Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman and the Samoans. Novato, Calif.: Chandler and Sharp.
Compares Meadís field notes and correspondence with the published version of Coming of age and concludes that she had been able to form a reasonably accurate picture of Samoan culture and sexuality. However, she then selectively used the information she had gathered to argue a case for cultural determinism and a more permissive sexual code, when the data she had collected would have equally supported the opposite case. Claims her fieldwork was sloppy and her enquiry could not have provided the evidence needed to prove her thesis - thus "her work may properly be dammed with the harshest scientific criticism of all, that it is Ďnot even wrongí" (p.155).
Explores reasons for the enthusiastic and uncritical reception the book received from scholars and the general public - including his own use of it as a set reading for his students. Criticises the failure of cultural anthropology to accept the need for a positivist scientific approach.
Describes Meadís understanding of three factors restricting adolescent sexual freedom in Samoa - noble birth, age and residence in the pastorís house, claiming that the first of these applied to a much larger proportion of the population than is generally recognised. Notes Meadís view that earlier generations had lived under a much stricter regime. Discusses evidence from Mead, Freeman and Holmes about Christianisation and internalisation of a sense of sin. Considers the "temporary felicitous relaxation" and the "little Margaret among the children" explanations, but concludes. from a listing of all the clearly positive and negative statements in Coming of age in Samoa (which shows the negative outweigh the positive nearly two to one), that such hypotheses are unnecessary. Accuses Mead of leaving out certain incidents recorded in her fieldnotes, such as the rape of an eight year-old girl and the immensely destructive hurricane which led to a "famine in native foods" by the time of her departure.
Examines Meadís field writings for evidence of her command of Samoan and her sources of information. Finds inconsistencies in her population statistics and evidence that two of her chief informants on sex were a young man and a European school teacher and that much of her data was gathered in English. Suggests her sources for her figures on such matters as sexual experience are dubious and amount to little more than gossip in some cases.
Rejects Freemanís claim that Mead was hoaxed by Faíapuaía Faíamu on four grounds - that it is inconsist with Meadís assertions of chastity as the norm for taupou, that none of the information in the field notes is attributed to Faíamu and her letters to Mead contain nothing of ethnographical interest, that Mead records the trip to Ofu and Olosega in a news bulletin letter but mentions nothing about receiving important new information, and that her letters to Boas show no change in her attitudes as a result. Accuses Freeman of leaving out a critical phrase from one of these letters - which ruins Freemanís interpretation of too much ethnography and too little focus on the question of adolescent stress.
The author spent 18 months
doing anthropological fieldwork in Samoa in the 1970s and 1980s.
viii, 190pp. Bibliography, pp.179-182 and index.
73. Shankman, Paul. 1996. The history of Samoan sexual conduct and the Mead-Freeman controversy. American Anthropologist 98(3): 555-567.
Reviews Freemanís history
of sexuality in Samoa in the light of contemporary accounts from missionary
times to the 1950s and concludes that he is guilty of selective quotation
to buttress his case and that the picture given by Mead is probably quite
factual. Distinguishes between ideology and behaviour, noting the double
standard evident in male pride in seduction of virgins. Compares figures
for Samoa given by Mead and Freeman with similar figures for the United
States 1920-1970 and finds more pre-marital chastity in the United States.
Argues the traditional role for taupou in cementing political alliances
was weakened by the abolition of polygamy and that chastity requirements
did not apply to other women. Suggests that missionary focus on reforming
sexual relations implies a perception of Samoan culture as anything but
puritanical. Quotes from Williams, Kramer, Keesing, Calkins, Michener and
Stanner to prove that Samoan society has always been less puritanical than
portrayed by Freeman. In particular, suggests widespread, and parent-sanctioned
liaisons with US troops in World War II are hard to reconcile with Freemanís
picture of Samoan society. Notes Freeman was in Samoa 1940-1943 and expresses
surprise at the lack of any mention of this period in his writings. Rebuts
Freemanís dismissal of the idea of substituting chicken blood in the defloration
ceremony, quoting Kramer to the effect that the practice was widespread.
Accuses Freeman throughout of omitting passages which would contradict
Notes and 50+ references.
