the passion of branz boaz

8/13/2019 The Passion of Branz Boaz

1/22

The Passion of Franz Boas

Author(s): Herbert S. LewisSource: American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 103, No. 2 (Jun., 2001), pp. 447-467Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/683476

Accessed: 04/01/2010 17:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell PublishingandAmerican Anthropological Associationare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,

preserve and extend access toAmerican Anthropologist.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/683476?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/683476?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/22

HERBERTS. LEWISProfessorEmeritusDepartmentof AnthropologyUniversityof Wisconsin-MadisonMadison,WI 53706

ThePassionof Franz BoasThereputationf FranzBoas as a scientistdeclined n the decadesafterhisdeath n 1942,buthisreputations achampionof human ightsandanopponentof racismremained ntact.Morerecently,however,some writershavequestionedhe sin-cerity, heresults,and hepolitical mplications f hisanthropologyndhis workagainst acismandethnocentrism.Othershavebeencriticalof hisrelatios withcolleaguesandstudents uch asElla DeloriaandZoraNeale Hurston. nthisessayIdiscuss some of these claims andpresenta morepositiveview. FranzBoas was passionatelyandconsistently oncernedabouthuman ightsand ndividualiberty, reedomof inquiryandspeech,equalityof opportunity,ndthe defeatof preju-dice andchauvinism.He struggledora lifetime o advancea science thatwould servehumanity, ndhe was as muchof ahumanitariannprivateashe was inpublic. Boas,political struggles,humanrelations]

My aimhasbeentoconjureup"neitherhepuregrammaticalsubjectnor thedeeppsychological ubject," sFoucaulthim-self onceputit,"butrather he one who says 'I' in theworks,theletters, hedrafts, hesketches, hepersonal ecrets."-James Miller,ThePassionofMichelFoucault

W x hen a group of scholars believes thatthey have anew and better way to understandreality thantheir teachers and predecessors, it is quite natu-ral that they turn on those forerunnersand try to demon-strate their superiority. To them the previous generationseems hopelessly old-fashioned, wrongheaded, and on thewrong track.This was the case in anthropology in the mid-1950swhen a group of dynamic young scholars entered the field.They were convinced of the necessity to turnanthropologyinto a "real"science, one that could deal with regularities,causality, and law. The answers were to be sought in thecore features of material culture and technology, the or-ganization of economies, and the relations between cultureand environment. Leslie White and Julian Steward werethe gods; Morton Fried, Marvin Harris, Robert A. Man-ners, Marshall Sahlins the Younger, Elman Service, andEric Wolf were among theirprophets.Under these circumstances, Franz Boas, who hadstrongly cautioned againsthasty andunsupportedgenerali-zations and against determinisms of all sorts (biological,geographical, economic, or psychological), whose ethnog-raphies did not come to closure in tidy packages, wouldseem to be a foolish old man holding back the advance ofscience. His suspicion of universal categories, his rejection

of grand narratives(before we knew that this is what theywere called), and his stress on diversity and historical con-tingency were not appreciated hen. He was, however, hon-ored for his insistence upon the equality of all peoples andhis battle against racism and ethnocentrism,even if his ap-proachto science was in disrepute.It is understandable that each intellectual generationfeels it must distance itself from its predecessors, some-thing Boas himself understood and appreciated.1In the1960s, however, criticism of Boas began to develop an ad-ditional dimension-an attackon the character of the manhimself. Leslie White (1966:26-28) accused Boas of anumber of unpleasant things, especially of being receptiveonly to Jewish students and being prejudiced againstAmerican scholarship. It was a nasty little piece, but itprobably had some lingering effect, as these things oftendo. (In fact, Boas's allies and closest associates includedsuch non-Jews as Ruth Fulton Benedict, Elsie Clews Par-sons, Gladys Reichard, Margaret Mead, Frederic WardPutnam, Livingston Farrand,Henry H. Donaldson, FrankSpeck, W J McGee, Fay-Cooper Cole, Alfred Tozzer, andL. C. Dunn.)More recently, however, there has been an efflorescenceof denigrationof FranzBoas, his motivations, his relationsto others, and, most seriously, the long-term impact of hisideas on race and culture. One of the earliest manifesta-tions of this new view of Boas came in a paper by WilliamS. Willis Jr., in which he argued (among other things) thatBoasian "Scientificantiracism was concerned only secon-darily with colored peoples" (1969:139, emphasis in origi-nal). Willis contended that "scientific antiracism" was in


3/22

448 AMERICANNTHROPOLOGIST VOL.103, NO. 2 J

realitybothanattempto combatanti-Semitism nd an in-tellectualweapon in the struggleof Boas and the otherEuropean ewsaroundhim "for he domination f anthro-pology in the United States" p. 139). He concluded hatthe effortof Boas andhiscolleagues o combatracismwasjust"anotherxploitation f coloredpeoples or the benefitof white people" (p. 139).2Thispaperappeared s a chaptern the influentialworkeditedby Dell Hymes,ReinventingAnthropology1969),and t reflected hegeneralangeranddissatisfaction f thelate 1960s.Willis would aterdevelopconsiderableespectfor FranzBoas, butthis piece was one of those that set atonefor succeedingdiscourseon the subjectof anthropol-ogy and "the study of dominatedcolored peoples"(p.146).3In the era of postcolonialand criticalstudiesthere s anewertropethatsees Boas's work as even more harmful.K. Visweswarancontends that Boas's "scientificantira-cism" tself hadterrible esults. na 1998paper he writes,"Isuggestthedisturbing ossibility hat heattempto ex-pungeracefromsocialscienceby assigning t to biology,as Boas and his studentsdid,helped egitimate he scien-tificstudyof race, hereby ueling he machineof scientificracism" 1998:70).What can be more of a condemnationthan that?What we used to think was "a good thing,"Boas's many-sidedattackon racism,we are now told wasin factverybad-not justbecauseothersmisusedhis sci-encebutbecausehe gotit so wrong.It is true,of course,thatthe findingsof sciencemaybeco-optedand used by those withdifferentandperniciousagendas. contend,however, hat hishas not been the casewith Boas's "scientificanti-racism."t has not been co-optedand misused as Visweswaranbelieves,nor has shegivena coherentpictureof how it occurred nd whatroleBoas's work could haveplayed n it. Infact,the realpointof Visweswaran'sarticle s to presenther ownthinkingonthe nature f "race" s a social construct ndapotentialpo-litical tool for the use of the dominated.The question swhy she felt it necessary o launchan irrelevant nd inac-curateassaulton FranzBoas in order o accomplish hataim.4

Similarly,FranzBoas's effortsto learnaboutKwakiutl(Kwakwaka'wakw)ulture hrough he texts collected inthat anguageby GeorgeHuntaresubjectedo harshcriti-cism by CharlesBriggsand RichardBauman 1999). Go-ing far beyondearliercriticslike VerneRay (1955) andLeslieWhite(1963), who had foundBoas's efforts nade-quate f notuseless,BriggsandBauman ontend hat hesetextsweretrulyharmful.Whiledenying hat heyintend odamnBoas (p. 481), they find that his work "fit into thelargercontours of colonial domination hat increasinglydeprivedNative Americancommunitiesof land,materialwealth,and culturalandlinguisticautonomy"1999:516)Theyfind him "complicitn naturalizingwhitecontrolofNative American communitiesand the ideology of 'as-

similation'"(p.519)and heyevenclaimthat heseKwak-waka'wakw exts"formed rucialdimensionsnot only ofcreatingan Americandisciplineof anthropologybut ofconstructingin de siecle modernityas well" (1999:522,emphasisadded).All this becauseheurgedGeorgeHunt ocollect accuratedescriptionsof the technology,customs,beliefs,laws,and storiesof theKwakwaka'wakw,n theirown language,concentratingn "traditional"ndprecon-tactmaterial s muchaspossible.There s no room here to deconstructhis dense fifty-pagepaper,butwe mayask howa seriesof reconditeexts,readby at most a handfulof academicspecialists,couldconceivably have had such world-constructingonse-quences.At a time when the Kwakwaka'wakwand allNative Americancommunities)had been under whitedomination or generations,when theirway of life andpracticeswere under constantattackand had undergonemanychanges,couldthe collectionof texts,no matterhowineptlydone, possibly have had such consequencesforthese peoples-and for "modernity"s well? Briggs andBauman anonlyassert t;theycannotdemonstratet.Theirpaper epresents commonpatternn deconstruc-tionistandpostcolonial cholarship:heattemptodemon-strate hat omephenomenonhatmightseempositiveoratleastneutralwas, in fact, injurious o the "Other."n thiscase it is "the extualconstruction f Others"p.482)-intheirwords.Notingthat"Ethnopoeticsndpost-structuralist critiques f ethnography aveconvergedof late n cast-ing a favorablelight on Boas's oeuvre"(p. 481), theauthors et out to demonstrate hat this favorableevalu-ationis wrong. (They cite, amongothers,Clifford1982,1988;Hymes1981, 1985;Krupat1992.)Theirpaperhas asadlypredictableutcome,one that eaves us poorern ourunderstandingf Boas, his work,and theprocessesof so-cial and cultural hange.As Hymesand otherspointout,thetextsremainas arecordof thelanguage,poetry,beliefs,ideas, arts,andpracticesof the people,available or boththe descendantsof the Kwakwaka'wakw nformantsaswell as for outsider inguists,anthropologists,ndliteraryscholars.Dell Hymes writesof his studiesof texts fromthesecollections,"Ithinkof it asrepatriation,or thebene-fit of descendants f those who inhabited he narrativera-dition and of others who can learn from it. Lear moredeeplywhatwas therebefore the whitescame, whathasbeen lost"(1999a:xviii,also 1999b;cf. Berman1996;De-Mallie 1999;Jacknis1996:209).It was preciselyBoas'sinsistenceon trying o record"whathasbeenlost,"whichBriggsandBaumandeplore, hat makesthe texts so valu-abletoday.In another phere,as Zora Neale Hurston,Boas's one-time student,hasbecome a figureof considerablempor-tance, a numberof writers(Hazel Carby[1990], KarlaHolloway [1987], SusanE. Meisenhelder 1999], GuidoPodesta[1991])believetheyhave discovered hatBoas'sinfluencewas actuallybanefulto Hurstonand her work.

