User:Msrasnw/TeachingDevelopment

Vlado Keselj (Vlado Kešelj) is a Serbian-Canadian computer scientist known for his research in natural language processing and authorship attribution. He is a professor at Dalhousie University.

Keselj is best known for proposing the CNG distance measure in 2003 (cited by 550 in Jan 2021) for authorship attribution, a modification of the Euclidean distance:

$$cng(f_{1},f_{2})=\sum _{n}\left({\frac {f_{1}(n)-f_{2}(n)}{\frac {f_{1}(n)+f_{2}(n)}{2}}}\right)^{2}$$

Vlado Kešelj has proven in 1996 the best known upper bound of the length of Pierce series:

$P(a)=O((a\cdot \log(a))^{\frac {1}{3}})$

Awards

Vlado Keselj is a recipient of the 2019 CAIAC Distinguished Service Award, awarded by the Canadian Artificial Intelligence Association (CAIAC).

Selected publications

• Kešelj, V., Peng, F., Cercone, N., & Thomas, C. (2003, August). N-gram-based author profiles for authorship attribution. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Pacific Association for Computational Linguistics, PACLING 2003 (Vol. 3, pp. 255–264).

External links

• Msrasnw/TeachingDevelopment's results at International Mathematical Olympiad

Authority control}}

DEFAULTSORT:Keselj, Vlado}} Category:Computer scientists]]

Sesselja (Hreindís) Sigmundsdóttir (born 5th, July 1902 Hafnarfjörður - died.)

Family

Her mother was Kristín Símonardóttir and her father was Sigmundur Sveinsson. Sesselja had seven sibling; Steinunn, Sigríður Gróa, Þórarinn, Kristinn, Lúðvík and Símon. When Sesselja was two years old her family moved to Brúsastaðir in Thingvellir. Her father became the manager of the restaurant Valhöll (Valhalla). In 1919 the family moved back to Reykjavík.

Sesselja was blessed to be able to go to Europe and study and stayed for six years in Denmark, Switzerland and Germany. She studied pedagogy, child nursing and kindergarten management. She was the first Icelander to study The Care for People with mental challenges. While studying in Germany Sesselja got to know Anthroposophy and the theories of Rudolf Steiner. She also studied gardening, flower cultivation and how to handle poultry.

<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>

This strong-willed woman rented the earth Hverakot from the Childcare Committe of the Church of Iceland. On her 28th birthday, the 5th of July 1930, she founded Sólheimar. She raised children as if they were her own and was a pioneer in the field of pedagogy and the care for mentally disabled peopled in Iceland. Sesselja was also a pioneer when it came to farming as she was the first to start organic farming (then even bio-dynamic farming) in both Iceland and in the Nordic countries. It is only fair to say the she was the first Iceland environmentalist.

In 1930, when Sesselja moved to Iceland, she was in contact with several people in Denmark, Germany, Holland, England and Switzerland about organic farming and anthroposophy. She travelled to these countries regularly. She corresponded with Dr. Karl König, founder of the Camphill movement in Britain, Sólveig Nagel from Norway and Carita Stenback from Finland. They were all pioneers in their own countries in matters concerning people with mental challenges.

Sesselja adopted two children; Hólmfríður and Elvar and raised fourteen foster children. Elvar passed away in November 27th 1963.

Sesselja married Rudolf Richard Walter Noah on March 17th, 1949. Noah was a German musician and a teacher who came to Iceland in 1935. He was arrested by the British Army on July 5th, 1940 and moved to a prison camp in England. He was not allowed to enter Iceland until 9 years later but finally on the 7th of March 1953 he went back to Germany without formally parting from Sesselja. Noah died in Germany in 1967 and Sesselja herself passed away on the 8th of November 1974, then at the age of 72, in Landakot hospital in Reykjavík.

The writer Jónína Michaelsdóttir wrote a book on Sólheimar and the story of Sesselja, called “Mér leggst eitthvað til - Sagan um Sesselju Sigmundsdóttur og Sólheima” which could be translated in the lines of "I will think of something - the story of Sesselja Sigmundsdóttir and Sólheimar". The book was published by the Relief fund of Sólheimar in 1990 but has unfortunately so far not been translated into English.

<o:p> </o:p>

Sólheimar<o:p></o:p>

Sólheimar was formally founded on July 5th, 1930 when the first five children arrived an a few days later five more children followed.undefined. There wasn't any proper housing available on the land at that time so they lived in tents until the basement of the House of Sólheimar (Sólheimahús) was ready to be moved into on November 4th the same year.  Lúðvík, Sesselja’s brother built wooden floors in the tents and under them led hot water from the hot spring in the center of the village. Sólheimar started as a children's home, especially for children that had lost their parents or had ill parents. There were also children staying only over the summer. In the fall 1931 the first child with mental challenges came to Sólheimar but at that time there weren't many other alternatives for children with physical or mental disabilities and sometimes they were even kept in outhouses. In the year 1934 it is stated that '11 healthy children and 8 retards' lived in Sólheimar 'apart from those dwelling for the summer'. In the year 1936 there were '10 healthy children, 14 retards and summer children as well'. Despite the shortage of staff in the years 1942 – 1944, after the war, nearly all the children in Sólheimar were mentally disabled besides the summer children and Sesselja’s foster children. In 1952 there were 16 mentally disabled people living in the community, in 1956 they were 25 and in 1964 45 people with disabilities.

Sesselja emphasized that Sólheimar was a home, not an institution and that the disabled people and other people shared the same rights. It is only fair to state that the emphasis of reverse integration was marked at Sólheimar and later became acknowledged in other countries around 1970. Reverse integration means that the community was and still is built with the needs and rights of the disabled and not vise versa as commonly known.

References

/{DEFAULTSORT:7 C's Of Communication}} //Category:Communication]] //Category:Public relations| ]] //Category:Marketing]] //Category:Communication design]]

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Jere R. Behrman Reviewed work(s): The Poverty of "Development Economics" by Deepak Lal Source: The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 95, No. 4 (Aug., 1987), pp. 885-887

The Poverty of "Development Economics." By DEEPAK LAL. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985. Pp. 153. $6.95 (paper); $17.50 (cloth).

Lal has written a provocative essay, in which he criticizes the "dirigiste dogma" that he claims characterizes a particular set of influential beliefs about Third World development.

In this work he outlines the major elements of the "dirigiste dogma", the ideas that underlying them and assesses the claims of this "dogma" in four important areas of development economics:

1. role of foreign trade and private capital flows
2. role and appropriate form of industrialization
3. the relationship between reductions in inequality, poverty alleviation and differing broad development strategies
4. the role of market prices mechanism versus planning

He characterizes this "dirigiste dogma" as having four essential elements:

1. markets need supplanting (not merely supplementing) by "various forms of direct government control"
2. that orthodox microeconomics concern with the allocation of given (admititely possibly changing) resources is of minor importance when designing policy in developing economies. Rather policy should be concerned with desiging and implementing a broad "strategy" of development - one whose focus is macroeconmic aggregates such as: savings, investment, the balance of payments, and the sectoral composition of production. Chosing between agriculture and industry.
3. that the arguments for free trade are not valid for developing countries - justifying restrictions on trade and international payments.
4. massive and continuing governmental intervention is required to redistribute assets and to manipulate prices in order to alleviate poverty and to improve income distribution.

For Lal the sources of this "dogma" is Keynesian macroeconomics - with its macro quantity adjustments, the growth and spread of national income accounting, the increased use of macroeconometrics (a la Tinbergen and his associates and successors), and the increased use input-output analysis (a la Leontief). These may have helped our understanding of macroeconomics, Lal argues, but they have led to an underemphasis on the role of prices.

