| OCR Text |
Show in art and in dance. W l e this collection gives us a valuable sampling of data and viewpoints, it lacks the depth to resolve disputed interpretations. A further constraint is the long delay since the original seminar in 1991; current arguments among professionals have gone far beyond the points raised here ( see for example, the controversy over Mesoamerican connections). For a full review, we must await another conference. Meanwhile, this collection is exemplary in relating hfferent types of evidence to its overall theme. Archaeologists and ethnographers didn't always communicate to each other this readily. Anyone interested in Kachinas, either as an avocation or professionally, will want to own this book. The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of California, by David S. Whitley. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 2000. 138 pages, 90 color plates, 8 black and white plates, 7 illustrations, 8 maps. $ 45.00 cloth Reviewed by: Steven R Simrns, Department of Sociology, Social Work and Anthropology, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322- 0730 Upon first encounter with this book I expected a light treatise that would play a supporting role to the beautiful color photography and full page, color maps in what was surely a coffee- table trophy. On the con-trary, David Whitley7s The Art of the Shaman is rich in detailed descriptions of rock art styles across the Cali-fornia and the Great Basin regions. Whitley traces rock art motif, style, variation and distribution in combina-tion with a host of ethnographic description to propose relationships between rock art, ritual, rites of passage, symbolism, and shamanism. Whitley also seeks more than description and classification. The book is a se-quentially structured argument that concludes, anlong other things: 1) rock art styles vary in time and much of the rock art of the last 1,000 years is directly related to historically known cultures; 2) rock art ehbits regional differences, but also interactive dynamism across cul-tural boundaries; 3) variation in the use of motifs is re-lated more to function than to chronology; and 4) rock art is related in myriad ways to the shamanistic ideo-logical systems of the indigenous cultures. This book is a lavishly illustrated summation of Wlutley's lengthy research into the relationship between rock art and shamanism ( e. g., Whitley 1982,1988,1994, 1996,1998). The argument that rock art has some con-nection to shamanism is not new; early twentieth cen-tury scholars such as A. L. Kroeber speculated on the possibility. The proposition that shamanism provides a context to account for much rock art finds support in cognitive neuroscience research. Many rock art graph-ics are found worldwide, suggesting there are underly-ing psychobiological processes at work regardless of the cross- cultural variations. Geometric graphics typi-cal of rock art are called entoptic figures. They occur in different stylized scales ranging from simple hatch-ing, squiggly lines and such, to patterned body humans, and fantastic animals. The brain can produce entoptic figures during a state oftrance or " altered states of con-sciousness" ( ASC). ASCs can be drug- induced, but are more commonly induced by fasting, physical exertion, and dreaming. Any or all of these activities can be re-lated to shamanism. Whitley illustrates some entoptic figures ( page 107), but in the meantime try pressing firmly on your closed eyelids long enough to " see stars." This gives you some idea of what entoptic figures are and how they are related to neurobiology. David Lewis- Williams ( e. g., 1986) and Thomas Dowson ( e. g., Lewis- Williams and Dowson 1988,1989) are the best- known proponents of the psychobiological research strategy, having applied it to European Upper Paleolithic and South African rock art cases. What Whitley brings to ths area of study is increased atten-tion to ethnographic and ethnohistorical lines of evi-dence to evaluate whether the graphic representations found in California and Great Basin rock art are tied to shamanism, how the context of rock art execution var-ies, and how it helps trace historically- known Native American groups into antiquity. Central to WMley7s arguments is that much rock art interpretation denies a voice to the Native Ameri-cans who produced it. By connecting rock art to eth-nographic accounts and the cultural context in which the art was made, Wlitley hopes to bring to life ele-ments of consciousness and meaning that are so easily missed in studies about the past where no person re-mains to challenge our interpretations or beliefs. Whit-ley criticizes interpretations of rock art such as the ever-popular astronomical and hunting magic explanations. He does not deny that indigenous cultures had deep knowledge of astronomy or that such knowledge made its way into rock art on occasion. Instead, his critique examines the tendency toward unwitting ethnocentrism in so much rock art interpretation. I must agree with Whtley that rock art studies suffer from this problem, having encountered many far- fetched and belief- based tales about what rock art means, including trans- oce-anic contacts, treasure maps, New Age vision questing, or the last resort and hopelessly ethnocentric conclu-sion that rock art is just " graffiti." Whitley's conclusions and the neuroscience ap-proach in general are understandably controversial. Critiques