Reply to Finkler's Review of The Shaman's Touch
2
692 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [go, 19881 New Era,” 85th annual meeting of the Amer- ican Anthropological Association, December 3-7, 1986, Philadelphia, PA. We would like to thank the symposium’s organizers, Dr. Caro- lyn Fluehr-Lobban and Dr. Arnold R. Pilling. We would also like to thank Dr. Fluehr-Lob- ban for her comments on this commentary. ‘This commentary is a collaborative effort and the order of the authors’ names has no special significance. *We would like however, a fuller discussion of what constitute “sensitive” topics. Of spe- cial concern is the legal use of the term in the Federal Code. References Cited Horowitz, I. L. 1965 The Life and Death of Project Cam- elot. Transaction 3( 1):3-7, 44-47. Lynd, Robert S., and Lynd, Helen Merrell 1929 Middletown, A Study in Contem- porary American Culture. New York: Harcourt, Brace. Thernstrom, Stephan 1964 Poverty and Progress. Social Mobil- ity in a Nineteenth Century City. Cam- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Warner, Lloyd, and Lunt, Paul 1941 The Social Life of a Modern Com- munity. New Haven: Yale University Press. Wylie, Laurence 1964 Village in the Vaucluse (revised). New York: Harper Colophon. Reply to Finkler’s Review of The Shaman’s Touch JAMES Dow Oakland University Kaja Finkler, in her review (AA 89:97%980, 1987), writes that my book, The Shaman’s Touch, presents Otomi religious rituals and be- liefs “as uniquely indigenous, pre-Hispanic forms.” This is an inaccurate perception on her part. The Shaman’s Touch describes only modern rituals and beliefs and presents them as modern. Whatever appears to Finkler as “pre-Hispanic” is part of the modern ethno- graphic reality. Finkler also writes that I treat Otomi people in the book “as if they were an isolated tribe living in some remote area of the Amazon rather than a population that forms part of the Mexican nation-state’’ (p. 979). She has not perceived correctly what I write. For example, I state, “Rapid and dramatic changes are tak- ing place today. Most people are becoming bi- lingual. . . . Schools are imparting new ideas, and people are thinking of themselves more and more as Mexicans rather than Indians of the Sierra” (p. 21). To justify her claim that I present rituals as pre-Hispanic, Finkler writes, “Isn’t ‘our sa- cred mother’ anything but the Virgin Mary in her many guises’’ (p. 979). The name “Our Sacred Mother” is a translation of my shaman informant’s words (pp. 10,30,70).For anyone to equate this supernatural being with the Vir- gin Mary would be to extend one’s interpre- tation of the belief beyond what the data war- rant. There are strong traces of this belief to origins other than the Catholic church. Finkler’s statements that the work presents Otomi religion “with condescension toward the people” and that “the healer is presented as if he could do no wrong” (p. 979) misinter- pret the ethnographic goals of The Shaman’s Touch. No effort is made to judge the shaman or his work either positively or negatively. Neither does The Shaman’s Touch render judg- ments on the culture or people. The book deals with ethical judgments only from the point of view of the shaman, as they are made in the course of treating patients. The method re- veals the intimate detail of a shaman’s work, and because of this, Don Antonio’s feeling of pride is transmitted in places. If this is what is meant by “condescension,” then to remove it would be to alter ethnographic data. In her review Finkler speculates, “It is pos- sible that the majority of the population may not know much about the beliefs the healer es- pouses.’’ Finkler does not recognize the wide- spread belief among the sierra Otomi in the ef- ficacy of shamanic healing. Shamanism is not out of place today in this part of Mexico. An- thropologists who have studied the sierra Otomi agree with my assessment of the im- portance of shamanic healing (cf. Christensen 1971; Fit1 1975; Galinier 1979; Sandstrom 1981). Finkler mistakenly concludes that my cen- tral reference point was Castaneda (p. 980). In the chapter called “Symbolic Healing,” which contains the major theoretical discus- sion of the book, I make no reference to Cas- taneda. The Shaman’s Touch contains a bibli- ography with 195 references to a wide range of authors. The book does contain some rather negative comments on Castaneda’s work in two places-in the introduction and in a dis- cussion of the symbolism of good and evil. Since Castaneda has deluged the world with popular tales of Mexican Indian shamans, an- thropologists must critique his work for the
Transcript of Reply to Finkler's Review of The Shaman's Touch
692 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [go, 19881
New Era,” 85th annual meeting of the Amer- ican Anthropological Association, December 3-7, 1986, Philadelphia, PA. We would like to thank the symposium’s organizers, Dr. Caro- lyn Fluehr-Lobban and Dr. Arnold R. Pilling. We would also like to thank Dr. Fluehr-Lob- ban for her comments on this commentary.
‘This commentary is a collaborative effort and the order of the authors’ names has no special significance.
*We would like however, a fuller discussion of what constitute “sensitive” topics. Of spe- cial concern is the legal use of the term in the Federal Code.
References Cited
Horowitz, I. L. 1965 The Life and Death of Project Cam-
elot. Transaction 3( 1):3-7, 44-47. Lynd, Robert S., and Lynd, Helen Merrell
1929 Middletown, A Study in Contem- porary American Culture. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Thernstrom, Stephan 1964 Poverty and Progress. Social Mobil-
ity in a Nineteenth Century City. Cam- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warner, Lloyd, and Lunt, Paul 1941 The Social Life of a Modern Com-
munity. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Wylie, Laurence 1964 Village in the Vaucluse (revised).