74. Williamson, David. 1996. Heretic: Based on the life of Derek Freeman. Ringwood, Vict.: Penguin.
A play in two acts, based
around the lives of Derek Freeman and Margaret Mead. Dramatises many of
the salient points brought out in the course of the controversy. Characters
include young and old versions of Derek Freeman and Margaret Mead, Ruth
Benedict and Franz Boas, Faíapuaía Faíamu, Fofoa (her friend), and Aviata,
Margaret Meadís Samoan lover, and Derek Freemanís wife, Monica. A five
page introduction outlines Freemanís interactionist paradigm. 97pp.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
acculturation in Samoa 17, 24, 25, 38, 47, 57; dismissed as explanation 36
Adolescent storm and stress: An evaluation of the Mead-Freeman controversy 70
adolescent behaviour, influence of biological factors on 67
adolescents (United States) 1, 17, 21
adoption in Samoa 5; see also residential flexibility (adolescent)
adultery in Samoa 1, 5, 9, 12, 20, 32, 53
adultery in the U.S.A. 43
aga and amio 11, 28, 34
aggression in Samoa 11, 12, 28, 39, 48, 57
aggression, origins of 45
Alaíilima, Fay 29
American Anthropologist 2, 4, 6, 17-20, 38, 39, 41, 44, 45, 48, 53, 59, 60, 71, 73
American Ethnologist 69
The American Scholar 46
anthropological restudies see restudies (anthropology)
anthropologistsí reactions to the controversy 33, 43, 46, 51
applied/advocacy 56; biases in 53; fieldwork see fieldwork in anthropology; indigenous views of 54;
professional ethics 61; restudies see restudies (anthropology); Samoan views of see Samoan reactions to the controversy
Appell, G.N. 33, 52
Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Sociology 43
Bargatzky, Thomas 51
Barnouw, Victor 13
behaviorism, influence on Mead 57
Benedict, Ruth 7, 12,13 see also configurationalism and culture and personality theory
bibliography of the controversy 23
biological determinism, kinds of 18
Boas, Franz 13, 14, 20, 21, 28, 30, 32, 43, 62
influence on Mead 12, 62, 64, 65, 66
Boasian school 12, 62, 64, 65
Bock, Philip K. 14
Brady, Ivan, (ed.) 17-20
in Samoa 26
Canberra Anthropology 10, 21-28
Caton, Hiram 34, 61
Central issues in anthropology 54, 56
Children - punishment 9, 12, 57
Choice and morality in anthropological perspective: Essays in honour of Derek Freeman 52
Christianity in Samoa 47, 56, 72
colonialism 47, 56
Coming of age in Samoa: A study of adolescence and sex in primitive societies 1
discrepancies between sections 2, 18, 53; reception and influence 12, 22, 29, Reviews 2
Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilization
see Coming of age in Samoa: A study of adolescence and sex in primitive societies
competition for rank and status in Samoa 36, 53, 57
configurationalism 19, 26, 27, 33,
influence on Mead 62
conflict, intergroup (in Samoa) 57 see also aggression
Cote, James E. 67, 70
crime in Samoa 12, 14, 67
cultural determinism 12, 13, 18, 20, 21, 26, 28, 30, 34, 45, 43, 61
cultural maximalism 43
cultural relativism 10, 21 28
culture and personality theory 54
culture (anthropology) 46, 61
culture, evolution of 10, 35
62, 64, 65
ĎDerek Freeman: Notes towards an intellectual autobiographyí 52
diffuseness of afffection in Samoa 19, 28, 37
double socialisation in Samoa
11, 19, 28
The Eastern Anthropologist 33
Ember, Melvin 38
eugenics movement 12, 20, 46, 54
evolution of culture see
culture, evolution of
Faíamu, Faíapuaía 8, 12,
ĎFact and context in ethnography: The Samoa controversyí 21-27, 28
falsificationism see Popperian refutation
family relationships in Samoa 39, 57
Feinberg, Richard 53
feminist interpretations 36, 56, 71
Feminist Studies 36
fieldwork in anthropology 25
in Mexico 15; in Ireland 37
Foerstel, Lenora 54
Freeman, Derek 10, 12, 28, 32, 39, 42, 45, 48, 49, 59, 60, 64, 66, 68
biography 52, 61, 74; correspondence with Holmes 61; his contrarian bias 18, 24 ; his delay in publishing 21, 25
his fieldwork 21; his positivist approach 40; his rhetoric critiqued 63, 69; his use of quotations 17, 30, 32, 62;
his use of statistics 14, 24, 25, 30, 32, 38, 43, 67
on virginity 17, 20, 44
Freudian psychology, influence
on Mead 13, 54, 57
Grant, Nicole J. 71
Hammond, Joyce D. 41
Heretic: Based on the life of Derek Freeman 74
Holmes, Lowell D. 5, 21, 47
by Freeman 28, 59; correspondence with
Freeman 28, 61; his fieldwork 47;
his knowledge of Samoan language 5, 59;
his relations with Mead 21