of mtley's California application, the Upper Paleolithic and South African work of Lewis- Williams and Dowson ( 1988, 1989) and of the neuroscience ap-proach in general suggest that some scholars remain unconvinced ( e. g., Bahn 1997, Quinlan 2000, see com-ments on Lewis- Williams and Dowson 1988). On the other hand, serious rock art scholars have for some time been looking toward resolving some of the long- stand-ing problems that have plagued the field. There is an effort to move beyond stylistic description without laps-ing into ad hoc correlations and gratuitous interpreta-tion by requiring more rigorous methods, as well as higher standards of test and verification ( e. g., Lorblanchet and Bahn 1993, Tacon and Chippendale 1998). How does 2; he Art of the Shaman stack up? Whitley begins with a description of the natural and cultural landscape, but with an eye toward giving the reader insight into how native Californians viewed their world. He divides the region into sections including Central, Southwestern, and Northwestern California, the Modoc Plateau, the Colorado River, and the Great Ba-sin. He then describes the nature of shamanism and the many symbolic and behavioral contexts that can be as-sociated with shamanism. He carefully distinguishes the various behavioral complexes underlying shamanism such as the " Spirit Helper Complex" and the " Mythic Complex." This section shows how dfferent the world view of hunter- gatherer societies was from European perceptions and shows that shamanism is at once a gen-eral, cross cultural concept, but one that can be expressed in many ritual and symbolic contexts. In the next chapter Whitley reports the geographic variations in rock art and the means of dating it using AMS C- 14, rock varnish, and a clever use of weather-ing patterns, exposure, and rock art style to argue for which types are likely to represent the last 1,000 years. He follows this with a detailed chapter describing each geographic tradition. Even if one were to ignore the central theses of the book, there is an abundance of fas-cinating information about the rock art. Whitley moves into the meat of his argument in the chapter titled " Ethnography and California Rock Art." He discusses the meaning and use of knowledge in the indigenous forager societies of California and draws contrasts with modern cultures. He then explores the ethnographic and ethnohistorical record for associations between rock art and the various layers or contexts of shamanism such as " Vision Questing," " The Shaman's Vision," " The Shaman's Cache," rites of passage such as puberty ceremonies, fertility, sexuality, and dreaming rituals that recount mythical creation stories. This fas-cinating chapter shows Whitley is not offering a single explanation for all rock art. Shamanism is too complex and multifaceted and the relationship between " shaman-ism" and rock art is a general one that enables myriad contexts and expressions. Shamanism itself so pervades the cultures of band societies that it is impossible for any expression of meaning, ideology, or art to escape its confines. Whitley argues that his explanation applies best to the rock art of the last 500 years, and possibly 1,000 years. He is aware of regional variations, but also aware that the relationship between types andlocations of rock art and the particular cultural contexts of shamanism also vary. He observes that the specifics of rock art change over time, but never loses sight of the " wide-spread unity of the ethnographic pattern ( that) speaks of a tradition of considerable time depth" ( pg. 101). The entire book, and especially the ethnographic descriptions, is heavily footnoted, but the reader will in most instances only find references to sources in their entirety, not the specific page citations permitting a rig-orous evaluation of the asserted evidence. Perhaps omitted from this treatise for a broader audience, the need for specific page citations is one of those issues about rigorous ethnographic research methods impor-tant for the acceptance of Whitley's research. Never-theless, in this general treatise, I appreciate Whitley's attempt to overcome the perception that shamanism amounts only to lone men vision- questing and halluci-nating in the desert a la Don Juan of Carlos Casteneda's famous fictional works. Anthropology has long shown there is much more to it than this. Whitley concludes with a chapter titled " Altered States of Consciousness and Metaphors of the Super-natural" in which he ties everything together. Here he presents the research on neuroscience and entoptics, and returns to the metaphors and behaviors found in vari-ous expressions or aspects of the shamanism complex. It is in this chapter that he devotes the most criticism to alternative models proposing to account for California and Great Basin rock art such as hunting magic and solstice sites. Whitley concludes: 1) his interpretation is the one best linked to ethnographic and ethnohstorical lines of evidence and thus to the cultural context of the rock art makers; 2) his interpretation is superior to com-peting models given the evidence at hand; 3) his model is sensitive to the variation in rock art expression while also accounting for the underlying similarities, not only in rock art, but also in the ideological systems of which rock art was a part. Through all the specifics and the model building, Whitley sticks to his thesis found