JUNE2001


4/22

LEWIS / THE PASSION OF FRANZ BOAS 449Onemightthink hata teacherwhosupported ndencour-agedablackwoman n the1920sto getaPh.D.throughhestudyandappreciationf southernNegroculturemightbelauded for this, but one would be wrong. As GeorgeHutchinsonwrites, "Yet Boas's very encouragement fHurstonas an anthropologist as, in recentyears, beenusedagainsthim inargumentslongon innuendo, hortonevidence] about how she had to fight for creative nde-pendence "(1995:70, also 462-464). Meisenhelder, orexample,blamesBoas for "dictatinghe focus of her re-searchandtreatingheras an aid orinformant ather hanaresearchern her own right" 1999:15),and she writesofHurston's"covertresistance"o him. At best,theseasser-tions arebaseduponunnecessarily arshreadingsof a fewlettersbetween HurstonandBoas, butthey aretypicalofthe currentdiscourse e.g., Meisenhelder1999:14-17;cf.Podesta1991:397).5Holloway goes even farther,drawinguponthe terribleimageof theSouthern lantation,f notof slavery,writing,"It s not unfair o see 'PapaFranz'as the paternalwhiteoverseerto this blackwomanstudentwho calledherselfBarnard's sacredBlackcow' in a forthright ndunambi-guousacknowledgmentf her status" 1987:2).Whatcanbe moredamninghan his, f true? suggest,however, hatsuchaninterpretations bothunwarrantedy theavailableevidenceandunhelpfulor ourunderstandingf Hurston'slife oraccomplishments.6Like ZoraNealeHurston,EllaDeloria,a Dakotawomanwho workedclosely withFranzBoas, has also gainedbe-lated recognitionas an author.In this case, Janet Finn(1995)believestherewereproblemsntheirrelationshipswell, imputingcultural nsensitivityand lack of under-standingoBoas.(See morebelow.)Thus,according o these accounts,not only did FranzBoas hold back the advanceof science and treatnon-Jew-ish students ndminoritywomenbadly,buthe was alsore-sponsible orboth heresurgencef "scientific acism" ndthe creationof a climateconducive o colonialdominationas well. The last shredsof Boasianpride, he lastprop hatsustained espect or Boas's accomplishmentsn thequestfor the good, thetrue,and thehumane,has been knockedfromunderhim. Far romhavingstoodupto anddefeatedscientificracism,Boas is now seento have beencomplicitin furtheringt, as well as being "complicitn naturalizingwhitecontrolof NativeAmerican ommunities,"ndcom-plicit in the failure of liberalpluralismand the develop-mentof "the anguageof cloakedracism"Star1997).

Franz Boas and the ZeitgeistI contend hatmostof thesenegativeclaims aboutBoasare notwell-founded riticismsof theresultsof his anthro-pological work or of his relations with others but arelargelygratuitous ndsometimes ar-fetched.There s noroom here to takethemon in detail,but one could make

convincing argumentsagainstthem all.) Why do thesewritersmake suchharshbutunsupportedlaims,andwhatdoes it tell us aboutour imes?As neverbefore,anthropologistsnd their nterlocutorsare looking at anthropology'spast in a critical manner.Thistrendbeganas partof thegeneralcriticismof Ameri-canand"Western"ociety during he late 1960s (Hymes1969,forexample).It wassparked y thegeneraldissatis-factionand the anger hataccompaniedhe VietnamWarand was heightenedby the strugglesof the civil rightsmovement, he movement or women'srights, he world-wide studentmovementsof the late 1960s, and concernabout heconditionof peoples n thecolonialworld.Someof the earliestcritics and advocates of "critical heory"drew heavily on Marxistwritings,but they were soonjoined, and overwhelmedby, scholarsconcerned withwomen's studies, black and other ethnic studies, theFrenchconnection(Foucault,Derrida,andmanyothers),postcolonialand subaltern tudies,culturalstudies, and"critical tudies."Clearly hediscourseof criticismof an-thropologys over-determinedseeLewis1998a).Along withthesecame "the iteraryurn"of postmod-ernism,CliffordGeertz'spieces aboutthe writingof an-thropologists, nd the development f a historiographyfanthropology blyledby GeorgeW.StockingJr.WhereasStockingandmanyof thosehe has inspired endtoward"historicism"Stocking 1968:1-12), much of the otherwritinghas thenegativeairthat s fundamentalo "criticalstudies"and Critiqueof Anthropology.Given these cir-cumstances,t is not surprisinghat herewill be a varietyof critiques f FranzBoas. He presents huge target; hereis so muchof himeverywherehathe is veryeasyto hit.7Over the decades there have been several distinctsourcesof criticismof FranzBoas. The firstmajorcriti-cism within the field of anthropology ame from thosewho took the scientisticandpositivisticperspective hatwas usually associated with neo-evolutionism,culturalecology,andculturalmaterialism. oas wasportrayeds amerecollectorof facts,rushingabout o save scrapsof in-formationabout dying cultures with "a philosophyof'planlesshodge-podge-ism'"(White 1943:355). Earlierthanthis,of course,the proponents f racialdeterminismand"nativism"awBoas as anenemywhoseworkthreat-ened theirviewof thenecessity or "whitesof solidAnglo-Saxon stock"to keep the "lesserbreeds" rom spoilingtheirAmerica.Andeventodaytherearethoseon therightof the sociopolitical spectrum,such as the late AllenBloom (1988) andDinesh D'Souza(1995), who considerwhat heybelieve to be the cultural elativism f Boas andhisstudentsmorallyandpolitically eprehensible.Normallywe would expect thatthose who have con-tempt orpositivismandscientismmightbe favorablydis-posedtowardone whois thought o havebeenopposed othe same things.We would also expect thatenemies ofracism,who celebratediversity,would also celebrate he


5/22

450 AMERICANNTHROPOLOGIST VOL.103, NO. 2 * JUNE2001

manwho led thefight againstracismandfor theapprecia-tionof othercultures.But we would be wrongagain.EventhoughFranzBoas canreasonably e seenas a forerunnerof certainkey ideas thatare held dear oday,his criticsonthe "postmodernist"ide seem more unforgivingthanthose onthe "modernist"ide.A postmodernist ationale or such critiquesmightbethatthey areimportant ecausetheycontextualizeBoas'sworkandhis activitiesas a liberalbeyondhis own self-awareness.Such analyses are meantto show the unin-tendedconsequencesof evenhigh-mindedcholarshipn asociety such as ours. But these fashionablecritiquesareoften insensitive o historicalcontext,eschewbenignbutequally reasonable alternativeinterpretations, nd arecavalieraboutcause andeffect.They rarelyncludeadem-onstration f the actual inkagesbetween he writtenwordand heharm hat hese textsaresaidtohave caused o "theOther."Intherest of theessayI offera view of the FranzBoas,withspecificreferenceo his politicalactivitiesandhis re-lationswithothers, hatI hopemayencourage ome read-ersto be moreunderstandingf FranzBoas andmorecriti-cal of thenegativeclaims. His life was livedin theserviceof precisely he valuesprofessedby manyof hiscritics,andhe achievedpositive resultsthatfew scholarshave evermatched.While it is certainly ruethatanyone'sbest ef-fortsmay go wrong,andone's scholarshipmaybe misusedandperverted y others,I believethatBoas's criticshaveso farfailedto demonstratehat his has been the case.

In Defense of Franz BoasIt is difficult odayto realizetheextentof FranzBoas'sinfluence as a scholar,as an institution-builder,ndas a

publicintellectual,because the scope of his workwas soenormousand his impactwas so widespread. n the ab-sence of any completebiography,we mustdependuponwidely scatteredarticles and chapters.8Even GeorgeStocking'snumerous ndispensablecontributionso ourknowledgeandunderstandingf FranzBoas pale beforethe magnitude f the man's effortsandaccomplishments,andDouglasCole'srecentbiography1999)of Boastakesus only upto 1906.TheAA memoirseditedbyA. L. Kroe-ber (1943) and WalterGoldschmidt 1959) broughtto-gether he efforts of more thana dozen specialists o dis-cuss andevaluatedifferent spectsof hiswork,but heydidnot beginto coverthe totalrangeof even his scholarship,letalonehispoliticaleffortsorhis institution-building.n-til we get thegreatworksthat shouldbe writtenabouthislife andwork,we must continuewritingarticlesandchap-tersandhopeto contributeittlebitsto the overallmosaic.9

Franz Boas's IdealsFranzBoas's valueswill seem naiveto sometoday,buthere is a summaryof the centralbeliefs thathe broughtwith him fromthe startof his long career,as theycan bederived romhispublishedwritingsand etters.

1. Boas believed n the pursuitof "truth"hroughhe sci-ence of anthropology in the interestsof mankind"aphrasehe often used). Any such "truths," owever,couldonlybe tentativeandfalliblebecausehe (likehiscontemporaries,he pragmatists)recognizedthat allpremises,conclusions,and beliefs are-and by theirvery naturemustbe-subject to criticism,challenge,modification,and further nterpretation.For more onBoas andpragmatismee Lewis 2001.) As Boas him-self wrote,"Whatever urgenerationmayachieve willattain n course of time that venerableaspectthat willlayin chains he mindsof thegreatmassof oursucces-sorsand t will requirenew effortsto freea futuregen-eration f the shackles hatwe areforging"1918:140).His sciencewas builtuponboth humanistic ndhis-toricisttraditions s well as those of the physicalsci-ences. Whenappropriate,or studiesof humangrowthand childdevelopment, r studies of humanvariation,he would calluponanthropometrynd the new field ofstatistics in which he was a significant nnovator).Atother imes he addressed umanhistory,creativity, ndemotion,perhaps hrough he arts orlanguageor evenpolitics.For him to advancehis programmeantnotonlycar-ryingout research ndreportingheresultsbuttrainingstudents, stablishing nthropologicalnstitutionsntheUnited States andelsewhere,securing undingfor re-searchersandinstitutions, nd striving o get researchresultspublished.He workedactivelyand simultane-ouslyon all of these frontsuntil hedayhedied.2. He believed,early n his careerat least,thatanthropol-ogy-science--could be used to improvethe humanconditionby lesseningthe reign of the unknownandignorance"the rrationaluthority f tradition"Stock-ing 1979:96])andbydecreasinghebarriers ndmisun-derstandingsmongpeoples.He thoughtof anthropol-ogy as atool with which to fight for the rightsof theoppressed nd he mistreated.And hebelieved ntakingan activist stance in the worldregardlessof the oddsagainsthim and the causes in which he believed."ForBoas, 'doing something'always meantusing his sci-ence in thecause of man" Bunzel1962:6).Thiswillbeamplydemonstratednthispaper.3. He insistedupon reedomof inquiryand reedomof ex-pressionand was devoted to the idea that a personshoulddevelop his or her own "innatepowers"andshouldbeathinking, ndependentndividual.Hefoughtagainst heconstraints f tradition ndconvention "the


6/22

LEWIS / THEPASSIONOFFRANZBOAS 451shacklesof dogma")allhis life. (Boasquoted n Stock-ing 1974:4142.)In1939Boaswrote oJohnDeweyabouthisconcerns:Thereare two matters o whichI am devoted:absolute ntel-lectual and spiritual reedom,and the subordination f thestate to the interestsof the individual;expressedin otherforms,the furthering f conditions n which the individualcandevelopto thebestof his ownability-as far as it is pos-siblewitha fullunderstandingf the fetters mposeduponusby tradition; ndthe fight againstall formsof power policyof states or privateorganizations.This meansa devotiontoprinciples f a truedemocracy. object o theteachingof slo-gansintended o befog themind,of whateverkindthey maybe. [11/6/39]1'

4. He ferventlybelieved in the absolute value of equalrightsandequalopportunityorall individuals ndpeo-ples.He hatedclassifyingand umpingpeople ntocate-goriesand insisteduponthe importance f individual-ity. He had contempt for chauvinism and narrowloyaltiesat theexpenseof othergroupsand of human-kind. This also meantrespectingother ways of life,othercultures, nd notassuminga priori hesuperiorityof one'sown.It is somewhatdifficult for us to recognizethat the valuewhich we attributeo ourown civilization s dueto the factthat we participaten this civilization,and thatit has beencontrollingallour actionssince the timeof ourbirth;but t iscertainlyconceivablethattheremay be othercivilizations,basedperhapson different raditions ndon a different qui-librium of emotionandreason,which are of no less valuethanours,althought maybe impossible or us to appreciatetheir values withouthavinggrown up under heir nfluence.Thegeneral heoryof valuationof humanactivities,asdevel-oped by anthropologicalesearch, eaches us a higher oler-ancethan the one which we now profess.[Boas 1911:208-209]