Lal claims that the dirigistes, at the same time that they overfocused on macro aggregate quantities, also largely ignored welfare eco- nomics, which provides the best analytical framework for assessing the di- rigiste claims about the inadequacies of laissez-faire policies and the possible need for governmental interventions due to distributional concerns and the lack of complete markets. He emphasizes, however, that real-world govern- mental interventions have resource and distortion costs so that in a second- best world such interventions should not be undertaken blindly because of market failures but should be evaluated in comparison with other alterna- tives, including nonintervention.

Lal then turns to the four important debates on economic development noted above. In each he attempts to summarize historical experience, the dirigiste advocacy for supplanting markets by governmental interventions, and the orthodox counterposition. He concludes with the summary that "the most serious current distortions in many developing economies are not those flowing from the inevitable imperfections of a market economy but the policy-induced . . . distortions created by irrational dirigisme" (p. 103), that "im- perfect markets [are] superior to imperfect planning" (p. 106) so that "the most important advice that economists can currently offer is ... Get the prices right!" (p. 107), and "the major conclusion of this book is that the demise of development economics is likely to be conducive to the health of both the economics and the economies of developing countries" (p. 109).

(((((((((

BASIC NEEDS

Making Basic Needs Operational in Development Planning Rene Wadlow The Basic Needs approach to development planning and mobilization has many early “fathers”. One was Mahatma Gandhi. His approach may be described as action oriented (the environment of domination and oppression was his laboratory), normative (the welfare of the poorest of the poor was his standard) and global (a non-violent world society was his ultimate goal). A second “father” coming from humanistic psychology and the human potential movement is Abraham Maslow, who died in 1970. His book Toward A Psychology of Being and his later The Farther Reaches of Human Nature develop his concept of the hierarchy of needs, “self-actualization”, and “peak experiences”. A third collective “father” is the American “structural-functionalist” school of sociology with Talcott Parsons, Robert Merton, Marion J. Levy and David Apter as the leaders. For an analysis of structural-functionalism’s contribution to development approaches, see Ankie Hoogvelt The Sociology of Developing Societies ( London: Macmillan, 1976). It was the 1976 World Employment Conference of the International Labour Office which placed basic needs directly on the governmental world agenda. In the ILO presentation, basic needs were defined in terms of food, housing, clothing, and public services, like education, healthcare and transport. Employment was both a means and an end, and participation in decision-making was included. The conclusions of the 1976 World Employment Conference state some of the requirements for satisfying human needs within one generation: “Strategies and national development plans and policies should include explicitly as a priority objective the promotion of employment and the satisfaction of the basic needs of each country’s population…Often these measures will require a transformation of social structures including an initial redistribution of assets. “The Programme of Action puts emphasis on the participation of the people, through organizations of their own choice in making the decisions which affect them… In view of the highly hierarchical social and economic structures of agrarian societies in some developing countries, measures of redistributive justice are likely to be thwarted unless backed by organizations of rural workers.” The ILO report goes on to indicate two crucial elements in the Basic Needs approach: “First, they include certain minimum requirements of a family for private consumption: adequate food, shelter and clothing, as well as certain household equipment and furniture. Second, they include essential services provided by and for the community at large, such as safe drinking water, sanitation, public transport and health, education and cultural facilities.” The Basic Needs approach constitutes an attempt to come to grips directly with poverty in the fields of food, nutrition, health, education, and housing. It is predicated on a policy consisting of relatively high growth rates, redistribution of income, reorientation of investment and a review and modification of consumption and production patters.

A Basic Needs approach stresses the importance of the household as a basic institution. It is the household which allocates among its members incomes earned by members who are employed for wages, and it produces goods and services for its own use. Moreover, household activities play a crucial role in converting education, health and nutrition into improvements in the quality of life of individuals. By stressing the household, the Basic Needs approach comes close to reality and focuses on the family which has often been overlooked in development planning. The ILO report stresses the importance of popular participation in development policies, especially of rural populations which are the least organized of workers. The report goes on to state “It is imperative for rural workers to be given every encouragement to develop free and viable organizations capable of protecting and furthering the interests of their members and ensuring their effective contribution to economic and social development.”(1) The world employment program built upon an increasingly sophisticated understanding of what is employment by better analysis of the role of the informal sector in employment. The ILO Employment Mission to Kenya in 1972 presents the clearest definition of what the informal sector is, its importance to economic development, and its relationship to the formal, modern sector. The informal sector is characterized by: - ease of entry: - reliance on indigenous resources; - family ownership of enterprises; - small-scale operations; - labor-intensive technology; - skills usually acquired outside the formal school system; - unregulated markets.(2) In addition to the informal sector, the World Employment Conference stressed rural employment and the role of rural workers associations, subjects, more often considered in the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Rural workers’ organizations should represent the workers’ interests by engaging in planning development programs at local and national levels, providing an educational base for workers and in general mobilizing to improve the resources and services available to the workers as well as ensuring that social and economic development is responsive to the workers’ needs. Such groups of popular participation must not only breakdown old ways of doing things but must group human beings around new ways of doing them. Popular participation and the mobilization of the disadvantaged is an essential requirement of a Basic Needs approach to development. It is this requirement of popular participation that distinguishes a Basic Needs model of development from other kindred poverty eradication models. The UN emphasis on basic needs is a good example of the role of the UN system in highlighting ideas and placing them on the agenda for action. As Richard Jolly, who has been working on a history of socio-economic ideas within the UN system, points out “ The UN Intellectual History Project has identified four ways in which ideas have impact: - By changing the ways issues or problems are perceived; - By defining lines of action and agenda for policy; - By altering the ways in which different groups perceive their own interests and thus influencing what ideas and policies they might support; A Basic Needs approach stresses the importance of the household as a basic institution. It is the household which allocates among its members incomes earned by members who are employed for wages, and it produces goods and services for its own use. Moreover, household activities play a crucial role in converting education, health and nutrition into improvements in the quality of life of individuals. By stressing the household, the Basic Needs approach comes close to reality and focuses on the family which has often been overlooked in development planning. The ILO report stresses the importance of popular participation in development policies, especially of rural populations which are the least organized of workers. The report goes on to state “It is imperative for rural workers to be given every encouragement to develop free and viable organizations capable of protecting and furthering the interests of their members and ensuring their effective contribution to economic and social development.”(1) The world employment program built upon an increasingly sophisticated understanding of what is employment by better analysis of the role of the informal sector in employment. The ILO Employment Mission to Kenya in 1972 presents the clearest definition of what the informal sector is, its importance to economic development, and its relationship to the formal, modern sector. The informal sector is characterized by: - ease of entry: - reliance on indigenous resources; - family ownership of enterprises; - small-scale operations; - labor-intensive technology; - skills usually acquired outside the formal school system; - unregulated markets.(2) In addition to the informal sector, the World Employment Conference stressed rural employment and the role of rural workers associations, subjects, more often considered in the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. Rural workers’ organizations should represent the workers’ interests by engaging in planning development programs at local and national levels, providing an educational base for workers and in general mobilizing to improve the resources and services available to the workers as well as ensuring that social and economic development is responsive to the workers’ needs. Such groups of popular participation must not only breakdown old ways of doing things but must group human beings around new ways of doing them. Popular participation and the mobilization of the disadvantaged is an essential requirement of a Basic Needs approach to development. It is this requirement of popular participation that distinguishes a Basic Needs model of development from other kindred poverty eradication models. The UN emphasis on basic needs is a good example of the role of the UN system in highlighting ideas and placing them on the agenda for action. As Richard Jolly, who has been working on a history of socio-economic ideas within the UN system, points out “ The UN Intellectual History Project has identified four ways in which ideas have impact: - By changing the ways issues or problems are perceived; - By defining lines of action and agenda for policy; - By altering the ways in which different groups perceive their own interests and thus influencing what ideas and policies they might support;

The Legitimation of Power by David Beetham is a famous Political Theory text. The book examines the legitimation of power as an issue for social scientists - looking at both relationships between legitimacy and the variety of contemporary political.

