In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

xv  The Mead–Freeman controversy has been raging for more than twenty-five years, and many people—anthropologists, scholars in a variety of disciplines, Samoans, journalists, commentators, political figures, filmmakers, and others— have discussed, written, and argued about it. I have incorporated many of their ideas and data into my own scholarship. Without their work this book would not have been possible, yet acknowledging their contributions and expressing my appreciation do not imply that they would approve of or agree with my analysis and conclusions. The controversy encompasses a broad spectrum of opinion, and responsibility for the book’s content is, alas, mine alone. Nevertheless , I want to thank a number of individuals, however briefly and inadequately , for their assistance and support. There are four scholars who have been deeply involved in the controversy and who have been especially helpful in a variety of ways. James Côté, Martin Orans, Hiram Caton, and Lowell Holmes have all authored or edited books on the controversy, and Côté, Orans, and Caton read earlier versions of my manuscript and made valuable suggestions. Tracy Ehlers provided excellent early criticism of the manuscript. Roger Sanjek, Bradd Shore, Richard Shweder, Mary Catherine Bateson, Dennis McGilvray, Nancy McDowell, Reevan Dolgoy , Andrew Weissman, Dean Birkenkamp, and Jake Page also read earlier versions of the manuscript, and I want to thank each of them for offering thoughtful advice and encouragement. Derek Freeman spent many hours with me in conversation in Canberra in 1984 and later recommended that I visit the Derek Freeman Papers in the Mandeville Special Collections Library at the Geisel Library of the University of California at San Diego. Freeman and his archive provided valuable information for the book. I also appreciate the assistance of the staff members at the Special Collections Library. Over the years a number of colleagues and scholars have contributed to my understanding of Samoa and the controversy. They include Sharon Tiffany, Tim O’Meara, Thomas Bargatzky, Cluny Macpherson and La‘avasa Macpherson , Serge Tcherkézoff, Unasa L. F. Va‘a, Paul Cox, Patricia Francis, Margaret Caffrey, Mel Ember and Carole Ember, Penelope Schoeffel, Jeannette Mageo, Alessandro Duranti, Richard Feinberg, Peter Hempenstall, Mac Marshall , Jacob Love, Ben Finney, Niko Besnier, Grant McCall, Glenn Petersen, Virginia Yans, Ray Scupin, Ward Goodenough, Jane Goodale, Paula Brown Glick, Kathy Creely, Jerry Meehl, Richard Goodman, Karla Rolff, Richard Warner, and Ben Kobashigawa. In addition to these individuals, the annual meetings of the Association for Social Anthropology in Oceania often served as a valuable forum for the exchange of ideas about the controversy. My colleagues and former colleagues in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Colorado–Boulder have been very supportive, including Jack Kelso, Donna Goldstein, Charlie Piot and Anne Allison, Ilisa Barbash and Lucien Taylor, Carla Jones, and Carole McGranahan. My graduate students— Paulette Foss, James Dubendorf, and Tracy McNulty—provided valuable research assistance. And other former students—Anne Bolin, Evelyn Christian, Walter DiMantova, Wynne Maggi, Brion Morrisette, William Lukas, and Sarah Cook-Scalise—deserve recognition as well. In addition, generations of undergraduates in my course on the South Pacific have shared their ideas about the controversy in their papers, and I would like to extend my thanks to them. Many Samoans have contributed to my knowledge of the islands and have been extremely generous with their time and understanding. I owe them a special debt of gratitude. In chapter 9 I discuss Samoan responses to the controversy , particularly those in published form. However, it should be apparent that I am not speaking on behalf of Samoans; they are more than capable of speaking for themselves. And I am expressing my appreciation to them collectively because they may not wish to be implicated in the controversy on an individual basis. Our conversations about Mead and their lives were informal and private rather than being part of a research project on the controversy, and they took place before I anticipated writing this book. In fact, much of my fieldwork in Samoa was conducted in the 1960s and 1970s, well before the controversy began. During the publication process, Gwen Walker and Paul S. Boyer at the University of Wisconsin Press have been extremely supportive. An A. Kayden Research Award from the University of Colorado–Boulder provided funding for permissions. In Boulder, my editor, Marie Boyko, brought the loose ends of the writing process together and made this book possible. My long-suffering family, Sally and Michael, have endured the writing of this book, and I’m...

Share