5. Althoughhe argued trenuously gainst heassumptionthat one's own culture American,German,"western,"oranyother)was superioro others,he didnot,as a re-sult,argue hatone shouldsuspend udgementon mat-tersof ultimatevalues.He was not an ethicalrelativistbut believed ferventlyin the pursuitof these values(Bunzel 1962:9).As ananthropologistfeelvery tronglyhat tispossibleostate certainfundamentalruthswhich are common to allmankind,notwithstandinghe formin which they occurinspecial societies. These generalhumancharacteristicsre aprotectionagainst a general relativisticattitude.I believethat heability o see thegeneralhuman ruthunder he socialforms in whichit occurs s one of the viewpoints hatoughtto be most stronglyemphasized. letter o ACLS, 2/17/41,emphasisadded]FranzBoas's perspective asbeendescribedby GeorgeStocking"as a struggle o preserve hecultural onditionsof the search oruniversal ationalknowledge,and on the

other hand], struggle o defend hevalidityof alternativeculturalworlds" 1979:97).Andthroughout is career,al-most 60 years,he laboredceaselesslyto putthesevaluesintopractice.The Background

FranzBoas derived hesecorevalues from the world nwhich he grew up, in Germanyat a moment in historywhen there was a strongpolitically iberal, ntellectuallyself-conscious movement among scientists, artists,andthinkersLiss 1996).This momentdrewuponelementsofthe Enlightenment ndthe Romantic-Liberalmovementsand, nthe case of themanyGerman ews who were nflu-enced by it, the Jewishprophetic raditionas well. (Boashimself would probablyhave been hesitant to acknow-ledgethelast,however Glick1982;Liss 1997].)"Thebackground f my early thinkingwas a Germanhome in which theidealsof the revolutionof 1848 werealivingforce"(Boas 1938a:201).This tradition alued sci-ence,knowledge, reedom,andtheroleof thefreethinkingindividual. Its heroes included Kant, Herder, Goethe,Schiller,Lessing,MosesMendelssohn,Beethoven,and heVon Humboldtbrothers Wilhelmthe linguist,educator,and statesman;Alexander he greattraveler,geographer,and cosmographer).t was a peculiarlyGermanmove-ment,andone thatmanyGerman ews embracedpassion-ately (Mosse 1985). And amongthese Jews was Boas'smother,Sophie, who was an educatorand feminist,towhomhe wasparticularlylose."FranzBoas wasborn n 1858,a decadeafter heunsuc-cessfulrevolutionof 1848,butdespitethe rigidregimeofChancellorBismarktherewere still people in Germanywho believed in these principles.One of these wasRudolphVirchow,a physician,pathologist, cientist,andradicalactivist,whowasprominentnGerman cienceandpolitics.Boas admiredVirchowgreatly,took a courseinanthropometry ith him beforeembarkingon his BaffinIsland ieldtrip n 1883,andclearly ookedupontheoldermanasafigure oemulate Stocking1974:22).The failureof theRevolutionof 1848had,however, edto theemigrationoAmerica f the"Forty-Eighters,"eoplesuch as Franz'suncleby marriage,Abraham acobi,whobecamea leadingphysiciananda well-knownandoutspo-ken liberalhumanitarianBoas and Meyer 1999; Link1949);OttilieAssing,abolitionistandtranslator ndsup-porterof FrederickDouglass;CarlSchurz,prominentib-eralpoliticianwho fought againstslaveryandcorruptionandforeducation,"culture,"nd herightsof laboringpeo-ple;andFelixAdler, he founderof theSocietyforEthicalCulture,whoworked ormaternal ndchildwelfare,medi-cal care for the poor, and civic reform(as did Jacobi).Franz'swife's father,ErnstKrakowizer,who diedbeforeBoascouldmeethim,wasanotheruch"scientist,hysician,


7/22


reformer"Liss 1996:179).FranzBoas joined this com-pany in America in 1887.12

Franz Boas's Ideals in Words and ActionAfter completinghis Ph.D. in psychophysics n Ger-many(U. of Kiel),servinghis yearof compulsory ervicein the Germanarmy,andspendinga yearcarryingoutre-searchamong heInuitof BaffinIsland,Boashad o decidewhere andhow to pursuehis goalsand his career.We arefortunateo have the evidence of his thinking romlettersthathe wroteto his parentsn Germanyandto theyoungwomanhe loved andwanted o marry,MarieKrakowizer,who livedin New York.While he was in Baffinlandhe wroteher(December23,1883):The earof traditionsndoldcustomss deeply mplantednmankind, nd n the sameway as it regulatesife here[amongtheEskimos], t halts allprogress or us. I believeit is a diffi-cultstruggle oreveryindividualandevery peopleto give uptraditions ndfollow thepath o truth.... I believe, f thistriphas forme (as a thinkingperson)a valuable nfluence, t liesin the strengthening f the viewpointof the relativityof allcultivationbildung]and that he evil as well as thevalueof apersonlies in the cultivationof the heart[herzensbildung],which I find here ustasmuchasamongstus,and hatall serv-ice, therefore,which a man can perform or humanitymustserve to promotetruth.Indeed, if he who promotestruthsearches or it and spreads t, it may be said that he has notlived in vain [Cole 1983:33,37]13And onJanuary 2, 1884-Will fortunebe good to me thatI canhopeto see our fondestwishes realizedspeedily?I do not want a Germanprofessor-shipbecause knowI wouldbe restricted omyscienceandtoteaching,for which I have little inclination. should muchprefer o live in America n order o be able to further hoseideas for which I live.... WhatI want to live and die for, isequalrightsfor all, equalpossibilitiesto learnand work forpoorandrich alike Don'tyou believe that o have done eventhe smallest bit for this, is more thanall science taken to-gether? do not think I would be allowed to do this in Ger-many.[Cole1983:37]13Afterspending he winterof 1884 in New York,he re-turned o Germany,where he accepteda positionat theEthnologicalMuseumin Berlin and gainedthe title ofDocentin Geography.By 1886he hadleft Germanyandsoon after committedhimself to life in the United States(Herskovits 1953:12). Looking back on his decision in1930,he wrotehis sister,"Themainreasonwas probablythatI saw no future hereandthatI wanted o getmarried.[Mariewas an American.]But therewas more behind t.The anti-Semitismduring my universityyears, the in-trigues n BerlinwhenI wanted o habilitatemyself,andthe ideathatAmericawaspoliticallyan idealcountry eemtohave been the mainmotives.The draftprobably lso had

a part n it"(12/8/30,Boas quoted n Rohner1969:295).14Considering he apparentlyheartfelt sentimentshe ex-pressed o Marieand o his uncle("scientific ctivityaloneis not enough;I must be able to livinglycreate"), nd hissubsequent ehavior,t is verylikelythathe was thinkingat leastas much of politicalprogressas his personalaca-demic advancementHyatt1990:12;Stocking1968:150;cf. Barkan1992:78-79).

Early Years: The Critique of Racism andEthnocentrismFranzBoas cameto the United States to stay in 1886,and,althoughhe rapidlywon professional ecognition, ehada difficult imeearning livingandfinding tabilityorthe first decade.He held a numberof temporary ositionsuntil 1896, when he finally got posts in New York at theAmericanMuseumof NaturalHistoryand ColumbiaUni-versity. Duringthis time he had a growingfamily,withfour children he eventuallyhad six, but one died withinthe firstyear),and he carriedon an incrediblepaceof re-search, publication,and organization.His research in-cluded fieldworkin Northwest Coast ethnography,hegeneral tudyof Indiananguages,andanthropometricndstatistical tudiesof the growthanddevelopmentof chil-dren n Worcester,Massachusetts.He workedas an assis-tant editor of Science,starteda programof researchandteachinganthropology t ClarkUniversity,and collabo-rated n the organization f anthropology t the World'sColumbianExposition nd he Field Museum nChicago.Boas playeda leadingrole in foundingthe American

Folklore Society and editing the Journal of AmericanFolk-Lore,n raising he statusof theAnthropologicalo-ciety of Washington Stocking1968:283),andin further-ing researchon AmericanIndianlanguagesthrough heSmithsonian/Bureauf AmericanEthnology.During hisperiodhe publisheda numberof classic articleswithpor-tentous heoreticalmplications, nd the book The CentralEskimo,andmanyreports,monographs,nd esserarticles.Hisbibliographyor theyears1886-96 contains170 itemsthatrangeover the fields of physicaland culturalanthro-pology, linguistics,psychology,geography, ndmeteorol-ogy (bibliographyn Kroeber1943).And throughouthisperiodhe had to expendaninordinate mountof time andenergy on personaland professional strugglesat ClarkUniversityand the FieldMuseum,and with theBureauofAmericanEthnology Hyatt1990;Stocking1960,1968).The idea thatFranzBoas did notengagein overtpoliti-calactivityduringhisfirstdecades nthe UnitedStateshasbecomewidelyaccepted.Barkans the mostdismissiveofBoas's political concerns,writing,"the ivory tower re-maineda secludedhavenfor him duringthe next thirtyyears" [1992:89], but see also Baker 1997; Levenstein1963; Stocking 1979) Given his employmentproblemsandtheactivitiesandaccomplishmentsnumerated bove,


8/22

LEWIS / THE PASSION OF FRANZ BOAS 453we mightreasonably sk when he wouldhave hadtimetobecomepoliticallyengaged,but thereare otherreasons oquestionthis idea. Althoughhe may not have been in-volvedinspecific politicalorganizationsndcausesduringhis firstyearsin America,he wasalreadyworking owardthe establishment f a new view of humanityn keepingwithbothhis scienceandhisvalues.When Boas beganhis workin America,evolutionismwas the dominanteven"hegemonic") aradigmnanthro-pology, sociology, andpoliticaleconomy.Intellectuals fthe political eft were as invested n evolutionismas werethoseon theright seePittinger1993;Ster 1931).In addi-tion to evolutionism,racial determinism nd Social Dar-winismwere alsoin theascendanceHarris 968;Stocking1968),andthesetouched heemotionsand socioeconomicinterestsof AmericanandEuropeanlites even more.Thiswas the era of the passageof JimCrowlaws,racialsegre-gation,and anti-blackandantiforeigner gitation.Despitetheirentrenchedtatus nAmerican ndEuropeanntellec-tual and politicallife, however,Boas, a new immigrant,virtuallyalone,startedo combatall of these fromtheverybeginningof his career,drawinguponhis view of human-ityandon his science.Werethesenotpoliticalacts?Boas'sattackonevolutionism,naddition o itstheoreti-cal and technicalaspects, nvolvedan attempto establishthecommonhumanity f "primitiveman"n scientificandpopulardiscourse; o remove the supposedgap between"our"minds and"theirs;"nd to question he assumptionthat "our"cultureis special, exalted,better than others(Boas 1888, 1899, 1904).As Stocking 1968) has shown,the evolutionismof thisperiodwasheavily weightedwithassumptions f thebiologicalandmentalnferiority f "thecoloredraces"and "theprimitives." oas attacked hispo-sitiondirectly, roma varietyof perspectives, eginningasearlyas his first articles n Science. Forexample,in oneshortpaperhe attemptedo demonstratehat,contraryoacceptedopinion,"the mindof the nativeenjoysas wellthe beautiesof natureas we do;thathe expresseshis griefin mournfulsongs, and appreciateshumorousconcep-tions" 1887:383)."These ew exampleswill show that hemind of the 'savage'is sensible to the beautiesof poetryand musicand it is only the superficial bserver o whomhe appears tupidandunfeeling" p.385). (Foranexampleof theview he wascontesting ee J.Lubbock1865.)Boas's workon "racialdifference,"n physicalanthro-pology,had the intended ffect of callingintoquestion60or 70 yearsof "scientific" acialdeterminism,heintellec-tual rationalizationor segregation.His researchon "TheHalf-Blood ndian"s oneearlyexample.A keyelement nthe argumentof the racialdeterministswas that"hybridraces show a decrease in fertility,and are thereforenotlikely to survive"[Boas 1894a:138]and thatthey showgeneral physicaland mentaldeteriorationBoas 1894a).But the conclusionsof his research,publishedn PopularScienceMonthly, howedsomethingquitedifferent:both