Notability

It has been praised by David Held in the Times Higher Education Supplement as being an "An admirable text which is far reaching in its scope and extraordinary in the clarity with which it covers a wide range of material... One can have nothing but the highest regard for this volume." and by Zygmunt Bauman in Sociology who argues that "Beetham has produced a study bound to revolutionize sociological thinking and teaching... Seminal and profoundly original... Beetham's book should become the obligitory reading for every teacher and practitioner of social science."

Structure of the book

The book is diveded in two parts. The first part looks at the criteria for legitimacy. Outlining the Social-Scientific Concept of Legitimacy; Power and its need of Legitimation; the intellectual Structure of legitimacy generally and the social science and the social construction of legitimacy in particular. The second part of the work examines the legitimacy of the contempory states. Outlining the dimensions of state Legitimacy, the tendencies of political systems to have crisis; various modes of non-legitimate power. This part concludes with a look at legitimacy in both political science and political philosophy.

A problem with "legitimacy" that this work, according to Steffek clearly emphasises is that the term is used both prescriptively and descriptively. From the prescriptive point of view social scientists should be able to suggest when governance deserves to be described as legitimate. From the descriptive point of view social scientists should be able to suggest why those subjected to governance aggree to accept and support it (or reject it). As for the first project, there is a well-established strand of normative research that discusses a prescriptive version of legitimacy.

The book's details

David Beetham (1991) The Legitimation of Power, Palgrave Macmillan 9780333375396

References

DEFAULTSORT:Legitimation of Power, The}} - Category: 1991 books]] - Category:Sociology book]] - Category:Political books]] - Category:Books in political philosophy]]

2.2 Prescriptive vs Descriptive Approaches In fact, one particular problem with the concept of legitimacy is that it is employed both in a prescriptive and a descriptive sense. Therefore, the discussion of different approaches cannot avoid making the crucial distinction that David Beetham (1991: Ch. 1) has hammered out most clearly. For a social scientist, there are two completely different ways of approaching legitimacy: 1. Prescriptive — social science should tell us under which conditions governance deserves the predicate legitimate. 2. Descriptive — social science should tell us why the subjects to that governance accept and support it in reality. As for the first project, there is a well-established strand of normative research that discusses a prescriptive version of legitimacy. Political philosophers and legal theorists have reflected on the conditions under which the domination of human beings over others should be called legitimate. Legitimacy in this context is a normative quality that is attributed by theorists to certain political systems. In this tradition we might grant the adjective ‘legitimate’ to governments which have been established in accordance with certain rules and principles, nowadays normally democratic principles. This prescriptive version of legitimacy is a normative statement and as such does not ask why people accept a social order in reality.

3-story pagoda that stands facing with a stone lantern each other on a high land surrounded by pine trees in the northwest to Hwaeomsa Temple. The figure of this pagoda is that the 3 story-pagoda body stands on the 2-story platform, and the head decoration is put on the body. But it is a kind of variation of a stone pagoda since the upper platform has a unique form.

The lower platform has the prominent carvings of heavenly people on each side that has various images of people who support musical instruments and flowers, dance, and sing the praises.

The upper platform that attracts the attention most has a couple of lions as its four pillars at its four corners.

The lions show their teeth by opening their mouths while looking forwards. A statue of a monk stands with its hands clasped together in the center of the platform surrounded by the lions. The monk statue is said to be Yeongijosa's mother. And a statue of a monk sits on its knees at the stone lantern just across the first statue. They say that the statue is Yeongijosa as a dutiful son who is holding a mass with tea.

The part of the pagoda body is like common stone pagodas, but the first-story core has the carving of a door design, and its both sides are carved with the statues of two guardians protecting Buddhist laws, the Four Devas and Bodhisattva image. The supports of the roof stone are 5-step, and the slant side is about flat, but the four corners are slightly raised.

At the top of the pagoda, there remain only the base of stupa finial and the decoration that has the figure of a container upside down. This stone pagoda is very excellent in the carvings at its every part, and the four corners of the eaves that are slightly raised make the pagoda look light and beautiful.

Considering that, it is presumed that the pagoda was made in the golden age of the United Silla Dynasty. The lions of this pagoda became the part of the pagoda by being put in the pagoda, unlike the lions of the stone pagoda (national treasure No.30) in Bunhwangsa Temple who sit separated from the pagoda as if they protected the pagoda.

This pagoda is one of the two best variations of stone pagodas in Korea along with Dabotap Pagoda (national treasure No.

20) in Bulguksa Temple. decoration that has the figure of a container upside down.

This stone pagoda is very excellent in the carvings at its every part, and the four corners of the eaves that are slightly raised make the pagoda look light and beautiful. Considering that, it is presumed that the pagoda was made in the golden age of the United Silla Dynasty.

The lions of this pagoda became the part of the pagoda by being put in the pagoda, unlike the lions of the stone pagoda (national treasure No. 30) in Bunhwangsa Temple who sit separated from the pagoda as if they protected the pagoda. This pagoda is one of the two best variations of stone pagodas in Korea along with Dabotap Pagoda (national treasure No. 20) in Bulguksa Temple.

Peter Worsley is one of the foremost scholars in Development Studis.

His studies at Cambridge were interrupted by World War II and he took employmnet as an officer in the British colonial forces in both Africa and India. This engendered his interest in anthropology. After the war he then taught in Tanganyika and then went to study with Max Gluckman at the University of Manchester. He won the Curl Prize of the Royal Anthropological Institute. , but, in the McCarthy epoch, was banned from Africa, so went to Australia where he was again banned, this time from New Guinea, but did field-research for his Ph.D. on an Australian Aboriginal tribe. His subsequent book on 'Cargo' cults in Melanesia is now regarded as a classic, but his left-wing politics ensured that he could not get a job in anthropology, so he switched to sociology, returning to Manchester as the first Professor of Sociology, just in time to join a British Government Mission to Tanzania - and to be deeply involved in the "student revolution." His book on The Third World introduced that term into the English language, while the Penguin edition of "Introducing Sociology" sold over half a million copies. He went to China a few months after Nixon. On retirement as Professor Emeritus of the University of Manchester, he taught in New York, where he wrote Knowledges. https://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/1810/.../Peter_Worsley.doc

Interviewed by Alan Macfarlane, filmed by Sarah Harrison, at his home on 25th February 1989, using a video 8 camera.