throughout the book but perhaps best expressed: " We can appreciate that native Calfornia rock art was simply one expression of a cognitive system of beliefs, relationships, and concepts that was as complex and rich as our own and that the indigenous Californians were not simply ' primitives' living on the edge of starvation, but individuals who Lived complex lives much like ours" ( pg. 101). I was pleasantly surprised that this was not just another pretty book about Indian rock art, or one where a modem person attempts to " read" the rock art. Two of the most basic dilemmas of anthropology reside in this book: that the study of other cultures often tells us more about ourselves than it does about " them''; and that a holistic anthropology is found in the balance be-tween seeing the forest for the trees, while attentive to the fact that there are individual trees. Thus, one can not only learn about rock art by reading this book, but one can glimpse some of the most thorny problems of understanding cultures other than our own. This recommendation does not come with an agree-ment to all aspects of Whltley's position. I continue to be suspicious that rock art can be anything we want it to be. Despite Whitley's accomplished ethnographc and ethnohistoric research, test andveracity remain circum-stantial. He does, however, present a systematic theory that gives force to his specific claims. His is not just a slew of correlations or " finger matching" with no an-chor to an internally consistent theoretical structure- a shortcoming all too common to rock art research and arclueology in general. The Art of the Shaman is an informative and thoughtful book that teaches a lot about rock art, sensi-tizes the interested reader to the difficulty of the inter-pretive task, and offers a glimpse of some of the most fundamental problems of studying humans- and the reason anthropology is called a " mirror for man." REFERENCES CITED Bahn, P. G. 1997 Membrane and Numb Brain: A Close Look at a Recent Claim for Shamanism in Palaeolithic Art. Rock Art Research 14: 62- 68. Lewis- Williams, D. J. 1986 Cognitive and Optical Illusions in San Rock Art Research. Current Anthropology 27: 171- 178. Lewis- Williams, D. J. and T. A. Dowson 1988 The Signs of All Times: Entoptic Phenomena and Upper Palaeolithic Art. Current Anthropology 29: 201- 245. 1 989 Images of Power: Understanding Bushman Rock Art. Southern Book Publishers, Johannesburg, South Africa. Lorblanchet, M. and P. G. Bahn 1993 Rock Art Studies: The Post- stylistic Era or Where Do We Go From Here? Oxbow Monograph 35, Oxford University Press. Quinlan, A. R. 2000 The Ventriloquist's Dummy: A Critical Review of Shamanism and Rock Art in Far Western North America. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 22: 92- 108. Tacon, P. S. C. and C. Chippindale 1998 An Archaeology of Rock- Art Through Informed Methods and Formal Methods. In The Archaeology ofRock- Art, edited by C. Chippindale and P. S. C. Tacon, pp. 1 - 1 0. Cambridge University Press. Whitley, D. S. 1982 The Study of North American Rock Art. Ph. D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 1988 Bears and Baskets: Shamanism in California Rock Art. In The State of the Art: Advances in World Rock Art Research, edited by T. Dowson. University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. 1994 Ethnography and Rock Art in Far Western North America: Some Archaeological Implications. In New Light on Old Art: Recent Advances in Hunter- Gatherer RockArt Research, edited by D. S. Whitley and L. L. Loendorf, pp. 81- 94. Monograph 36, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1996 A Guide to Rock Art Sites: Southern California and Southern Nevada. Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana. 1998 Cognitive Neuroscience, Shamanism and the Rock Art of Native California. Anthropology of Consciousne.~ 9:~ 2 2- 3 7. Prehistory of the Carson Desert and Stillwater Mountains: Environment, Mobility, and Subsistence in a Great Basin Wetland, by Robert L. Kelly, with contributions by Virginia L. Butler, Linda Scott Cummings, Steven D. Grantham, Richard E. Hughes, Keith K. Katzer, Stephanie Livingston, David Rhode, Nancy D. Sharp, and Peter Wigand. University of Utah Anthropological Papers Number 123. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, 2001.325 pages, 147 figures, 106 tables. $ 45.00 paper Reviewed by: David W. Zeanab, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, California 95819- 6106. Archaeologists are at their best when they grapple with thorny research issues. Confronting evidence that obstinately conflicts with theoretical expectations de-mands areconsideration of the archaeological signatures of behavior, incorporation of new constraints into mod-els, and testing predictions against new sets of data. Robert L. Kelly's investigation of Carson Desert pre-history is an excellent example of how such a research program can yield insights about the past that other-wise may never have been gained. Kelly's goal was to evaluate the presumption that hunter- gatherers become sedentary whenever resources are sufficiently plentiful. He argued that foragers should remain mobile, even amidst a Garden of Eden of nearby foods, if scarce foods are energetically more profitable to procure than abundant foods. In the Carson Desert of western Nevada, he suspected that hard- to- come- by upland resources offered higher foraging returns than |