thefertilityand the stature f the "Half-Bloodndian"ur-passed hatof eitherof theparental opulations.n additionto the contributions f thisstudy othestudyof humanhe-redity, t wasa directchallenge o theargumentsf therac-ists andthe laws barring ntermarriagehat werejust thenbeingpromulgated.Not long after,he would advocate n-termarriageetweenblackandwhite.Whatcouldbe morepoliticalanddaringn the racistclimateof that ime?Beginning n 1894,Boasbeganto directlyconfront hequestionof the differencesbetween"primitiveman"and"civilizedman,"and racial differencesand racialpreju-dicesin a seriesof papershateventuatednhis 1911book,The Mindof PrimitiveMan. The main argumentswere:"There s no fundamental ifference n thewaysof think-ing of primitiveand civilized man.A close connectionbe-tweenraceandpersonality asneverbeen established.Theconceptof racial ypeascommonlyused evenin scientificliteratures misleadingandrequiresa logicalas well as abiologicalredefinition"Boas 1938b:v).He also arguedthat "achievements f races do not warrant s to assumethatone race is morehighly gifted thananother"Boas1894b;Boas quoted n Stocking1974:227); hatciviliza-tions are the productof history, includingdiffusion andchance,rather hanbiology;"that nvironment as an im-portanteffect upon the anatomicalstructureand physi-ological functionsof man"(1911:75); that each "race"contains o muchvariationwithin t that heaveragediffer-encesbetween t andothersare muchless thaneach con-tainswithin tself;and hatracialprejudices "themostfor-midable obstacle to a clear understanding" f theseproblems1911:245).

He concludes hebook with a pleaforgreateroleranceof other"formsof civilization" ndsympathyor"foreignraces" o that,"as all raceshavecontributedn thepasttocultural rogressn one wayoranother, o theywillbe ca-pableof advancingheinterests f mankind,f we areonlywilling to give them a fairopportunity"1911:278).Thebook was very influentialandwidely read,one of those"bookswhich havechangedmen'sminds" Bunzel1962:10; Degler 1989:17-19), basic for all who wanted o be-lieve in theequalityandcommonhumanity f allpeoples.In addition,as Hutchinsonpointsout, the leading iberal-left weeklies, The Nation and The New Republic,bothcloselyassociatedwiththeHarlemRenaissance, relied nthe Boas school for commentary ndreviewsconcerninganthropologyndracial heory"1995:209).Boas'scomparativetudiesof Europeanmmigrantsndtheir American-bor descendants e.g., 1910-13, 1916,1922) struck"a stunningblow at those who doubted hepowerof the environment"Degler 1989:3).Boas had alifelong nterest nproblems f growth, nvironmentespe-cially healthandnutrition), ndheredity,beginningwithhis studiesof growth nWorcester n 1890,and n 1908hereceived unds or a studyof almost18,000newimmigrantsand their American-bornhildren.The results,reported


9/22

454 AMERICANNTHROPOLOGIST VOL. 103, NO. 2 * JUNE2001from 1912 on, indicatedmarked hangesof form fromtheparents o the children.What was most strikingwas hisfindingthatheadshape cephalic ndex),untilthenconsid-eredbothdiagnosticof "racial"ypesand stableovertime,was shownto be quiteunstableandclearlyaffectedby en-vironmentalchange.This was of majorimportancebe-cause (a) it pointed o "agreatplasticityof human ypes"that(b) could be seriously nfluencedby environment.teffectively called into questionthe usefulnessof the ce-phalic ndex for historical econstructionr "racialdentifi-cation,"and it was one moreelementcallingintoquestionthe acceptedview of "race."He also reports he findingthat "Theaveragestatureof childrendecreaseswith thesize of thefamily" 1940a:63). nsofarasstatures takenasa measureof healthandbiologicalsuccess,he is reportinga findingrelated o classand ivingconditions.He wasal-ways concernedwiththeimpactof socioeconomic actorson health,nutrition, rowth,andwell-being,both theoreti-callyandpractically.The series of papersthat FranzBoas publishedfrom1910 untilhis death n 1942report he findingsof his re-searchonaspectsof "race"hat ed him(a)todenytheuse-fulness of the concept;(b) to stress the need to considereachpersonnot as a memberof a "race" ut as an individ-ual; and (c) to demonstrate he ways in which socioeco-nomic conditions and huspoliticaldecisions)affected hewell-beingandachievements f variouspopulations.'5All of these gave ammunition o those who wantedtobelievein equality,who wereagainstJimCrow,and whoopposed"racially" ased mmigrationestrictions. o takejust one example,CarlDeglerhas documentedBoas's in-fluence in turningthe sociologists of the UniversityofChicagoawayfromracialexplanations f behavior 1991:84 ff.). As Bernhard . Ster putit, "Itmustbe creditednlargemeasure o Boas andhis studentshata considerablemodification f thethought f the nationhastakenplace nrecentyearsin this importantieldof controversy"1959:218, alsoStocking1968:300).

Research into Other Social ProblemsInJanuary 905,FranzBoas submitted proposalo theBureauof AmericanEthnologyand theCarnegieFounda-tionfor a massivecomparativetudy, ocusingon Ameri-can IndiansandNegro populations.He called for a majormultifacetedresearcheffortwith five main components.The first hreewere orientedowardbothspecifichistoricalandgeneral heoreticalssues,butthe fourthand fifth weredirectedo social andeconomicproblems.Part ourwastobe a studyof theeffects of social condi-tions,climaticadaptations,ndracemixtureupon he Indi-answith the intentionof gainingunderstandingn order oguide governmentpolicy with respectto educationandeconomicdevelopment.He hoped hatsuch studieswouldhelp mitigatethe hardships hat Indians were enduring.

(Oneideawas to explorethepotential conomic andcul-turalrole of Indianartssuch as potterymaking,basketry,andwoodcarving.)Althoughhe was not involvedin an organizedmove-ment for Indianrightsat this time, as earlyas 1898 hespokeoutagainst heoutlawingof thepotlatchn Canada,andhe continued o writeagainst heprohibition f Indiandancingandthe use of peyote.In 1903 he wrote o NatalieCurtis,"Ithinkyouarequiteright nregrettinghat he cul-turalachievementsof the Indiansare not made use of intheireducation.On thewhole,theneglect o take nto con-sideration he cultureof the tribe has the effect that theschool-teachinghat the Indians eceive is a verythinve-neer covering their ancientideas, or, in less favorablecases,itdegradeshe character f theIndians nsteadof up-lifting hem" 8/20/03).He seems to have been concernedabout Indianrightsandcultureallhis life,buthe feltpowerless ohelp.("Ihada councilwiththeIndians,who arereallysufferingbecauseof the stupidpersecutionof theircustomsby the [Cana-dian]government. cando nothingabout t, butpromisedto domybestin Ottawa. am not certainwhatI cando be-cause themissionarieshere are behind t all. It goes so farthat the children n school arenot allowed to draw n thetraditionaltyleof theirpeoplebut[only]accordingopre-scribed models" [to Ernst, 11/18/30; Boas quoted inRohner1969:291].)The firsttimeanthropologistsadanyhopeof affectinggovernmentpolicywas during he NewDeal and the administration f JohnCollier as commis-sionerof Indianaffairs,butmanyweresuspiciousof Col-lier.Ina letter o Collier 12/7/33),Boasspeaksof the det-rimental ffects of the allotment ystem,of the leasingofland, and of the failings of Indianboardingschools. "Imerelyrepeatacommonplacef I state hat hecontempt fcustomsandbeliefs of the Indianswhich s instilled n theyoung s oneof theelements hatmustbeovercome."In the fifthpartof his researchproposalhe called for aparallelstudyof the Negropopulation, lso dealingwith"racemixture" s well as withchilddevelopment,health,andeducation.This study,too, wouldbe directed owardtheamelioration f poverty,discrimination,ndsociopoli-ticalmarginalization.Theprojectwas notfunded,but thisproposal,madeal-most a centuryago, shows thatFranzBoas was urging-even then-studies of changeandof social,political,andeconomic onditionsorbothscientific ndpracticaleasons.The imageof him as a factcollector,merely nterested n"gettingall the old customsbeforetheydiedout," s quiteincorrect.He alwayshad n mind he wider mplications fhis studies,andthis proposalwas not an exceptionbut apartof his program or a scientificanthropologyn theserviceof mankind.Thiswas inkeepingbothwithhis Ger-man liberal activist inheritanceand with the sentimentscommon nthecontemporaryrogressiveEra nAmerica.


10/22

LEWIS / THE PASSION OF FRANZ BOAS 455

Franz Boas's Professional Activities, 1896-1914In 1896, FranzBoas established he anthropology e-partment t ColumbiaUniversityandtaughtgraduatetu-dentsincludingA. L. Kroeber,RobertH. Lowie,EdwardSapir,WilliamJones(a Mesquakie Fox]Indian),Alexan-derGoldenweiser,PaulRadin,andquitea few undergrad-uatewomenatBarnardCollege.(Hisbetterknownwomengraduatestudents, ike Ruth Benedict,MargaretMead,GladysReichard,RuthBunzel,EstherGoldfrank,ndMayEdel,didnotenterColumbiauntilsomeyears ater.)Heleda majoreffortto trainstudentsand send them out to studyAmerican ndian anguagesandcultures,while he carriedout ethnographicieldworkand publicationhimself,pri-marily,but notonly,about he Kwakiutl.He was editorofand the driving force behind the Journal ofAmerican Folk-Lorefrom 1908to 1924,andof ColumbiaUniversityCon-tributions oAnthropologyrom1910throughhe 1930s.Boas organizedandcoordinatedhe research ndpubli-cation of the massiveJesupNorth Pacific Expedition,aproject hat nvolvedmanyscholars n thestudyof peopleson both sidesof theBeringStraits Boas 1903).The resultsconstitutemuch of the basis for ourethnographic nowl-edgeof Siberiaas well as of theNorthwestCoastof NorthAmerica and Alaska. He workedon the ethnographicx-hibits of theAmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory,aboveall preparing he magnificentNorthwestCoast hall. Heserved as active editorof several ournalsand tried o de-velopboth"aGreatOriental chool" orthestudyof Asianculturesand the Internationalchool of AmericanArche-

ology andEthnologynMexico(Godoy1977).And,as al-ways, he was constantlyoccupiedin the searchfor thefunds to supporthis own and his students'and collabora-tors'research ndpublication. heneed o begformoney-which botheredhimdreadfully-did notend untilthedayhe died.In November1902, he wrote to Columbia'spresident,NicholasMurrayButler,recommendingheestablishmentof anundergraduaterogram f anthropology particularlyin connectionwith the teachingof historyand the socialsciences. It is perhaps hebestmeans of opening heeyesof studentso what s valuablenforeigncultures, ndthusto developa justerappreciationf foreignnationsand tobringout those elements n our owncivilizationwhich arecommon o all mankind"Stocking1974:291).Thissoundsvery much like the Universityof Wisconsin-Madison's"GlobalCultures"rogram,stablishedust90yearsater.The Race Problem and theAfrican American Past