[Later additions in 2004 by Peter Worsley in square brackets, and in notes at the end]

Part 1: From childhood to Australia (60 mins)

Born in 1924. Parents and early life. Merseyside. Lower middle class background [were lived in middle-class Wallasey, but father’s business was in proletarian Birkenhead, so I knew a divided society) misery around, old blind men selling matches, proletarians, class injustice, the Orwellian world, a growing sense of injustice

Sent to a Catholic school, father a [very tolerant] Catholic 2:30 Catholic discipline at school; physical punishment; Jesuits, storing up merit in heaven, thinks extremely immoral, [see note 1 at end] made me unhappy and physically sick, then went to another marvellous [Protestant, liberal] school and stimulating. So became early aware of two cultures. 4:20 became head boy at Wallasey Grammar school in 1940/1, always aware of democracy and inequality and the rights of minorities because of Catholic background, and sensitized to other cultures. [see note 3 at end]

First part of University education and the army

5:10 went to University, partly due to inspiring masters in English and history, ruined for natural sciences [see note 2 at end]. Went to Cambridge to read English [because of my wonderful English teacher] – a Leavisite in 1942. Social criticism of Leavisites by Eliot, Lawrence and Raymond Williams 7:00 the effects of Stalingrad siege. The Red Army stood between us and conquest. A huge influence on me. So it was not long before I joined the Communist Party in Cambridge [since discovered that the Cambridge University Socialist Club had c.1000 members – the biggest in Cambridge]. Not in the spy generation. We were young people who had anti-fascist enthusiasm. Very respectable and patriotic. 8:17 Went into army, straight into Officer’s Training School in Wales, the Royal Artillery. Surrounded by older and more mature people [see note 4 at end]. Got into trouble in guard duty, [because I’d never done it before]. 10:20 The time of Alamein. The blitz over [so need for AckAck]. Converted into the infantry. Volunteers were needed for East and West Africa and chose East Africa. Marvellous out there [after the austerity of wartime England and the blackout]. Egypt a revolting experience, mind blowing poverty. We are very racist – realized through experience in Egypt and India. We blamed them for their poverty, an attitude which continues to this day. 11:40 I was a Red, I went to India and made contact with the Indian Communist Party as did people like John Saville. [Communists in the forces in Italy] were selling the Daily Worker to the troops [on trains]. There was an elected Forces Parliament in Cairo and the Communists won one quarter of the votes. 13:17 I was entranced with Black Africa and learnt Swahili. Got interested in African languages and culture and got to know the African troops through language. [Taught myself Nandi]. 14:30 Went to Orissa in India, nearly went to Malaya [one week later, we would have been in invasion], where I would with others have been butchered by the Japanese. But the war ended, which I heard from jungle drums [returning to camp one night]. 15:00 Back to East Africa, taking African troops back to their villages. [A wonderful, happy time. Saw a lot of East Africa, from Sudan to S.Tanganjika. The demobilized soldiers were, of course, full of joy!] So I determined to be an anthropologist. I read a lot of anthropology.

Second undergraduate education: anthropology 16:21 When I returned I wanted to change course at Emmanuel College. [I asked, timorously, for sociology [but was told they hadn’t any, but I could do anthropology – which was what I actually wanted! Welborne told me 90% of ex-Army changed courses!], so I did anthropology. 17:04 Anthropology was in a shocking state generally. Prof. Hutton on caste and Nagas, mostly about soul stuff, head-hunters etc. for hours on end. The material culture very funny. Bushnell and practicals on ways of making fire (fire drills) and spear throwers being hurled around in Downing Street. Godfrey Lienhardt was the Examiner and prompted my answers. Hippo killing spear. 19:15 Physical anthropology and Archaeology – don’t believe they are linked to anthropology, irrelevant. Much of my time dis-education. 20:02 Anthropological studies proper. I found a hoard of books, but they were like dirty or banned books behind an iron grill [in Prof. Hutton’s room!], [e.g. Rhodes Livingstone Institute publications]. One needed special permission to read them. “Modern” anthropology hardly born. 20:29 Hutton on Freud, his mannerisms, ‘damn nonsense’. Reo Fortune appointed, a breath of fresh air, but the bizarreness of Reo. 21:50 Went to Heffers, learnt a little about lineage systems. Reo, powerful insights and both serious and crazy. 22:40 G.I. Jones really pedestrian ex-government official, though good on land tenure. Another dis-education. 23:06 H.S.Bennett told him not to go to Leavis’ lecture in the 1940’s. That period dreary in the extreme, arbitrarily leaving out huge chunks of literature. Bad English literature and bad anthropology. Only one’s fellow students were exciting. 24:11 Fellow students included Jack Goody, Frank Girling (in C.P.), Ramkrishna Mukherjee. They were married and rather remote and did not see much of them. 25:07 Kathleen Gough – adorable and intelligent, but remote as two years above 25:50 Evans-Pritchard used to come over, the only ray of light. He gave a course for colonial officers, marvellous, talking about African Political Systems. Also H.A.R.Gibb (non-anthropologist) on Islam was marvellous and learnt a lot 26:45 Graham Clark the archaeologist, wrote interestingly, but his lectures were dreary in the extreme, he had come from Libya and very boring. I’m anti-archaeology. It can be interesting in the wide sweep, e.g. Gordon Childe and Glyn Daniel (who was my tutor for a while). 27:35 Jack Trevor was my first tutor. He knew some social anthropology. Not a very effective teaching system. 28:03 I resent the arrogant upper-class and elitist assumption that Cambridge and Oxford are the centre of the world, much as I loved being there. I had two lousy dis-educations. They are good places to leave.

Africa 28:33 The ground-nut scheme in Africa was being launched. [I thought this sounded like a good program and went to Unilever House for interview. High powered scientists recommended pulling out bush and planting ground nuts. I was hired to teach ‘Basic English’, the Africans were to be given decent education and health. A modification of IA Richards. Description of scheme and project. Why it failed. The equipment tried out in Berkshire, where the soil is different. The equipment soon collapsed. 31:19 Description of the Kongwa region, the Africans. The peanuts burnt up by the sun, a huge waste. To impress visitors, ground nuts were imported from South Africa. A farce. Clergymen ran social programs. I abandoned language teaching. We ended up reproducing the colonial cultural division of labour, equipping whites to control African labour. 32:34 I was visited by the C.I.D. – my mail was opened regularly and they pulverized left-wing mail. There was one law for ‘politicos’, another for racketeers [for example a senior engineer in charge of the Training School, fired for embezzlement].

Return to England and contacts with Max Gluckman 34:00 went home, no job, no money, except what I had saved, aged 22. I still wanted to be an anthropologist, but there were no opportunities. [Whilst in Tanganyika, I had written] to the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute and asked if there were any posts. [light getting poor] I had been to South Africa at the end of the time there and been to Johannesburg where I met Ruth First and, like others, fell wildly in love with her. 35:51 Coming back through the streets [from a Communist Party meeting]with an Indian we were jeered at by louts. C.P (Communist Party) meetings were curious. [Ruth showed me my first shanty-towns]. 37:02 Went for an interview at the Colonial Office. Max Gluckman (M.G.) was one of the assessors. The job was to study race relations in Rhodesia. My answer untactful and I didn’t get job. But two weeks later a letter from M.G. to say that he had been appointed to Chair at Manchester and would I care to put in for Assistant Research Lectureship. I got a job on the basis of work in Africa. At week-ends I wrote on Hehe grammar. I had also done some recording on ‘wire’ recorder of music and language. 39:07 I went to Manchester and gave some lectures on Bantu languages. Victor Turner was there, and later R.Frankenberg, Freddie Bailey. Max said that ‘you’ve one great defect, that you were not trained at Cambridge and know no anthropology’. I had never read any Fortes, Evans-Pritchard etc. So read Fortes and being a Marxist I could not buy it. I was a primitive Marxist and economic determinist. (***) 41:09 That is how I wrote my critique of Meyer, which won the Curl Prize. I don’t agree with my piece now, Meyer was an idealist, mystical. 42:04 Life was luxurious in those days. The ESRC was not whipping people to finish their theses, people had time to think. So in six weeks I wrote the piece and turned it into an M.A. and got the Curl Prize. 43:04 I met Fortes in London, he introduced the award ritual at the R.A.I. ‘I don’t agree with this, he said’. However, we agreed to differ. Afterwards most positive relations with Meyer and we never discussed the Tallensi. Applied to Cambridge, but Jack Goody got the job. 44:00 Stayed with Max and applied again to Rhodes-Livingstone and got the job. A Research post in the Institute. But M.I.5 stopped me getting the post. [poor colour on film]. I was doomed. 6 years in Africa, but the end of the road. The R-L subject to much political interference. 45:17 Max himself was under a cloud because he had introduced the inauspiciously sounding ‘Three Year Plan’. Max was never a red, but a radical liberal. Mary his wife was a member of the C.P. Much of the political orientation was Mary’s. 46:05 Max was a fine anti-colonial, his hour of glory was when he took on the [Kenya] governor [Sir Philip Mitchell]on to the Mau Mau and defended the Mau Mau. Supreme courage. He talked on the radio about it. He was very popular on the radio [indeed a celebrity]. Anthropology was a subject on the 3rd programme. He exposed the torture in the camps. I was very actively involved in anti-colonial movements, all to my undoing. It blocked me.