Hooper, Antony 40
ideal/actual in human behaviour 24, 32, 41, 42, 73
identity (in Samoa) 11
ĎInductivism and the test of truthí 28
12, 27, 30, 32,
33, 37, 68; defined
Jarvie, I.C. 22
Journal of Anthropological Research 14
The Journal of Psychoanalytic Anthropology 13
Journal of the Polynesian Society 5, 49, 50
Journal of Youth and Adolescence 67
Juan , S. 43
Kroeber, Alfred 12
Laing, Patricia Kinloch 50
Leacock, Eleanor 56
Letters from the field 1925-1975 8
Levy, Robert I. 35
Lowie, Robert H. 2,
Madan, T.N. 52
Mageo, Jeannette Marie 57
Malinowsky, Bronislaw 20; 28 see also Trobriand Islands
Manuía - ethnography 3
Margaret Mead and Samoa - reviews 12, 14, 29, 30, 31,
Margaret Mead and the heretic see Margaret Mead and Samoa
Marshall, Mac 69
McDowell, Nancy 30
Mead, Margaret 1, 3, 6, 7,
as a generator of myth 46; allegations of duping 18, 31, 32, 59, 60, 66, 68, denied 70, 72; autobiography 7;
her field correspondence 8, 72; her fieldwork 7, 8, 12, 15, 18, 22, 54, 72; her influence on anthropology 64, 65;
her knowledge of Samoan language 25, 72; her informants 72; her meeting with Freeman in 1964 15, 28;
her political and social achievements 37; on cultural relativism 45;
Meleisea, Malama 24
criticised by Freeman 28
moetotolo 5, 9, 14, 16, 24, 32, 37,
Murray, Stephen O. 62, 65
myth, role of 46
Nardi, Bonnie A. 36
nature and nurture see cultural determinism
Not even wrong: Margaret Mead, Derek Freeman and the Samoans 72
nuclear family in Samoa 37;
see also diffuseness of affection in Samoa
Orans, Martin 72
Pacific Islands monthly 16
Pacific Studies 29, 30, 31, 32, 51, 57, 58
Paradigms in collision: The far-reaching controversy over the Samoan researches of Margaret Mead and its significance for the human sciences 68
participant observation 8; see also subjectivity in anthropology
Patience, Allan 44
Paxman, David B. 58
perspectives, different see subjectivity in anthropology
political implications 37, 38, 56
Popperian refutation 19, 26, 28, 35, 37, 39, 44, 45, 46, 58
psychometric studies see
Samoans, psychometric studies of
Quest for the real Samoa: The Mead/Freeman controversy & beyond 47
by Freeman 48, 49; reviewed 51
rape in Samoa 9, 25, 32, 36, 39, 48, 59 urban-rural rates compared 28
Rappaport, Roy A. 46
residential flexibility (adolescent) 9, 19, 24,
respect language in Samoa 30, 32; see also interactionism
restudies (anthropology) 17, 22
Reviews in Anthropology 15
Reyman, Jonathan E. 41
ĎA rhetorical analysis of a scientific controversy: Margaret Mead versus Derek Freeman in cultural anthropologyĎ 63
Salaíilua: A Samoan mystery 11
critiqued by Freeman 28, 32
Samoa - cultural uniformity 45
inter-village differences 38
urban-rural differences 39, 47
Samoa - ethnography 9, 11, 12, 61 see also Taíu -ethnography and Manuía - ethnography
Samoan concepts and perceptions 11
Samoan reactions to the controversy 16, 29, 35, 31, 39, 47, 67
Samoan sexuality 1, 12, 26, 32; feminist view 36; history of 70, 71, 73; obtaining information about 25, 47
The Samoa reader: Anthropologists take stock 61
Samoans, psychometric studies 1, 17, 47
Sapir Edward 65
Scheper-Hughes, Nancy 37
Schoeffel, Penelope 9, 24
criticised by Freeman, 28
Schwartz, Theodore 18
sexual activity, premarital (in Samoa) 12, 13, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 72, 73
feminist view 36
sexual activity, premarital (in U.S.A.) 41, 73
Shankman, Paul 25, 73
criticised by Freeman 28
Shore, Bradd 11, 19, 26
Smith, Joseph Wayne 44
social change see acculturalisation
social control 11
Social organization of Manua 3
South Seas paradise 16, 29, 58
ĎSpeaking in the name of the real: Freeman and Mead on Samoaí 17-20
ĎSpecial section: Speaking in the name of the realí 17-20
ĎSpecial volume: Fact and context in ethnography: The Samoa controversyí 21-27, 28
Strathern, Marilyn 27
criticised by Freeman 28
subjectivity in anthropology 24, 27, 33, 35, 37, 50, 58, 70
suicide in Samoa 9,
25, 47, 70
Taíu - ethnography of 1, 5; uniqueness and isolation 20, 21, 51, 70, dismissed as factor 26, 39, 45
Taíu: Stability and change in a Samoan village 5
reviewed by Mead 6
taupou 1, 5, 20, 53
Trobriand Islands 20;
see also Malinowski, Bronislaw
Visual Anthropology Review 66
Weimer, Donna S. 63
Weiner, Annette 20
Wendt, Albert 16
Wendt, Tuaopepe Felix S. 31
Williamson, David 74
Winston, Ellen 4, 13
women, status of (in Samoa)
Young, R.E. 43