Shortlyafter heturnof thecentury,Boasbecamemoredirectly nvolvedwith"theraceproblem" y contributingactivelyanddirectly o the effortsof W. E. B. DuBois and

otherAfricanAmerican eaders.Responding o MarshallHyatt'sclaim(seenote3), VernonWilliams 1996)writes:Yet Boas's correspondencewith leadingAfricanAmericanintellectuals uch as BookerT.Washington,W.E. B. DuBois,Carter G. Woodson, Alain L. Locke, George E. Haynes,AbramHarris,CharlesS. Johnson,MonroeN. Work,CharlesH. Thompson,and Zora Neale Hurstonreveals that he notonlydisplayedanastonishing egreeof realempathywiththeplightof AfricanAmericanntellectuals ndthe blackmassesbut also performed uchpracticalunctionsas assistingthemin obtaining obs and foundation upport, ighting for aca-demic freedom,and nurturingtudies of AfricanAmericanhistoryand ife inthe social sciences.[p.37]OnMay31, 1906,atthe invitation f DuBois,Boas de-livered hecommencement ddress tthe allblackAtlanta

Universityandspokeabout he Africanbackgroundf Af-ricanAmericans. n thisupbeat alk he urgedhis listenersto takeheart rom theknowledge hat"theNegroracehadcontributedts liberal hare"o thedevelopment f humancultureand hat hehistoryandethnographyf Africagaveample evidence of the skill, creativity,and ambition oftheirancestorsandkin. He spokeof thepoliticaland artis-tic skill of thepeoplesof WestAfrica,of thegreatmarketsthere,andof theenergyof Africankings."If, herefore,t isclaimedthatyourrace is doomed o economicinferiority,you may confidently ook to the home of yourancestorsandsay, thatyou have set out to recoverfor the coloredpeoplethe strengthhat was theirsbeforetheyset foot onthiscontinent"Stocking1974:313).W. E. B. DuBois, a toweringpoliticaland intellectualfigure in AmericanNegro life from the 1890s until hisdeath n 1963,wrote,"FranzBoas cameto AtlantaUniver-sity where I was teachinghistory n 1906 and said to agraduatinglass:Youneednotbeashamed f yourAfricanpast;and then he recounted hehistoryof blackkingdomssouth of the Saharafor a thousandyears. I was tooastonished o speak.All of this I had never heardand Icame thenand afterwards o realizehow the silence andneglectof science can let truthutterlydisappear r even beunconsciously istorted"DuBois1939:vi).DuBois hadreceivedhisPh.D. fromHarvard,wherehehadstudiedwith WilliamJamesandothergreats;he haddone graduatework in Germanyand had publishedhisown researchon AmericanNegroes,butthiswas the firsttime he was exposedto sucha view of Africaand ts con-nectionto the AmericanNegro.He soon beganstudyingand writingabout Africahimself and became a leadingproponent f Pan-Africanism.Boas becamedeeply nvolved ntheNAACP nitsearlyyears,andwhen DuBois publishedhe secondnumberofthe NAACP's new journal, The Crisis: A Record of theDarkerRaces, Franz Boas contributedhe lead article:"TheRealRace Problem" 1910). Boas wrote andspokeout on thistopicoverandoveragain orthe restof his life,andheencouragedhestudyof bothAfricanandAmerican


11/22

456 AMERICANANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 103, NO. 2 * JUNE 2001

Negroculture.He envisionedandworked or anEncyclo-pedia of theNegroRace,an African nstituteand Africanmuseum (combining public exhibits with scholarlyre-searchon Africaand AfricanAmericans Beardsley1973:60]), and"theadoptionof a 'black studies'curriculumtColumbia"Hyatt1990:96).He was involvedwithG.Car-terWoodsonof HowardUniversityand his Center ortheStudyof NegroLife andHistory, timulating nd rying ofundresearch, ndsupporting ndtrainingNegroscholarssuch as AlainLocke,ArthurHuff Fauset,AbramHarris,and JamesF. King. (Forfuller accountsof FranzBoas'smany activitiesin the struggle againstanti-black acismandfor theimprovementf thesituation f AfricanAmeri-cans, see Baker 1998; Hyatt 1990; Williams 1996. SeeWillis 1975 on Boas andNegrofolklore,and Hutchinson1995onBoas, Herskovits, nd he HarlemRenaissance.)Boas's students ncludedHerskovits,whose contribu-tions to the studyof the "NewWorldNegro"as well as toAfrican studies n Americaareextraordinary;oraNealeHurston,whose nterest n southernNegroculturewasfos-teredandpartly undedand directedbyBoas andhis otherstudents;David Efron,whose study Gesture,Race andCulture 1941)demonstratedhecultural ndclass basisofgestures;andOttoKlineberg,a socialpsychologistwhosework on the limitationsof intelligencetesting, with itsbuilt-inculturalbiases,should be farbetterknowntoday.Klineberg'swork, nspiredanddirectedbyBoas,is of cen-tral mportance ecause t formstheexperimentalasis forthe claim that ntelligence esting s culturally iasedandapoor indicatorof groupdifferences-still a central ssue.The Bell Curveby Herrstein andMurray 1994) repre-sents preciselythe sort of ideas that Boas foughthardestagainst.Thatbook exists not becauseof anythingBoas didbut because he lessonsthathe andhis collaboratorsaughtushave beenforgottenBoas 1931;Klineberg1935).The "raceproblem"nvolvedmore hanblacksandIndi-ans, however.Prejudicewas directed oward mmigrantsfromeverywherebut northwestEurope, speciallyagainstthosefromsouthern ndeasternEuropeandAsia. The so-called nativistmovementbecamea central ssuein Ameri-can life in thisperiod,asprominent Anglo-Saxon" ritersandpolitical igureswrote aboutAnglo-Saxon uperiorityand heimminentdemiseof "thegreatrace" f these"lesserbreeds"wereto continue loodingAmerica'sshores.Boascontestedthese ideas in the press and on the speaker'sstand.'6He questionedthe premises and promises ofeugenics, anothermajorenthusiasm of the time (Boas1917a).The problemof racismandprejudice emainedamongBoas's central oncernsall his life,untilthe momentof hisdeath.PaulRivet,the Frenchanthropologistwho was be-ing honoredat the luncheonat which Boas died,reportsthathis lastwordswere:"Onemustnevertire of repeatingthatracism s a monstrous rroror animpudentie"(1943:313).17

Itis importanto stress,contraryo currentmyth, hat nhis battleagainst he then-currentonceptsof raceandbio-logicaldeterminism oasneversubstituted ethnicgroup"or "culture"or "race."He attacked acismonmany ronts,but never n a waythatsuggests hatculturehas thequalityof permanencehathadpreviouslybeen ascribedo "race."One of his cardinal principles, which he constantlypreached,was to separatehebiologicalfrom the culturaland both from anguage,andto note thateach of these is adifferentrealm thatoperates ndependentlyand with itsown rules. He also repeatedly tressed he variabilityandchangeabilitynherentnthesephenomena.He wasfirmlyandfundamentally gainstwhattoday are called "essen-tializing"and "totalizing," lways emphasizing he indi-vidualandvariabilitywithingroups.He held to thispointof view whetherhe was dealingwithbiology, culture,orpolitics(Liss 1997;Ster 1959:238).

The Great War of 1914-18Theperiodof WorldWarI was a timeof controversynintellectualand politically liberal circles in the UnitedStates,andit was a source of greatdistressfor Boas formanyreasons.

1. He was normallyagainstwarunlessit was in self-de-fense or in defense of a powerfulprinciple. nthiscasehe was convinced hat the war was due to nationalismand superpatriotism,ttitudeshe hated,as well as togreedandpride. See his "Patriotism"917b:156-158;letter oErst, 7/29/17;Hyatt1990:126.)2. He disapprovedof the effect the war was havingonAmericandemocracyandcondemned he xenophobiathat he warhadunleashed n AmericaagainstGermansand German culture.Although he had become anAmerican,he still loved andrespectedwhat he saw asthepositivethings nthe Germanntellectual ndscien-tific traditions.There were seriousattackson freedomof speechthataffectedhis friendsandcolleagues n ad-dition o offendinghisdeepestprinciples.3. He feared he effect of the waron German ociety:"Hepredictedhata Germandefeatwouldunleasha hatredcapableof stirringup 'hernationalism or centuries ocome,'" while "a victorywould create an arrogancethatwould be equallydamaging." Hyatt1990:122,af-terRohner1969:271)4. He was disturbedby the destructionn Europe,bothfrom deaths due to fighting and from malnutrition,dislocation,andpoverty.He was concernedabouttheinabilityof Europeanso pursuescience andlearning,andhe still hadfamilyand riendsnGermany.5. His two sons wereeligiblefor thedraft.Boas,asalways,wasveryvocalabout hesematters.Al-thoughhe wasinanexposedpositionas animmigrantGer-mananda Jew in a time of xenophobia, rom 1914 until


12/22

LEWIS / THEPASSIONOFFRANZBOAS 457Americanentryinto the war in 1917 he wrotenumerousarticlesandgave speechesagainstAmericannvolvement(Boas 1945). Once the United States entered he war hestopped his public pronouncements,but he remaineddeeply nvolved n thecausesof peoplewhohadbeenpun-ished forspeakingout.He foughtbattles or two colleagueswho wereaccusedof disloyaltyand were removed romtheir obs. OnewasLeo J. Frachtenberg, linguistwho got his Ph.D. underBoas andworkedon Indian anguages or the BureauofAmericanEthnology. Frachtenbergwas summarilydis-missed nlate1917 onthegroundshathe hadmade"utter-ancesderogatoryo theGovernmentf the UnitedStates,"andBoas spenta greatdeal of timeand effort rying o gethim reinstated. Iam not a bitpleasedwiththewayFracht-enberg allsall overhimself to provehis loyalty,butthat snot thepoint" letter o Lowie, 12/3/17).OnDecember26,1917,Boas wroteto his son, Ernst,"Ihavemobilized heAssociation of Professors, he EveningPost, 3 senators,Keppel nthe WarDepartment.hopethis dioticnonsensewill be stopped oronce"(cf.Hyatt1990:128).Thesecondcase involvedJamesMcKeenCattell,oneofthe leadersof Americanpsychologyand a long-timecol-leagueof Boas at Columbia andhis superior tScience n1887-88).Cattell,verymuchagainst hewarandveryout-spoken,hadwritten o themembers f theCongressurgingthem to defy Wilson and "to supporta measureagainstsendingconscripts o fight in Europeagainsttheirwill"(CattellquotednHyatt1990:127).Columbia'smperiouspresident,NicholasMurrayBut-ler,saw this as anopportunity to ridhimself of animpla-cable enemy" (Hyatt 1990:127),so he and the board oftrustees ried to dismiss CattellfromColumbia.Boas ledthe battle o supporthim, and he broadened is resistanceinto a more general confrontationwith Butler's high-handedadministration. e attackedwhathe sawas thelossof freedomof speechandof consideration f thefaculty'sopinions,andhe led a movement o developnew guaran-teesof facultygovernance tColumbia.18These don't exhaust Boas's wartimeactivitiesby anymeans.Amongotherthings,he campaigned n behalf ofEuropeanscholars who were adverselyaffectedby thewar,especiallyfor Germanand Austriananthropologistswho hadbeen caughton the wrongside of the linesandwereinterned.l9 nd after he war he ledefforts o supportart and science in GermanyandAustria,which includedcollectingbooksfor librariesn thosecountries ndgettingfood relief to Vienna.At firsthe worked hroughheGer-manisticSociety,of whichhe was thefounder, nd henhehelpedestablish he EmergencySociety in Aid of Euro-peanScienceandArt.On January 0, 1922, Boas wrote to W. H. R. Rivers,one of Britain's eadinganthropologistsnd a physician,suggestinga planfora massivestudyof theproblemof se-riously inadequatenourishment nd increasedmorbidity