Australia: preparations for New Guinea 47:48 I was told [by Max] that I had better go to Australia. Nadel had just been appointed at Canberra. Firth interviewed me and I and Ken Burridge got scholarships. On the ship, news came over the radio that Menzies was having a referendum on outlawing the communist party. Much to everyone’s surprise it was rejected [but only by 100,000 votes]. I was planning to go to the Central Highlands of New Guinea. I read all the reports etc of the [Australian equivalent of the ]Colonial Office. It was run by the strange Freddy Rose [an ex-meteorologist] Freddy went up to Groote Eylandt to get near the aborigines. It was a seaplane base from England to Sydney. Rose studied the aboriginal kinship system. 50:51 These were bad times. I wrote an article on this [‘What CP policy should be’ in the Communist Review, (see my contribution to the Stanley Diamond festschrift), and was invited to present my arguments at the CP National Executive!]What happened with McCarthy in the U.S. happened everywhere in the 1950’s. It was awful and we thought they were going to arrest all the Communists. I buried my C.P. literature in the garden. It was provoked by a Soviet defection. 52:07 The first European to New Guinea was a Russian [of Petrov, a “diplomat”]. I had taught myself Russian, while travelling into Manchester and could read Soviet anthropology. I had some connections with Soviet Anthropologists, one of them poisoned by the secret police [in Dar es Salaam]. A nice story about how one had chosen his fieldwork. I got some early Russian writings on New Guinea. And I was not jailed, though Freddy Rose was on trial at the Royal Commission on Espionage. Nothing was proved. 54:57 The Australian Communists were lovely people, but living underground. Later I was in trouble and I would not admit I was a communist. I do not see why I should, because of Habeas Corpus. I would defend my denial and refused to make a statement. Freddy was fired and went off to Tasmania . He ended up in East Berlin and wrote a most exhaustive study of kinship among the Groote Eylandt Aborigines. A historical landmark. 57:48 I bought enough food for a year and prepared for a year in the Highlands of PNG and a day before I was going went for my entry permit and was refused. 58:39 I thought ‘to Hell. If I’m ruined, then I’ll pull the temple down’ and I went public. All Hell broke out – the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald etc. Parliament Debates. Many attacked me. I and others had set up a student association. Ten of us. It took up my case and lined up with all other Universities. It was pretty hellish, hounded by the paparazzi. A miserable time, on the phone all the time. Sheila in a bad way with it.

Part 2: Australia onwards (60 mins)

Fieldwork among Australian aborigines: Groote Eylandt 01: Attempted entrapment. No support from the Department. Some sympathetic and nice people like Richard Storry the Japanese specialist at ANU. Nadel washed his hands of it, wouldn’t do anything. Firth found me a dreadful embarrassment. We were poverty stricken, forced to live in the University Hostel. I was hired for interviewing on a project and my boss Jean Craig was furious with me [because my political scandal might prejudice her project]. I had little support from senior colleagues. 03: Freddy Rose suggested that I study Australian Aborigines and go to Groote Eylandt. Fred Gray’s life and career and his setting up of an Aboriginal reserve with financial support from the Government. 04:50 work in Groote Eylandt; remonstration at beating of boys and ordered off, but did not leave 6:15 converted from Africanist, overnight an Australian aboriginal specialist; the complicated kinship systems an intellectual magnet – so difficult. 6:30 Stanner my supervisor – cracked the kinship system I think. Discussion of Aboriginal kinship systems and theories about, including Rose, Gray and others. Four and eight section systems. 8:17 young men’s marriage systems and the mechanisms for keeping young men inferior; riven with structural inequalities of age and gender 9:15 I worked through the language and spent some ten months in the field, ghastly difficult topic 10:28 women as pawns etc. , the logic of algebra cannot work; no available women, have to manipulate kinship terms. Not pure algebra. 11:20 Others showed the politics of bestowal. The argument goes on. The sociological work of David Turner still seems to me algebra - four or five different accounts might need to be reconciled! Josselin de Jong tried. I was interested in all dimensions of the lives of the 450 people there – very rich. 13:10 I read the Berndts’ work; they record just a small part of one of the ritual cycles, only a segment; incredibly complex. An order of complexity similar to Griaule on the Dogon, even though a hunter-gatherer people. Incredibly sophisticated and I couldn’t penetrate into that, as the Aboriginal ritual specialists were at the Mission and I could not go there as a Red. 14:50 various negative things about the CMS; puritanical, useless etc., story of having to dress up when missionaries visited. They had no interest in the aborigines 15:26 an exception is the absolutely marvellous recent book, which could only have been written after the deep immersion of a missionary, Dr. Julie Waddy, a 2 volume work on plants and animals by - superb. No anthropologist could do this. 16:30 I pioneered that field. It came about through a school test when I asked children to draw the island and was amazed at the trails which they could see [and called ‘roads’ and I could not – so I started to ask about plants and animals and to write articles. I got very excited and read the work of Vygotski and was blown away. I thought this is the answer, the classification system 18:20 the social structure helps to classify, intra-myth connections, how animals occur in myths, the four frames [see the chapter in my book Knowledges (1997). Edmund Leach used the original article in his teaching.

