AA Spring 05 pg C1-12 B
2/15/05
8:03 PM
Page 3
Letters NPS Too PC
Ban “Anasazi”
I was astounded to read in the Winter issue that the national parks were banning certain books from their bookstores. When I read who the authors were, I was even more surprised. Some of our best archaeological authors are banned because they did not use the correct wording for Anasazi (oops, sorry, Ancestral Puebloan) or photographed rock art. I have read many books by the banned authors and will support them in any way I can, even if it means returning all the books I have purchased from the Park Service over the years (after all, they are now considered “culturally incorrect”). It is, as one of the authors, Polly Schaafsma, stated, a “terrible infringement on intellectual freedom.” Political correctness has gone much too far. Perhaps a note attached to the inside of the cover of these banned books explaining how some groups feel about some of the wording in the text would be a smarter way of handling the situation. For example, “This book is rated politically incorrect by some cultures” might be a solution. I will write the National Park Service to complain. American Archaeology is a terrific magazine. Keep up the great work. Tina Nupuf Canoga Park, CA american archaeology
For a long time, I have been bothered by your use of the term “Anasazi.” Pueblo people have made it clear that this term is an inappropriate name for their ancestors. By contrast, in articles about historic-period sites, you respect African-Americans by using the term they prefer for themselves and their forebears. I was moved to write by your article on banned books in national park bookstores. Every bookstore in the world has criteria for choosing stock. No bookstore carries every book that is printed, or even every book on a particular subject. If you ran a bookstore, I doubt that you would carry titles that are considered disrespectful of the people about whom the books were written, especially if those people are your co-workers and neighbors. Chris Judson Los Alamos, New Mexico
Sending Letters to American Archaeology American Archaeology welcomes your letters. Write to us at 5301 Central Avenue NE, Suite 902, Albuquerque, NM 87108-1517, or send us e-mail at tacmag@nm.net. We reserve the right to edit and publish letters in the magazine’s Letters department as space permits. Please include your name, address and telephone number with all correspondence, including e-mail messages.
Editor’s Corner Our feature “The Peculiar Phenomenon of Pseudoarchaeology” examines the popularity of bogus archaeology and its effects. The article’s author, Ken Feder, an archaeologist with Central Connecticut State University, has been studying and writing about this subject for some 20 years. He teaches an introductory course in archaeology, and over the years he’s polled his students regarding their acceptance of various myths supported by pseudoarchaeology. In 2003 he asked his students if there is convincing evidence that the lost continent Atlantis exists. Thirty-three percent of his students either strongly or mildly believed that such evidence exists. Twenty-two percent expressed strong or mild disbelief in this evidence. Forty-five percent had no opinion. Some people might find it surprising, perhaps even shocking, that only 22 percent of these university students believe Atlantis to be a fiction. Feder explained that his is the first archaeology class that many of these students take, and their previous exposure to the subject often comes in the form of television shows that glamorize pseudoarchaeology. Reviewing the poll with that in mind, the results aren’t so surprising. The students who believe in Atlantis may also believe in other myths, such as extraterrestrials visiting Earth in prehistoric times to nudge human civilization along. To Feder and other archaeologists, this susceptibility to myths is no small matter. They think it suggests the public’s inability to distinguish science from pseudoscience. No small matter, indeed.
3