andmortality mongthe populations f CentralandEast-ernEurope.He hopedthatRivers couldget thesupport fthe Royal Societyfor a studyof "pathologicalonditions,actual ood amounts,medicalobservations bones,tuber-culosis, growth],"of the relationsbetweensocial condi-tions and nourishment, nd of growthandphysiologicalandpsychological unction.Notingthat the "after ffectsof thisperiodof partial tarvationwill undoubtedly e feltformanyyears,"heurged hat hisstudybe doneforpracti-cal purposes, or preventionandimprovement f currentconditions,andfor basic scientificunderstandingf suchproblems.He hadearlierurgedCharlesB. Davenportojoinhim nan effort o get funding or a major tudyof U.S. armysol-diersbefore heyweredischarged,n an effort o testques-tions of heredityversus environment.20lthoughDaven-port was a leading proponentof eugenics and racialdeterminism,e wasone of themajor igures n theorgani-zation andfundingof Americanbiology,andBoas had totrytocooperatewithhim.Boas's involvement n all of these projects houldhelpdispel the myth thatBoas saw anthropologyas just thestudyof "primitives,"f languagesand cultures n dangerof extinction, f thequaintandexotic,"theOther."Once the warwas over,he sent a letterto The Nationpubliclydenouncinghe actionof the WarDepartmentndfour ndividual nthropologists ho wentto Mexicoto en-gage in espionageusingthe cover of theirscience(Boas1919a).JohnDewey advisedhimnot to sendthe letteronthe grounds hathe would be suspectbecause of his Ger-manoriginsandthismight essenhis usefulness or goodcauses in the future 3/9/17).This act was costlyto Boas,as he expected;hefeltimpelled oresign rom heNationalResearchCouncilandsuffered eprisalsromtheAmericanAnthropologicalAssociationandthe Bureauof AmericanEthnologyas well (Hyatt1990:131-134; Stocking1968:270-307). Butlerretaliated y firingGoldenweiser ndre-fusing o hireanother nthropologist.ut Boas had nsistedonactingon hisprinciples.Althoughhe vehementlyopposedWorldWarI, he wasunderstandingnd humane in his attitude o those whowentto war.Boas's sonErnst,who laterbecamea promi-nentphysician, nlistedas a medicalofficer whenhe real-izedthathe mightbe drafted.Theletters hatBoas wrote ohimaredirected gainst hewar andthestupidity f politi-cians,but heyareunderstandingf Ernstandhisdilemma.July24, 1917-

I haveno right o criticizeyou and canunderstandourdeci-sion. But I amsorry hatyou yieldedto torturing ncertaintyand the pressureof circumstances, nd thruyour voluntaryentry ntothearmyhavegiven yoursilentapprovalo the war.It is not a question[it goes withoutsaying?]thatyour armyservicewill bringus worrisome imes, in thisperiodof uni-versal orture ndcares.My dearboy,no matterwhatyoudo,mybest wishesgo withyou.


13/22

458 AMERICAN NTHROPOLOGIST VOL.103, NO. 2 * JUNE2001

Next came the problemof Heine,his youngerson. Au-gust15, 1918-Heineis naturally ll wroughtup [about hedraft]. believehis attitudes determinedby the fact thathe does not want tobe a coward,and thathe will therefore eekthe service hathemostfears.I shalltryto convincehim that t takesmorecour-age to actrightthan to appear ourageous.Whether hatwillhelp s anothermatter. fmyfatherhad ried opersuademe inthis mannerwhenI was youngI would nothavefollowedhisadvice.If I canconvincehimI should ike to tryto gethim intheambulanceervice.Youareallwrongwhenyou saythat tmakesno differencewhetheronekills oneself or whetheroth-ers do it. You would speak differently f you had thrust abayonet nto the abdomenof a man who alsojust does thatthathe is compelled odo.There s a well-knowntale among anthropologistshatholds that FranzBoas was so upsetwhenRalphLinton,thena graduate tudent, eturned fter he war in anarmyuniform hat Boas threwhim out of the department ndtold him thathe wouldnevergetadegreeat Columbia.Buttheircorrespondenceives a differentpictureof theirrela-tionshipduringandafter hewar:September11, 1917-Linton's first letter n the corre-spondence ile is on the letterhead f the ArmyandNavyYoungMen's ChristianAssociation(featuring flag, theslogan "With the Colors,"and the heading"WarWorkCouncil").He begins by sayingthathe knows his wife hasalreadywritteno tell Boasthathehadenlisted nthe 149thartillery ndexpectsto go to Francewithina week or two."Johas decidednot to leaveme,but na spiritandwith n-tentionswhich make it far more difficult or me to go on

withherthanwithouther." He thinks hatshe thinks hathe will be moremiserablewithher hanwithouther,andhewrites hatJo has had an affairwitha particularrcheolo-gist.) "Please believe that I have enlistedin the hope offindinga wayout,butthatI donot believe nthiswar,or inanywar.It s merelya manner f escaping romunbearableconditions."He closed the letteras "Your riend,RalphLinton."Boas responded n September14:"Iamsorrythatyouwill not be able to come back next all. I can understandyour eelings... be patientandawaitascalmlyas youcanfuturedevelopments. expectto see someof thepartiesnthefall,andI canwrite o you more ntelligentlyhanI cando at thepresent ime. I wish youto feel sure hatmy sym-pathiesare with you in your greattroubles" emphasisadded).The next letters are from 1922. Linton is at the FieldMuseum,havingreceiveda Ph.D. fromHarvard, nd heasks Boas for his reactions o a paperon Polynesia.Boasrespondspromptlyandcordiallywitha detailed, hought-ful theoretical iscussionof cultural ndbiologicalchangein relation o thepaper.He endswith,"Yourwork s cer-tainly nteresting, ndIthankyoufortheopportunityf ex-amining t,"and"withkindestregards."s it possiblethat

RalphLinton'saccountwasactuallya product f thebitterdisputes hathe laterhad with RuthBenedictand,perhaps,with Boashimself,afterhejoinedthe Columbia aculty nthe 1937?21Boas's Continuing Public and Political Activities

Boas became ncreasinglydisillusionedwithAmericanpolitical ife as the restrictions n freedomof speechthatbeganin WorldWarI grew increasinglyoppressive,andhe became ncreasingly riticalof imperialism nd coloni-alism, including he American mperialistventure n thePhilippines ndLatinAmerica. n 1919he attacked oloni-alismandthe treatment f nativepeoplesin TheNation,writing,amongother hings,Anypolicythat ncreasesproduction f valuable awproductsby exploitation f thecountrywithoutregard o thefuture,orthatdestroys he basis of the industrial ndsocial life of thenatives,must be condemned.... It is obvious that[different]policieswill neverbe introduced o longas colonies andtheirinhabitants reconsideredas the property f colonialpowersthatexploitthe landandutilize its inhabitants or their owneconomic purposes and for the fighting of their battles.[1919b:249]In a letter to Ernston this topic he added,"Theonlyhopefora betterworld ies in the submergedmillionsandtheywill comein to theirown.It is difficult o speak em-peratelywith all the hypocriticalphrases hatareto coverupthegameof grab"5/4/19).Both the political situation and Boas's personallifegrewdarkern the 1930s. He was almost80 andhad lost

his daughterGertrude o polio in 1924,his son Heinein arailroad ccident n 1925, andMarie,his belovedwife of42 years, o a hitandrundriver n 1929. He hadhad heartattacksandulcers.An operation o remove a cancerousgrowth roma nervein his face yearsearlierhadleft himwithsome contortion f his face anddifficultypronounc-ing certainsounds,which was particularly ifficult for afrequentpublic speakerand a linguistwho worked withphonetics.Despitethesetroubles, he politicalandeconomic cir-cumstances f theGreatDepressionand herise of Nazismand Fascismin Europeled him to speakout more fre-quently,giving speeches and writingin left and liberalperiodicalsabout racism,chauvinism,attempts o limitfreedomof inquiryandspeech,abouteconomic nequalityandunequal ducational pportunities.Hereis anexcerptfroma 1940piece:

The undernourished,ll-clad child of the slums,the isolatedchildin a remotevalley,theNegrochildin theSouth s not ina positionto develop freelytheresources hat ie in his mindandbody.Thecommunities o whichsuchchildrenbelongareso poorthat heycannotgive adequatehelp,evenif theyknewhow to do it. Without ederalhelpthis situation anneverberemedied.Justas little as the needs for an adequatehealth


14/22

LEWIS / THEPASSIONOFFRANZBOAS 459service can be met without ederalhelpcanourfundamentaleducationalneeds be metby theinadequateesourcesof localcommunities. 1940b:189]Nor did he only speakof thesethings n lofty terms.Inaddition o activecampaigningor childwelfare,he con-tributed o institutions imselfandsought hecontributionsof wealthypeople(letter oMrs.DwightMorrow1/17/33).In addition o his manypoliticalandpublicserviceac-tivities,he continueda remarkableaceof research,writ-ing,editing,andpublishing.His lastmajorpublication ro-jects includedGeneralAnthropology editorand majorcontributor), 938c;the editingandorganization f manyof hismajorpapersasRace,Language, ndCulture, 940a;A Dakota Grammar,with Ella Deloria, 1941; KwakiutlTales (posthumous1943);and he was workingon a vol-ume tobe calledKwakiutlEthnography henhedied.He started o combatNazism and all it stoodfor quiteearly. He fought againsttheirracial ideas (e.g., Barkan1988;Kuznick1987) for freedomof speechin Germany,andonceagainhe workedon behalfof Europeancientists,artists,andothers n need of asylumandwork. His corre-spondenceof the 1930s containsmanyrequests o chairsandadministratorso considerhiring his one, or to bringthatoneto campus ora seriesof lectures.He wroteonbe-half of Wieschoff-the GermanAfricanistwho was dis-missed from his post in Germanybecause his wife wasJewish-and Paul Rivet, JuliusLips, RomanJakobson,Paul Kirchhoff,and Rudolph Kayser,Einstein'sson-in-law (in German iterature).When a Cubanprofessorwasjailed by the dictatorFulgencioBatista,Boas wroteto aleadingLatinAmericanist,CarletonBeals,recommending

action.Despitehis complaints hathe had no energy,heseemsindefatigablen his politicalactivities-writing let-ters,attendingmeetings,and oining(andorganizing)eft-liberalorganizations.Columbiagraduate tudentsof thetime tell of goingalongtoprotecthimwhen he went off toarguewithAmericanNazisandothers Ebihara,nJaneR.Hanks,1988;Goldfrank 978;Mead1959).In a long letter o RuthBenedict,aftergivinghis latestreadingof Hitler,Stalin,andthesituation n Europen Oc-tober1939,he writes,I ammore nterestedn ourown civil liberties nd,as youknow, am n that ight. ustnowweareattackingheCham-ber ofCommerce]f theState fNewYork,whowant oseeour reehighschools hopped ff,religionntroduced,tc.Iwish I hadmorestrength,utI cannotundertakenyworkthat equires hysical trength.Myheart implywon'tstandit.[BoasquotednMead1959:413f.]Here is a brief sampleof his activitiesduringhis lastyears:He was a founderof the AmericanCommittee or De-mocracyandIntellectualFreedom,whichactivelyfoughtracialdiscrimination nd heinvestigation nd ntimidationof teachers n colleges andhigh schools (6/4/42, to John