The Hungarian Revolution and the New Left

20: I blew up at the Hungarian Revolution. I was going out there on a motorbike when it happened. I couldn’t stand it. It set up new resistance within the CP, led to the Reasoner, the New Reasoner and finally the New Left Review. I was a founding member of the NLR 21: Hungary was the first great shock. Stalin was not unmasked to me before then. I withdrew from academic talks in Budapest; I got a telegram in reply to mine expressing appreciation. The horrors only became patent later. 23: we revolted with the Hungarians, we started to ask questions, what was wrong with Marxism and the Soviet Union? 24: the change from the original New Left movement and the New Left Review today; became a ‘Mandarin’ journal under Perry Anderson. Perry not far short of genius, but converted NLR into an arid and esoteric journal. It was part of a movement and used to be sold in all sorts of places and discussed everywhere. 25: it was linked to the start of CND with which we immediately identified; the New Left became the biggest protest movement since the Chartists The journal at first attracted people like Richard Hoggart, Raymond Williams and covered arts, films and others. Later E.P.Thompson said it was converted into an arcane and specialist and highly Marxist journal. EPT exploded. 27: the disappearance of the CP(Communist Party) in England, which scarcely now exists. Asked about Orwell and Koestler. I’d read them and I would have been more sympathetic, but E.P.Thompson very hostile to both of them and influenced me. I deferred to the immense charisma and power of EPT, an amazing guy, so we never gave them much attention. We thought of them as unspeakable right-wingers, and they were of another generation. 29: What was the central doubt about communism after Hungary? That the entire state of society and the role of the party was in doubt, the brutal Stalinism. We were blinded to this before Hungary. I have become more humble since. We made a total re-examination of our own culture and of Marxism and the development of the (rival) concept of ‘socialist humanism’. My main role was as a commentator on colonial affairs, especially Africa. I wrote an article on Mau Mau which later converged with writing on cargo cultures. I tried to explain MM, the brutal rituals of induction and the horror of the Kikuyu themselves [at the taboos which Mau Mau deliberately broke in their initiation rituals]. 31: I also wrote an article against Albert Schweitzer, not a saint. This brought the house down on my head. AS a bloody old colonialist, though dedicated. This takes us to 1966-7 [rest for a few minutes – break of 4 seconds] 32: Further reflections on Stalingrad and the feelings about loyalty to Russia. There was nothing to stop the Germans except the Red Army. It showed us that the Soviet Union was real and that we had been fed a load of myths about how weak it was, the people would rise up against Stalin etc. Hence my loyalty to the people who had saved us. 34: return from Australia, with a Ph.D., looking for a job. I was not very proud of my Ph.D., because of the conditions of writing, a new baby and written in five months. My wife in the field and very stoical, worked with the people and always busy but not directly involved in my work. Awful climate in the monsoon. The living conditions described. The aboriginals were in the open. I was given a room in the bungalow and hence living in a quasi-colonial relationship. Went out often for sheer sociability or when significant things happened. 37: my daughter is a ‘classificatory’ member of the West Wind clan, Deborah, and has a territory [by virtue of my own ‘brother’-like relationship to my chief informant]. I have never been back and still wonder whether I would even now be allowed in.

Return to Manchester and Max Gluckman

39: I got back and looked for jobs. I had gone out as the protégé of Max Gluckman. MG’s intellectual power. He could turn anthropology to anything and had ten ideas before breakfast. He started up sociology of Britain, e.g. Tom Lupton, Allcorn and others. The intellectual centre was Max, he infused people with a strategy for looking for certain clues, though he did not provide the answers. This was different from sociological work but the tradition he developed did not persist. 41: Max could turn his mind to current social and political issues, e.g. in his very popular radio broadcasts which ordinary listeners found illuminating and exciting. Imagine, best sellers about the Zande etc, Max made them exciting, they could see common problems and the rational ways in which people in other cultures faced universal human problems. The classic anthropological message. A superb lecturer and teacher, even on themes, (e.g. when Srinivas came) – which were far from his expertise. 43: another who had the same gift was Victor Turner. At Brandeis VT gave a lecture in a Mexicanist department on pilgrimages etc. Often his lectures went on for 2-3 hours, difficult to stop, entrancing, often went on into the night. When he talked to Mexican experts they said it made them look at their familiar topics they had been studying for decades in a new way. 44: Max was authoritarian but democratic, surrounded by a group of apostles, we spent all our time together, worked in his garden, constant face to face inter-action, made us inter-act, a constant flow of people were coming from the field like Turner, Ian Cunnison, Bill Watson, we had a sense of collectively working on joint problems. 45: I remember sitting in on a Srinivas seminar on what turned out as the Coorg book – I knew nothing about India, but we all contributed. The senior people treated us as intellectual equals; Max was very supportive and encouraging.

The Trumpet Shall Sound and other works

46: Reflections on The Trumpet Shall Sound. I went back and I’d written my Ph.D. and published a little. I was still frustrated about New Guinea but I’d collected a lot of material and discussed it in that book together with the latest findings of Peter Lawrence and Ken Burridge. 47: One week-end Max, like yeast, played his stimulating role. He had become interested in movements of protest among colonial peoples. He arranged a special week-end, not on the Mau Mau. Eric Hobsbawm came to talk about the materials which later became Primitive Rebels, Norman Cohn on medieval movements and me on cargo cults. One of the most exciting week-ends I remember, marvellous, out of which came three cracking books. 49: Eric Hobsbawm in those days had a bit of a blockage about writing, though known to be a genius and a polymath. Not many articles. He started to write this book and never looked back. E.H. was incredible and marvellous and gets better as he goes on, e.g. The Invention of Tradition is a mind-blowing and funny book and iconoclastic. Also, like me, a jazz man. I myself (like EH) nearly became jazz critic for the New Statesman! He, Perry Anderson and others like Christopher Hill were my great heroes among living Marxists. 5O: I later wrote The Third World and Christopher Hill reviewed it enthusiastically in the Guardian, commenting that I was really a historian as well as anthropologist and intellectual sociologist. My historical interest stemmed from a wonderful history master at school. Life does not start at University, it starts at school. My great debt is to that master, also influenced by others. But my real trio of greats is Edward T, Perry Anderson and Eric Hobsbawm. Which is the greatest? Perry is still young… 51: I decided I would not continue to write just about one area, as E-Pritchard had done on the Nuer, so I would not go on about Groote Eylandt. Max G. was approached by a young leftish publishing firm, McGibbon and Kee, to write a book about the Mau Mau. He said no, but referred them to me and that is how ‘Trumpet’ came about. 53: It is a book about colonial resistance, the disintegration of colonialism, on the eve of the ‘Winds of Change’ in Africa in particular. Millenarianism was the dominant form of political action on the part of ordinary people in places like Melanesia, a very different phenomenon from revolution in Russia or China. We had to try to come to terms with it. 54. An auto-criticism of ‘Trumpet’. It was too heavily political economy. This can be seen when compared to Peter Lawrence. I started with pol. econ., Peter with the Melanesian world-view. This is how I come to see it now. The amazingly different impacts of colonialism. How does one explain these different responses? All kinds of response. Not dictated by the colonialists themselves. 56: the inherent logic of political economy is threaded through my book, the Melanesian perceptions are there but not so obvious; I should have planted them at the start. 57: a similar auto-critique of my work on the Tallensi, which over-emphasized the material dimensions of life and ignored the lineage ideologies etc. It was a base-superstructure model which is inadequate. 58: Alan talks of the recent Sahlins lecture at the British Academy which fits with this re-assessment of local resistance, the McCartney Mission account of the Chinese Emperor being the classic statement. Yes, the heliocentric arrogance and contempt for the West of the Chinese is classic. The core-periphery models are nonsense and can be answered by one word: Iran. How does c-p explain the Ayatollahs. We have got to start talking about Islam. 59: I wrote the ‘Trumpet’. It was very successful. Reviewed by Geoffrey Gorer in the Observer as a wonderful book, and other very good reviews. I myself became a reviewer for the Guardian and did numerous reviews and became quite well known (and earned quite a lot of money).

