Comments on: Radical Hope by Jonathan Lear

By: Strong

Strong — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 05:15:18 +0000

Oh great. Another book I *must* read.

By: Laura

Laura — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 19:03:49 +0000

I’m going to order this. It sounds fascinating.

I wonder if anyone from the Crow community has commented on the book?

By: Rex

Rex — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 18:51:21 +0000

I was thinking more generally of the Vine Deloria Jr.-style critiques of the disrespectful and objectifying relationship anthropologists have sometimes had with Indians when I invoked anthropology’s failure to live up to its own ethical standards.

Lear pares down his project by putting certain things out of bounds. Many versions of this book are ruled out of bounds because, as Lear writes, they are the job of future Crow historians and philosophers, not Lear.

Equally, when examining the visions and dreams that the Crow leader Plenty Coups has, Lear states very explicitly that he is not interested in judging whether or not these visions were given by a divine being or the product of Plenty Coup’s imagination. He is merely interested in defending the intelligibility and rectitude of what Plenty Coup _does_ with those visions.

Both of these issues — pronouncing authoritatively on the Crow and relegating their religious life to deeper social-structural causes — involves assumption of a certain epistemological authority which anthropologists have often taken up. Perhaps it is Lear’s position outside of anthropology that gives him a ‘way in’ to these issues since he is (relativel) free of the cultural politics of being a white guy studying Indians.

I don’t know. I would be interested in hearing what others thought of the book, though.

By: John

John — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:44:53 +0000

I am looking forward to seeing Rex’s answer to this question. My immediate response, based only on Rex’s review is that Lear appears to have made a traditional-sounding anthropological topic, the ethnohistory of the 19th century Crow, exciting and interesting for all sorts of academics and intellectuals who aren’t anthropologists. Just consider the list–psychoanalysis, Aristotle, Native Americans. Add the story, the collapse of a life world that nonetheless makes a case for radical hope in the face of cultural devastation. The packaging and titling are brilliant. If the book has substance as well–and here I’m inclined to trust Rex, who strikes me as a pretty hard-headed fellow — this could be that genuine rarity, a truly brilliant book. How many ethnographies do you know that measure up to that standard?

By: St Ann

St Ann — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:32:04 +0000

“…This is a job that anthropologists are particularly concerned be done well, because we have so often done it badly. …” What exactly do you mean? They have failed at doing ethnography?