Davies).Amongotherbattles, heCommitteeook on theDies Committee, orerunner f the House Un-AmericanActivitiesCommittee.He fought ortheendingof thepolltax laws thatmadeit difficultor impossible or Negroes(blacks) o vote in manysouthern tates,andhe wrotetochide senatorswho failed to vote. He lent his nameandcontributedmoney to the Scottsborodefense.He was amemberof theboardof theCouncilon AfricanAffairs, o-getherwithPaulRobeson,RalphBunche,andMax Yer-gan.He hopedthattheirresearchwouldbe directedo theaim of gettingthe coloniesout of the controlof imperialrulers.Andeveryday'smailbrought ewrequestsorhelpfromprivatendividuals nd eadersof politicalandchari-tableorganizations.Whena biology teacherat the BronxHigh School ofSciencewrote to Boas tellinghim thattheirbiologytext-book contained"a drawingshowing markeddifferencesbetween the chromosomesof Negroesand Whitemen,"Boas checked with his colleague, the geneticist L. C.Dunn,andthenwroteto complain o thepublisher ndthesuperintendentf schools,andnotifiedWalterWhite,thepresident f theNAACP.On April4, 1942, the managingeditorof TheJewishSurveyaskedfor a shortarticle rom himcondemninghe"Jew-baiting"f FatherCoughlin,andcallingfortheban-ningof his magazine,SocialJustice.Boasreplied,"Inmyopinion heonly kindof protest hatmeansanythings toattack he whole attitudeof racestowardone another. fyou wanta note in which I accuse at the same time theJews for their anti-Negro attitude I will write it." (Howdoes thatsquarewiththe accusationhatBoas's attackonanti-black rejudicewasacover foradefenseof Jews?)He campaignedor the freedomof thejailed leaderofthe AmericanCommunistParty,EarlBrowder.Althoughnota Marxisthimself,during hisperiodhe devotedmuchof his time andenergyto politicalcausesassociatedwiththe far left (Goldfrank 1978:123 ff.; Ster 1959:239-241).He wrote oBrowder,whowasin theAtlantaPenitentiary,"HowevermuchI maydisagreewith themethodsof yourpartyandthe demand or obedienceof partymembers,recognize hat hefinalidealof yourpartyagreeswiththislofty ideal," that is, "they envisage a group consciousnessthat must embrace humankind as a whole andforbidgroupconflict"(5/17/41). He was impressedwith the fact thatmany of the young people he had met "who profess to beCommunists... are attractedby the ideas of equality of allmembers f mankind."f FranzBoas waspoliticallynaive,it wasa naiveteof theleft,not therightorthecenter.In thelightof all thisI find itdifficult ounderstandowJuliaLiss canwrite,"WhatBoas didnotaddresswerethesystemsof powerover which even his sciencecouldnotrise" 1995:130).


15/22

460 AMERICANNTHROPOLOGIST VOL. 103, NO. 2 * JUNE2001

The Political and the PersonalManya great public figurewho fights for all the rightcauses turnsout to be moreof a humanitariann publicthanin private, o "love manin generalmore than n theparticular."See, for example,Ray Monk'sbiographyofBertrandRussell [1996].)This was farfrom thecase withFranz Boas. Here are four examples of the manner nwhich he implemented is beliefsat the individualevel.22Dr. Albert Gatschetwas a linguistwho workedon In-dianlanguagesandethnology orthe Bureauof AmericanEthnology.As he agedhe developedsevere mentalprob-lems,andby 1905 he was unable o function.He wasgivenleave but withoutpay, leavinghis wife and child withnomeans of support.Boas was outragedand "petitionedmembersof the Smithsonian,he CarnegieInstitute,andCongress for redress"(Hyatt 1990:76). As a result ofBoas's efforts,theCarnegieFoundation or the Advance-ment of Teachinggrantedhim$1,000perannum.He dieda year ater,however.HermanK. Haeberlin ame fromGermanyo studyan-thropologywithBoas.He wasa brilliant tudentand wentto work among the pueblosfirst, then among the Sno-homish of the NorthwestCoast.He had startedpublishingexcellentwork,but he had diabetesandbecame ncreasingill. Boas arrangedor his care,helped pay for it, and evi-dently ookonresponsibilityn locoparentis.Unfortunate-ly Haeberlin ied fromacidosis n 1918at theageof 26.AlexanderGoldenweiserwas anearlystudentof Boas,verybrilliantbutverydifficult-undisciplinedandself-in-dulgent.Much of theircorrespondence evolves around

Boas'sattemptso findresearchundingand eachingposi-tions for Goldenweiser,or helping him out of trouble.Goldenweiserdrank oo much,and he fell in love withwomenmorethanwas wise or verynice. Boasusuallyputupwith his problems,but when Goldenweiser eft his wifeforanotherwoman "adeep,tried,andunslakable motionthathas come intomylife-my loveforMiss....") andre-fused to contribute o the maintenanceof his wife andchild,Boas puthis foot down.WhenGoldenweiserwroteyet again askingfor work or researchmoney, Boas re-sponded,"You should, throughyour lawyer, ask for ajudgementagainstyourselfwhich would bindyou to suchfinancialsupport... [forhis wife andchild].It is theveryleast thatyoucan do on behalfof yourchild."Hetells himto stayoutof New York n order o avoid conflictwithhisex-wife. "Ifyou will acceptthis plan please write me. Ifnot, I am sorryI shall not do anything urthern regardoyourcase. I thinkyourwholefuturedependson theques-tionwhetheryoucanmakeupyourmindto acceptobliga-tionsthatanydecentmanhasand ive accordingly."Gold-enweiser'stelegram eads,"Acceptyour message n spiritand in letter.. ." (5/27/26-7/2/26).EllaDeloriahasbeen ustlyrediscoveredasZoraNealeHurstonhas) many yearsafterher death.But Boas knew

how goodshe waswhen he firstmet her n 1915.He hiredherto work with him and his students ranslatingLakotatextsin one of his courses. It was her firstpaying ob, asshe laterremindedBoas.)Boas contactedher in 1926 andasked if she would be interestedn workingwith him onthe Dakotalanguage.Their collaboration ndcorrespon-dence continued rom thattime until he died. He encour-agedher,he foundmoneyfor her,and he supportedherwork n the field andforherstays nNew York,whereshecouldwriteupher materialwith morescholarly esourcesthan she had in Kansas.She also taughtsome coursesatColumbiaMedicine1980,1999;Schildkrout 989:553).In 1935 and 1936, Boas urgedElla Deloria to come toNew York for work, and from her letters o him it seemsclear thatshe reallywantedto. She kept settingdates tocomebutthenwouldwrite opostponehertrip.Finallyshewrote hatshecould not comebecauseof herresponsibilityto herfamily,especiallyhersister,whoneededher.Basedon thisincident,JanetFinnaccusesBoasof cultural nsen-sitivity:he waspressingher to come to New York,puttingher nadifficultpositionwhenshe couldnot andwouldnotleave her family (1995:136-139). But it is clear thatshehadn'ttold him of those obligationsearliernor was shegenerallyaverseto traveland residenceaway from herfamily.She had studiedatOberlinCollege nOhio andCo-lumbiaTeachersCollege in New York and had happilystayedatColumbia n severaloccasions.23Finnassumes thatBoas, as a whiteman,wouldn'tun-derstand he power of kinshipobligations hatkept EllaDeloriaclose to herfamily.But a letter hathe wrote o hissisterToni,when she wasashamed oaccepthishelpwhensheneeded t, givesadifferent icture.Hewrote,

Itdependsentirelyuponhow stronglyone feels aboutfamilysolidaritywhich stems from a person'slove for his parents,his attachment o commonchildhoodexperiences,his atti-tudes toward life and his character raits which were im-plantedn himas well as in all the othermembersof thefam-ily. If thefeelingof belonging ogethers stillstrongwithinusand if it has not been killedby outsidecircumstanceswhichhave forced us into [other]pathsthen I can not understandyourfeelings[ofunwillingnesso accepthelp].[10/29/06]In fact, in his graduate tudentdaysBoas haddeclined

an opportunityo work at the laboratory f Hermann onHelmholtz, he leader n the field of psychophysics,n or-der oremain loserto Toniata timewhenshewasquite ll(Cole1999:51).JanetFinn,workingwith a cultural tereo-typeof Boas,makesassumptions bouthimthat,althoughfashionable, reprobably ntrue.Boas hadhis ownpower-ful senseof familyloyalty,andthere s everyreason o be-lieve that he understood he importanceof kinshipandcommunityo Indianpeopleaswell.Finn also writes, "While Deloria's labor supportedBoas'sethnographic genda,herroleas informanteemedto be valuedmorethanherrole as a scholar"p. 137).Ican


16/22

LEWIS / THEPASSIONOFFRANZBOAS 461find no evidence for this. One merelyneeds to readtheglowing letter hathe wrote for her in 1937 to see his re-spect for her."Shehas a thoroughgraspof the grammarandspiritof the language.... and she is thoroughly on-versantnotonlywiththe formsbutalsowiththevery ntri-catepsychologicalbackground.... Herknowledgeof thesubject s unique" Deloria1944:xiv). RobertH. Lowie,Boas's eminent formerstudent,expressedhis admirationfor Ella Deloria'sfieldworkandwroteto Boas tellinghimthathe was goingto base his graduate eminaron her Da-kota Texts 2/27/35).Onanother ccasion(7/16/34)Boas wroteto JohnCol-lier,Commissioner f IndianAffairs,recommendingDe-loriaas one of those"qualifiedndividualswhomightbeofassistancentheworkof rehabilitatingndianribalorgani-zation and social life." He notes that she "hasanexcellentgraspof the needs of the situation" nd that a report ub-mitted to Collierby one of Boas's formerPh.D.studentswas merelya repetition f whatMiss Deloriahadtold her.Boasrecognizedqualitywherehe found t.But supposeFranzBoas had been insensitiveat somepoint in his long relationshipwith Ella Deloria as JanetFinnclaims.Is this worthnoting o theexclusionof the factthatas a resultof Boas's training, ncouragement,nd ad-vice, and his commissionsandfinancialsupport, he wasable to developa career hatgave herwell-deservedprideand satisfactionandbroughther considerablehonor?Shepublishedone classic linguisticwork in her own name(DakotaTexts[1932])andwas coauthorwithBoas of an-other,A DakotaGrammar1941), a work thatsome lin-guists considerto be the finestgrammar f an AmericanIndian anguage. "So manypeopleare askingaboutourgrammar, feel veryproud o be yourco-author,"wroteDeloria,7/15/41.) Fromthe work thatshe did withBoasshe gainedthe confidence,experience,contacts,and rec-ommendations hathelpedher to writeandpublishotherworksandto obtainspeakingengagementsandpositionsthatgavehera moresecureandmorehonoredife. Her astletters o Boas are full of the satisfaction he felt as a resultof herresearches, er ncreasing isibility,andhercontactsandsense of collegialitywithotheranthropologistsuchasRuthBenedict,EdwardKennard,OttoKlineberg,GladysReichard, ndRuthLandes.