Part 3: Mature years and sociology (50 mins)

Sociology and the Third World

00: I always wanted to write for a popular audience. One of my ambitions, which has never been realized, is to write a book that will be sold on station bookstalls. I thought I had done it when I came back from China and wrote a book on it, but it was not so successful. 01: I applied to Cambridge, but there were no posts in those day. There was very slow expansion. Max said that with my political reputation I would never get a job in anthropology. So I thought of other possibilities, including studying schizophrenia at the Maudsley. Max said I should switch to sociology, which was just beginning to take off. I got the first job I applied for, at Hull, against strong competition. I don’t know why I was picked, though two days before the interview I did a BBC interview on 3rd Program on Cargo Cults. I then tried to read a lot of sociology. 03: I also used a lot of anthropology and gradually we built up a very popular course. The social sciences exploded after the Robbins Report. We ended up with a huge department. I finished there in 1964. I was there for eight years. Quite prestigious. I was Head of Department. 04: Max managed to get a Chair in Sociology at Manchester a year before I left it all and after a year I was appointed to that new Manchester Chair and went there. The expansion of sociology was exponential. This caused great problems with Max who saw sociology as an ancillary part of his empire and tried to restrict it. It turned into a nasty territorial battle, which we won and then the Department was split. There were 10 new Universities a year. I was offered many other Chairs. 07: Teodor Shanin came a little later. In 1965 I was recruited onto the British Economic Commission on Tanzania, and got interested in co-operatives, the predecessors of Ujamaa. So I got interested in co-operatives in the 3rd World and this drew the attention of Teodor. An amusing story of their first meeting and Teodor’s personality. 10: Teodor taught me more about peasants in two hours than I had ever learnt. I became a patron of Teodor and together we worked on peasant studies, including promoting the work of Polish scholars like Galeski. Teodor got the second Chair at Manchester. A larger than life man, a great guy. 11: The Third World was written at the end of my time at Hull. The Press lost the first copy of the index, which I had to completely re-do. It was published just after my arrival in Manchester and was well-reviewed and made me the ‘Third World’ person in the Anglophone world, (though the French had invented the concept). I travelled all over the world with the book – there were 8 editions in Mexico alone. Mainly in South America it took off. It was never translated into French. There are still huge barriers with France. 14: One thing I resented about the NLR was that they worshipped everything on the South Bank in Paris. Only very recently has there been a French translation of ‘Trumpet’, nothing else, not ever invited to France or German. The term ‘Third World’ was coined by Alfred Sauvy in 1952, taken up in France and probably I learnt about through the contacts of NLR. 15: our motto was ‘neither Moscow nor Washington’ (Trotsky), and this idea fitted well, but more positive. CND and the Third World worked together, a new entity was forming. The publishers put in the sub-title ‘A vibrant new force in international affairs’. It was indeed a new, and important, force. A new force in the world. 16: It was written in a burst of steam, in a couple of summer vacations. White heat. Philip Larkin described it as a passionate book. I do not like to write unless I have something to say. Unlike today, when people have to write – publish or perish – and hence churn out an exponentially increasing amount of rubbish. 17: I now feels the germs of a new book, a kind of sexual itch of another book coming up inside me. 18: reflecting on The Third World, I couldn’t re-write it as the great non-aligned movement has died back, though it still persists. Now there is the non-aligned group in the UN. The Americans cannot control the UN any more. But then it was a political force. 20: Nyerere and new leaders were just realizing the problems of taking over the emerging countries, in particular the power of the multi-nationals. The African countries found they could not do anything. In many areas the situation is getting worse. They began to see the problem as a global one – the first UNCTAD conference, predominantly a resistance to the economic power and hegemony of the West.

The Three Worlds, South America and World Systems

22: I waited a long time to find out about Latin America, and also felt [that the ‘Third World’, by virtually ignoring Latin America, was not good enough an intellectual job. My chapter on nationalism was not very good. I gradually equipped myself to write another book, helped by Brian Roberts and Teodor and finally wrote it after 14 years. 23: I was sentenced to be Dean at Manchester for two years, the final degradation. Sterility, though I quite enjoyed it. I got a year off and decided to go to Ecuador and learnt Spanish and Portuguese. It opened up a new world. A rich intellectual tradition, Chile etc., the time before the dictators. Mexico with its revolutionary heritage. 24: I encountered Gunder Frank and swallowed him at first. But as I looked around at the traffic filled cities etc. I began to wonder if this was really ‘underdevelopment’. I started to study industrial things. But I remained deep down in my fibres an anthropologist. I’m never happy with purely sociological totalities and I’m most interested in cultural things. 25: I was brought back to culture by people like Marshall Sahlins, the big influence of ‘Culture and Practical Reason’, which has never been answered by Marxists who cannot take M.S. to pieces. I read early Geertz etc. But I think Geertz mystifies and absolutized culture and reifies it and is unsatisfactory. So I persisted and wrote Three Worlds. 27: A critique of ‘World System Theory’. Of course there is a world system, from at least 1885 on, but I fell out with it on a particular occasion in Berlin. [better light] Wallerstein and Frank were on the platform and we were discussing ‘One World or Three’. Gundar was very rude and I was piqued. So I went home and read Wallerstein comma by comma and decided to write a critique and it was published by the Socialist Register. Zero response from Immanuel. Wallerstein is much better than Gunder Fr’s polar model. Revolution is no longer an option. Comments on Wallerstein. 30: I visited Hong Kong and was shattered by the transformation in 16 years. I went back recently. Is HK a 3rd World country any more? Clearly not. The ‘Little Tigers’ are clearly not 3rd World, so impressive, though vulnerable. But the end of the 3rd World a bit premature and I began to read about a new international division of labour, Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs). Dependency was exaggerated. 32: It is a sleight of hand that the 3rd world has disappeared, a recent visit to Peru shows that there is still a 3rd world. Peru is broken backed and with tremendous problems. [nice close ups and good light] 33: Black Africa is going backwards in conventional terms, a 6% decrease in exports etc. Dropped off as a basket case by the west, we don’t care a damn. The World Bank has divided countries into poor, middling poor, very poor, degrees of poverty. These are our perception, they also see themselves as 3rd World. 34: I do not believe in any immanentist models, e.g. like those of Nigel Harris.

Anthropology, culture and knowledge 35: Alan asks about Wallerstein, how much was your critique determined by your being an anthropologist? Absolutely, a brilliant man, but I was by then moving back towards anthropology. For instance, Hong Kong cannot be understood without understanding its Chineseness, culture. 36: China is very different in its communist ideology from Russia. Ideologies and social structures do not correspond 1:1, cultures and histories exist and have to be taken into account. Most political scientists and economists have no understanding of this or realize the relevance of this, not in their intellectual universe. 37: I now want to write a book about other knowledges, influenced by Dr. Waddy [since done – Knowledges]. I want to take the Australian Aboriginal knowledge system, their elaborateness, also others like the Micronesian navigators. This is related to the wider theme about how other cultures work, e.g. Chineseness, Iranian Islam etc. 39: the Chinese quarrel with the Soviet Union is not just about Marxist ideology, but to do with Russians and Chinese society and culture. 40: Alan asks about the abandoning of base/superstructure model and the turn to Weber. Views about Weber, what is attractive about him, he raises interesting questions. Weber a great genius. Better than Marx who stressed production too much. 42: Alan asks about the move from economic determinism towards ideas, aesthetic. Why? Most significant was the death of Marxism, the disastrous pluralism and faction-fighting of the Marxisms, the clash between Promethean and determinist. This exploded into savage wars and undermined by Stalin, Pol Pot, Sendero Luminoso and other horrors. 45: Now the Salman Rushdie affair and the re-emergence of Islam, regenerated, not the original Islam, the Koran re-interpreted, it had not put the mullahs at the top. But it is an example of the persistence of historically rooted cultures themes. A huge change in the world. 47: Asked what most proud of. Story of Bertrand Russell – three women. But I think it was ‘Trumpet Shall Sound’ and my other books. Also, as a political animal, though sickened by subsequent history, of my early work for NLR, the New Left, CND etc. 48: What would you have liked to have done which you did not? What avenues did you not go down? Further work in Australia. I quite enjoy public bureaucracy. I could have done industry and business. Also something practical in the 3rd World. We are so involved in our own culture, we lose interest in the rest. I have noticed that anthropologists who go to the field then return and, having had children, mortgages etc, suddenly become interested in their own place which “must be studied”. They argue that it is imperative to study the West. This is false consciousness. 51: Have you ever been bored? Yes, in the Army at times. Otherwise not.