New York: Harper Colophon.
Reply to Finkler’s Review of The Shaman’s Touch
JAMES Dow Oakland University
Kaja Finkler, in her review (AA 89:97%980, 1987), writes that my book, The Shaman’s Touch, presents Otomi religious rituals and be- liefs “as uniquely indigenous, pre-Hispanic forms.” This is an inaccurate perception on her part. The Shaman’s Touch describes only modern rituals and beliefs and presents them as modern. Whatever appears to Finkler as “pre-Hispanic” is part of the modern ethno- graphic reality.
Finkler also writes that I treat Otomi people in the book “as if they were an isolated tribe living in some remote area of the Amazon rather than a population that forms part of the Mexican nation-state’’ (p. 979). She has not perceived correctly what I write. For example,
I state, “Rapid and dramatic changes are tak- ing place today. Most people are becoming bi- lingual. . . . Schools are imparting new ideas, and people are thinking of themselves more and more as Mexicans rather than Indians of the Sierra” (p. 21).
To justify her claim that I present rituals as pre-Hispanic, Finkler writes, “Isn’t ‘our sa- cred mother’ anything but the Virgin Mary in her many guises’’ (p. 979). The name “Our Sacred Mother” is a translation of my shaman informant’s words (pp. 10,30,70). For anyone to equate this supernatural being with the Vir- gin Mary would be to extend one’s interpre- tation of the belief beyond what the data war- rant. There are strong traces of this belief to origins other than the Catholic church.
Finkler’s statements that the work presents Otomi religion “with condescension toward the people” and that “the healer is presented as if he could do no wrong” (p. 979) misinter- pret the ethnographic goals of The Shaman’s Touch. No effort is made to judge the shaman or his work either positively or negatively. Neither does The Shaman’s Touch render judg- ments on the culture or people. The book deals with ethical judgments only from the point of view of the shaman, as they are made in the course of treating patients. The method re- veals the intimate detail of a shaman’s work, and because of this, Don Antonio’s feeling of pride is transmitted in places. If this is what is meant by “condescension,” then to remove it would be to alter ethnographic data.
In her review Finkler speculates, “It is pos- sible that the majority of the population may not know much about the beliefs the healer es- pouses.’’ Finkler does not recognize the wide- spread belief among the sierra Otomi in the ef- ficacy of shamanic healing. Shamanism is not out of place today in this part of Mexico. An- thropologists who have studied the sierra Otomi agree with my assessment of the im- portance of shamanic healing (cf. Christensen 1971; Fit1 1975; Galinier 1979; Sandstrom 1981).
Finkler mistakenly concludes that my cen- tral reference point was Castaneda (p. 980). In the chapter called “Symbolic Healing,” which contains the major theoretical discus- sion of the book, I make no reference to Cas- taneda. The Shaman’s Touch contains a bibli- ography with 195 references to a wide range of authors. The book does contain some rather negative comments on Castaneda’s work in two places-in the introduction and in a dis- cussion of the symbolism of good and evil. Since Castaneda has deluged the world with popular tales of Mexican Indian shamans, an- thropologists must critique his work for the
COMMENTARILS 693
benefit of undergraduates and nonprofession- als.
Finkler writes, “What the healer tells us is well known in the anthropological literature,” but this is not the case. There are only a few extensive narratives from Mesoamerican In- dian shamans on their work (Estrada 1981; Colby and Colby 1981). Like the latter, T h Shaman’s Touch uses shamanic narratives to inform the reader; however, it relies on the- matic clustering rather than ethnosemantic analysis to develop the emic picture. The sim- plicity of the results of this method have made it possible to publish a book that can be read by nonprofessionals as well as by professional anthropologists.
References Cited Christensen, Bodil
1971 Bark Paper and Witchcraft. In Witchcraft and Pre-Columbian Paper. B. Christensen and S. Marti, eds. Mexico City: Ediciones Euroamericanas.
Colby, Benjamin N., and Lore M. Colby 1981 The Daykeeper: The Life and Dis-
course of an Ixil Diviner. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.
DOW, James 1986 The Shaman’s Touch: Otomi In-
dian Symbolic Healing. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Estrada, Alvaro 1981 Maria Sabina: Her Life and Chants.
Henry Munn, trans]. Santa Barbara, CA: Ross-Erikson.
Fitl, Regina 1975 Die ‘Muiiecos’ von San Pablito: Ein
Beitrag zur Kenntnis der ‘Brujeria’ in der Sierra de Puebla, Mexiko. Ph.D. disser- tation, University of Vienna.
Galinier, Jacques 1979 N’uhu, Les Indiens Otomis: Hitr-
archie !%zale et Tradition dans le Sud de la Huasteca. Etudes Mesoamericaines, Strie 2, No. 2. Mexico City: Mission Ar- chtologique Franqaise au Mexique.
Sandstrom, Alan 1981 Traditional Curing and Crop Fertil-
ity Rituals among the Otomi Indians of the Sierra de Puebla, Mexico: The Lopez Manuscripts. Bloomington, IN: The An- thropology Museum of the University of Indiana.
![Burning the house of Fatima binte Mohammad[saww] · page 3 of 47 7.5 reply two 31 7.6 defence three 32 7.7 reply one 32 7.8 reply two 32 7.9 reply three 32 7.10 reply four 33 7.11](https://static.fdocuments.us/doc/165x107/6008f7ca6342d553a45420f3/burning-the-house-of-fatima-binte-mohammadsaww-page-3-of-47-75-reply-two-31-76.jpg)