Ella Deloria wrote to Boas regardinga tribute o himthathad appearedn the New YorkTimesin 1939, "It isbeautiful, sn't it, but not a whit more thanyou deserve.Please allow me to addmy feeble bit to the well meritedpraise,who havereallyknownyourather etter hanmany,throughmany yearsof profitableassociationwith you. Iwould not tradethe privilegeof having knownyou, foranything can thinkof" (7/17/39).She laterwrote,"Youhavealwaysbeenmybest friendandhavehelpedmeto dowhatI wanted odo inthepast; thinkmaybeyoumightbeable to helpme again, hrough our nfluenceandadvice"

Perhapswe can deconstruct hese texts and see herwordsas mereflatteryand a signof herdependenceuponhim,but this wouldprobablydo a graveinjustice o EllaDeloria,herfeelings,and the realitiesof her life story.Intheabsenceof anyotherevidence, n thelightof their ong,mutually respectful and profitable collaboration,whysearch or hiddenmotivesandmisunderstandingshat di-minishbothor eitherof them?Thesefour cases are usta few of the manythatcan befound in the massive correspondencehat Boas left be-hind.24

ConclusionsFranzBoas was not anethicalrelativistbut believedinandspenthis life workingandfightingfor certainvalues:equalopportunityorall,understandingnd mutualappre-ciationamongpeoples,freedomof speechand nquiry.Hethought hatanthropologywas the best instrument o useforthesepurposesanddid notprostitute imselfor his sci-ence in thepursuit f theseendsbutsought earlessly oin-vestigate he causes of sociocultural ehavior.He was asfarsighted ndclear-eyedas anyone n his time,an oppo-nentof racism,ethnocentrism,nequality, hauvinism,m-perialism,war, censorship,and politicalcant and mind-foggingsloganeering.He wasacutelyawareof thecausesandconsequencesof inequalityandunderstood he mate-rial bases of much of it. The image of "PapaFranz"asnothingbut a fact collectorcould not be further romthetruth.SeeLewis2001.)Itwouldbe foolish todenythatothersmay pervert per-

son's workor thatone's intentionsmay be irrelevantbe-causeone's effortsmayleadto verydifferentresults hanthosethatwere ntended nddesired. t is far-fetched, ow-ever,to argue hatFranzBoas contributedo the develop-ment of "scientificracism"or to ethnicchauvinism,na-tionalism,or colonialism. Those who claim this bear aheavy burdenof proof they arefar from meeting.Thesewere all well establishedbeforehis time;his contributionwas to fightthem andto tryto replace hem withapprecia-tionof "theOther."He cannotbe heldaccountable orthefactthat hese evils stillexist,but here s a verystrong asetobe made hat here s less of itbecauseof hisefforts.Theevidence ndicateshatFranzBoaswas anoutstand-ing andadmirable umanbeing,bothin termsof whatheattempted nd whathe achieved,nhis valuesandthewayin whichhe putthem ntopractice.He was willingto beargreatcostsfor hisbeliefs,evenwhenthesewentagainsthispersonal,professional,andscientific nterests.The recordalso shows thathe dealt with his colleagues,students,andfamily in a deeply humaneway. Althoughone may ap-proveof much that a persondoes but profoundlydisap-proveof otheraspectsof thatperson's ife andwork,we donot have to makethatcompromise n the case of Franz(6/17/41,emphasisadded). Boas. This is not to say that Boas cannot be legitimately


17/22


criticized for anythinghe ever did or said, but it is to argueagainst the too-easy attribution of guilt, especially in lightof the major differences between the world of his earlydays andtoday.FranzBoas both professed and acted upon the finest andhighest ideals of his (and our) culture and time. These are:concern for the dominated and oppressed, respect for "oth-ers" as individuals as well as for other cultures; toleranceand humane dealing; and respect for the eternal quest forknowledge about ourselves and the world. Despite all theuncertainties and decenterings, the reversals and question-ings of values of the current moment, at base, I believemost of us would still want to be judged by how well weserved these interests.5

NotesAcknowledgments. owe a debt to the American Philo-sophical Society for an Andrew Mellon Resident Research

Fellowship and for permissionto publishmaterial rom theircollections. I must also add personalthanksto Beth Carroll-Harrocks,Rob Cox, and Roy Goodmanof the APS Librarystaff for theirprofessionalandfriendly support.In additionIwish to thank Walter Goldschmidt,Dr. Norman F. Boas,LeonardB. Glick,JayMiller,Amelia Schultz,JohnLandgraf,GeorgeHutchinson,Michael C. Coleman,GeorgeM. Foster,FrancisSchrag,FrankSalamone,MitchellHart,MayEbihara,and my fellow researchersat the APS, SaraTrechter,KevinDann,NathanielComfort,and David Miller.As always, spe-cial gratitudes duemy wife, Marcia.1. "I must confess I often am annoyedwiththeyoung peo-ple who forgetwhattheyowe to us seniors,and thenI get stillmoreangryatmyself thatI amupsetby it, for it is quitenatu-ral, and they should feel that they think and work for them-selves"(letter o sonErnst,4/13/18).2. It is impossibleto discuss the manyproblemswith Wil-lis's articlehere,but one must record he factthat,withrespectto these allegations,a quotation rom Boas is misleadingandreference o a letter n Rohner 1969) is irrelevant p. 139).3. It is interestingto contrast Willis's anger in this piecewith the understandinghat he shows in a laterarticledealingwith Boas's lifelong efforts to supportthe study of AfricanAmerican folklore (1975). Willis would later offer sympa-thetic comments about Boas in the 1990 documentary ilmTheShacklesof Traditionand was workingon a biographyofBoas at the time of his death.By then he had come to respectBoas greatly, according o FrankSalamone(personalcommu-nication).MarshallHyatt, in a fair and useful book, suggests thatBoas's ownexperienceswith discriminationwere the immedi-ate stimulusfor his attackson racism,but"rather han call at-tentionto his own plightandrisk accusationsof subjectivity,Boas chose anotheraspect of bigotry, that directedagainstAfro-Americans,at which to vent his distress"(1990:33-34;also 1989:21-23).Compare hedifferingviews of Baker1998:266; Hutchinson1995:69 ff.; Liss 1997;Williams1996:53.4. For fullerresponsesto Visweswaran'spapersee Lewis(1998b) and Stassinos(1998).

5. The letter that Meisenhelder 1999:15) cites as proofofHurston's "posturingas a deferential disciple" (4/21/29)seems to be what one would expect from a 27-year-oldneo-phytewho is askingadvicefrom heradvisor,especiallyan ad-visor who is the world's leading authorityon the topicsshe isaskingabout.Boas's suggestionsto heras to what to look forin the field (5/3/27),rather hanevidence of "Boas's controlofHurston's work"(Meisenhelder1999:201), are the sugges-tions thatany good advisormightgive to a young student.In-deed, this particular dvice might have been quite useful forHurston'ssubsequentwork because he urges her to pay lessattentionto the contentof stories (many of which had beenpreviouslyrecorded)and more to diction, style, andperform-ance. Boas wrote, "The methodsof dancing,habitualmove-ments in telling tales, or in ordinaryconversation;all this ismaterial hat would be essentiallynew." She closes her lettersto Boas with "Most affectionately yours" (12/27/28) and"Love" 4/21/29) Should theseexpressionsbe taken as primafacie evidence of her dominationby Boas, or may we creditheragencyin thismatter?6. George Hutchinsonwrites in response to Holloway,"Regardlessof Hurston's eeling of her generalstatus at Bar-nard,her view of Boas was unambiguouslypositive-a brightstudent'sview of an admiredteacher"(1995:464; also Hur-ston 1942:178-179). F. Lionnet-McCumber 1993:263-264)gives analtogethermorepositiveview of Boas's influence onHurston,as doWilliams(1996:48-51) and Hill (1996).7. EvenGeorge Stocking,who taughtus abouttheproblemof presentism 1968), fallspreyto thistendencywhile discuss-ing Boas's kulturkampf1979:110-113), distributingpassingor failing marks to Boas based upon the political ideas ofStocking'sown worldin 1979. How valid, one wonders,willthese judgementssound in 2040? (In conclusion, however,

Stockingoffers an endorsementof Boas's general standpointsimilar o theone in thispaper.)8. DouglasCole worked ormanyyearsto prepare he firstof two projectedvolumes of Boas's biographybut unfortu-natelyhe died before it could be published.This valuablevol-ume has beenpublishedposthumously,however(Cole 1999).9. Therearequitea few worksthat considerFranzBoas'svalues, politics, andpersonal history. See, for example, LeeD. Baker (1997, 1998), Elazar Barkan (1988), Melville J.Herskovits 1953), GeorgeHutchinson 1995), MarshallHyatt(1990), Peter Kuznick (1987), Alexander Lesser (1981),HarveyA. Levenstein(1963), Julia Liss (1995, 1996, 1997,1998), Enid Schildkrout (1989), George Stocking (1974,1992),andVernonJ. Williams 1996).Thispiece complementsthose and,despite some inevitableoverlap,offers new mate-rial and a newemphasis.10. EdwardSapirand RuthBenedict wanted to stopMar-garetMead from going to Samoa. Although Boas, too, hadbeen concerned for her health and safety, he wrote to RuthBenedict, "In my opinion an attemptto compel her now togive up the trip... would be disastrous.Besides it is entirelyagainst my point of view to interfere n such a radicalwaywith the future of a personfor his or her own sake-unlessthere is actual disease that needs control" (Darnell 1990:186-187). His daughterFranziska old an interviewer hathehad the samereaction o her desire to be an actor and dancer.


18/22

LEWIS / THE PASSION OF FRANZ BOAS 46311. His motherestablished hefirstFroebelkindergartenntheirtown, Minden,Westphalia.12. After Jacobi's first two wives died, he marriedMaryPutnam,a physician,feminist,andpioneeractivistin the con-sumer movement (Link 1949). She was a relative of theprominentanthropologistFredericWardPutnam,who becamean early patronandfriendof Boas. Foran interestingaccount

of the membersof this groupwho were so importanto FranzBoas, see Boas andMeyer(1999).13. Bildunghadlong been a key conceptfor German ntel-lectual humanists ike Boas and his circle, from the time ofGoethe and Herder on. It meant somethinglike "theunhin-deredgrowthof thepowersof the individual" Diehl 1978:19;cf. Mosse 1985). Boas's declarationof his aims to Jo

the passion of branz boaz

Documents