View Item 

Show simple item record

Science, Property, And Kinship In Repatriation Debates
dc.contributor.authorKirsch, Stuarten_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-06-18T18:32:08Z
dc.date.available2013-06-18T18:32:08Z
dc.date.issued2011-09en_US
dc.identifier.citationKirsch, Stuart (2011). "Science, Property, And Kinship In Repatriation Debates." Museum Anthropology 34(2): 91-96. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/98136>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0892-8339en_US
dc.identifier.issn1548-1379en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/98136
dc.description.abstractA striking feature of debates concerning the disposition of N ative A merican human remains is their invocation of the conventional domains of science, property, and kinship. Strong political claims about repatriation tend to assert the primacy of one domain over the others. Yet in contemporary North A merican social contexts, these domains have heterarchical relations in which no single perspective dominates, rather than hierarchical relations organized by a fixed ranking system. Resolving disputes in heterarchical systems requires negotiation across domains rather than privileging one domain. This comment examines how the relationships between these domains influence debates on repatriation. It also sheds light on how A mericans make political claims.en_US
dc.publisherHarvard University Pressen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherHuman Remainsen_US
dc.subject.otherHeterarchyen_US
dc.subject.otherHierarchyen_US
dc.subject.otherKinshipen_US
dc.subject.otherN Ative a Mericanen_US
dc.subject.otherPropertyen_US
dc.subject.otherRepatriationen_US
dc.subject.otherScienceen_US
dc.titleScience, Property, And Kinship In Repatriation Debatesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelAnthropologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98136/1/muan1110.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1548-1379.2011.01110.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceMuseum Anthropologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRose, Carol M. 1994 Property and Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory, and Rhetoric of Ownership. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNiezen, Ronald 2003 The Origins of Indigenism: Human Rights and the Politics of Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNowotny, Helga, Peter Scott, and Michael Gibbons 2001 Re‐Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePálsson, Gísli 2007 Anthropology and the New Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePocock, J. G. A. 1992 Tangata Whenua and Enlightenment Anthropology. New Zealand Journal of History 283 26 ( 1 ): 28 – 56.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePratt, Mary Louise 1992 Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. London: Routledge.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRabinow, Paul 1996 Severing the Ties: Fragmentation and Dignity in Late Modernity. In Essays on the Anthropology of Reason. Pp. 129 – 152. Princeton:  University of Princeton Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRadin, Margaret Jane 1993 Reinterpreting Property. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRichards, Janet 2010 Spatial and Verbal Rhetorics of Power: Constructing Late Old Kingdom History. Journal of Egyptian History 3 ( 2 ): 339 – 366.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRiding In, James 2000 Repatriation: A Pawnee's Perspective. In Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains? Devon A. Mihesuah, ed. Pp. 106 – 122. Lincoln:  University of Nebraska Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRose, Mark 1993 Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSax, Joseph L. 2001 Playing Darts with a Rembrandt: Public and Private Rights in Cultural Treasures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSakharov, Andrei 1968 Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. New York Times, July 22: A14–16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchneider, David Murray 1980 American Kinship: A Cultural Account. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSinopoli, Carla 2010 NAGPRA Spurs Potential Collaboration between U‐M Museum and Native Tribes. Consider 24 ( 9 ): 2.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith, Andrea 2005 Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide. Cambridge, MA: South End.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStillman, Amy Ku'uleialoha 2009 Access and Control: A Key to Reclaiming the Right to Construct Hawaiian History. In Music and Cultural Rights. Andrew N. Weintraub and Bell Yung, eds. Pp. 86 – 109. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStrathern, Marilyn 1992 Reproducing the Future: Essays on Anthropology, Kinship and the New Reproductive Technologies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStrathern, Marilyn 1999 Property, Substance and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStrathern, Marilyn 2005 Kinship, Law and the Unexpected: Relatives are Always a Surprise. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThomas, David Hurst 2000 Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology, and the Battle for Native American Identity. New York: Basic Books.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTrope, Jack F., and Walter R. Echo‐Hawk 2000 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: Background and Legislative History. In Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains? Devon A. Mihesuah, ed. Pp. 123 – 166. Lincoln:  University of Nebraska Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWeiner, Annette 1976 Women of Value, Men of Renown: New Perspectives in Trobriand Exchange. Austin: University of Texas Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZiman, John 2000 Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown, Michael F. 2003 Who Owns Native Culture? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarsten, Janet 2003 After Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceColwell‐Chanthaphonh, Chip, and T. J. Ferguson, eds. 2008 Collaboration in Archaeological Practice: Engaging Descendant Communities. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoombe, Rosemary 1998 The Cultural Life of Intellectual Properties. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDominguez, Virginia 1986 White by Definition: Social Classification in Creole Louisiana. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEhrenreich, Robert M., Carole L. Crumley, and Janet E. Levy, eds. 1995 Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies. Arlington, VA: American Anthropological Association.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeeley‐Harnik, Gillian 1991 A Green Estate: Restoring Independence in Madagascar. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFine‐Dare, Kathleen S. 2002 Grave Injustice: The American Indian Repatriation Movement and NAGPRA. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoodale, Mark 2009 Surrendering to Utopia: An Anthropology of Human Rights. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreely, H. T. 1998 Legal, Ethical, and Social Issues in Human Genome Research. Annual Review of Anthropology 27: 473 – 502.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHarmon, Amy 2010 Indian Tribe Wins Fight to Limit Research of its DNA. New York Times, April 21. Electronic document, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22dna.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1311889212-EQfpdyT5vCEbZtIuRU+qTg, accessed April 22, 2010.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHenare, Amiria, Martin Holbraad, and Sari Wastell 2006 Thinking through Things: Theorising Artefacts in Ethnographic Perspective. New York: Routledge.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHirsch, Eric, and Marilyn Strathern, eds. 2004 Transactions and Creations: Property Debates and the Stimulus of Melanesia. New York: Berghahn.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKirsch, Stuart 2004 Property Limits: Debates on the Body, Nature, and Culture. In Transactions and Creations: Property Debates and the Stimulus of Melanesia. Eric Hirsch and Marilyn Strathern, eds. Pp. 21 – 39. New York: Berghahn.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLessig, Lawrence 2001 The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World. New York: Random House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMacpherson, C. B. 1964 The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke. Oxford: Clarendon.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMalinowski, Bronislaw 1935 Coral Gardens and Their Magic. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMaine, Henry Sumner 1986 [1861] Ancient Law. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcLaren, John, A. R. Buck, and Nancy E. Wright, eds. 2005 Despotic Dominion: Property Rights in British Settler Societies. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcLennan, John F. 1865 Primitive Marriage. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMihesuah, Devon A., ed. 2000 Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains? Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorgan, Lewis Henry 1870 Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
muan1110.pdf
Size:
62.22KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.