Some added notes by Peter Worsley on the above (written in 2004).

Note 1: The Jesuit teachers awarded ‘red bills’, written in Latin (and headed Ad majorem Dei Gloria), for good work and behaviour, e.g. homework. They had a numerical value (e.g. 6). This was the carrot. The stick was, literally, a whalebone ferrule – you were hit on the hand, say, 6 times for offences – very painful. In theory, you could evade the punishment by ‘cashing in’ a red bill. But in fact, there was indeterminacy – you never knew whether they’d accept it or not! This disgusted me – both the brutality, and the notion of ‘exchanging’ (cancelling) ‘sins’ by merit stored up in red bills. (I thought you should be sanctioned for bad deeds (though not via a ferrule!) and rewarded for good ones. See how this institution affected me – I’m still going on about it 70 years later!

Note 2: When I transferred schools, I was 3 years ahead in Latin and way behind in maths. This shaped my entire academic trajectory (even now). At the RC school (St. Francis Xavier’s) we were constantly made to attend ‘sodalities’ (religious society meetings at the end of the school-day (and to bring penances?? For various religious causes).

Note 3: An important factor was the sectarian division on Merseyside into Roman Catholic and Protestant. People kept off the street during rival ‘processions’ – bricks might be thrown (we were told). I became Head Boy at Wallasey Grammar School in 1940/1, but, despite this eminence, as I was a Catholic, wasn’t allowed to attend morning Assembly, which had some religious content. So the Catholic and Jewish boys waited in a room off the main hall (where we did our homework and told dirty jokes – I can still remember one of them!), but were let out into the Hall to hear the end part of the Assembly which deal with (non-religious) notices – sports, etc.

Note 4: In wartime, you were not called up for about a year, but had to join the training corps (and attend training sessions). You then passed ‘Certificate A’, and Cert B. This gave you automatic entry into Officer Training. I came over from Cambridge, to join guys who were years older, married, and sometimes working class (& so unhappy in this middle-class environment).

(6600 words)

H. Beynon: Working for Ford. Penguin Modern Sociology 1973.

Working for Ford by Huw Beynon is a path breaking industrial sociology book.

are usually written from two general standpoints; firstly, they are written largely for other sociol-ogists, and secondly, they are written from the perspective of a basic harmony of interest between management and labour.

This book is interesting and useful because it transcends both these limitations, while at the same time retaining a focus on the key issues in 'industrial relations'. Beynon transcends the limitations of a mere sociological stand-point, by, while remaining an outsider, becoming "an outsider who was accepted inside".

In this work Beyon potrayed the workers, - included many shop-stewards - who worked making Ford cars at Halewood, in a sympethis but not uncritical way. The industrial relations at the plant are axamined via documentation of the workers views and an examination of the limitations of an assumption of a 'harmony of interest'. A basic conflict between management and workers is identified a conflict which at its most fundamental is about how much work is done and how much the workers get paid for it. The conflict is obviously unequal, Beynon argues, because capital, when confronted by any significant challenge to its managers power, can relocate. Capital is inherently mobile and its investment shifted around the world.

The power of the workers, as embodied in the shop stewards committee, is far weaker given the lack of international organization. At the heart of Beynon's analysis is the idea of a working-class factory consciousness - and Halewood's shop stewards are a good example of this. They had this factory class consciousness in that they understood how they and their workers were exploited in the factory. And they used this undersatnding for a basis for their struggles. Struggles over both the control of various aspects of the job and over the managers and workers "rights". The book is clearly political in that it identifed and documented exploitation.

But it is a politics of the factory implicitly tied up with the day-to-day battle with the boss In its least developed form it is revealed in sporadic bloody-mindedness and malingering - the 'fuck-em' attitude that most managers are familiar with and find so distasteful 1 , (pp.98-99). By introducing this concept Beynon is able to take into account the fact that while the car workers have been at the centre of industrial conflict there is little evidence that they have been able to link their struggles positively with those of other wor-kers. Their battle has produced no radical political demands. They have not been able to shift the basis of the struggle from the effects to the causes - to an attack on the dominant logic of capitalist production. Hence Beynon avoids the pitfalls of a superficial revolutionary optimism by recognizing that the shop stewards within the car plants for all their militancy are not revolutionaries. Their factory consciousness is not necessarily a revolutionary class consciousness in the Marxian sense of that much abused concept. "They hate the car plant and they hate the system that produces it but they see no clear way out of it- They vaguely articulate the notion of workers control, but the slogan of the "car plants for the workers" makes no sense to the lads who work on the line. They hate the car plant in a way that the miners never hated the pits. They see no salvation in the nationalization of the car industry, be it under workers control or not", (p.314). If the stage for this conflict is the factory floor, its organiz-ational manifestation is not the trade union bureaucrats but the shop stewards committee. Hence factory class consciousness finds its historical antecedents in syndicalism - developed in Britain in the shop steward movement that occurred during and after World

Page 3 55 War I. The shop stewards are the representatives of shop floor democracy - the basis of the shop stewards committee, is the collective defence of shop floor workers against the 'bosses' and the unions. Here Beynon is concerned to explain why some workers define their interests in collective terms and become shop stewards and others in 'individualistic' terms and become supervisors. He rejects an explanation of activism in terms of different types of people and opts for an explanation in terms of the collective position of workers in the factory. He writes that, "Psychologism ignores the dialectic of social life. It also ignores ideology• Dominant personalities can dominate for good or ill. The use to which they put their abilities is not determined by these abilities. Activity is directed by values and systems of belief. An adequate account of shop-floor activism and leadership needs to go beyond the personalities of the people involved and consider the ideology of the activists and of the organization within which they are active", (p.192). Beynon locates the roots of activism clearly in what he describes as the structural contradiction of capitalism most starkly manifested on the factory floor. The contradiction of factory production, and the source of contradictory elements within class consciousness, is rooted in the fact that the exploitation of workers is achieved through collective, co-ordinated activities within both the factory and society generally. So much for the agitator thesis! This is a book which is rich in insights, simply and humorously written, e.g. on management p.133, on social science p.113, on 'class traitors' p.123, on 'scientific management' p.137, on the essentially political nature of all industrial relations p.221, and on what it means to be a shop steward and married p.204. To work on the production line in a motor car factory is a boring and fundamentally alienating task where one's day is regulated in an authoritarian way that is difficult for the non-manual classes to comprehend. This book urgently needs to be read and understood by academics, managers, and trade unionists. The man in the engine dress has just fitted another gearbox. Forty an hour. Three hundred and twenty a shift.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Agricultural Involution is one of the most famous of the early works of Clifford Geertz. In this book Geertz examines the agricultural system in Indonesia. The two dominant forms of agriculture are swidden and sawah. Swidden is also known as slash and burn and sawah is irrigated rice paddy. The geographical location of these different types is important. Sawah is the dominant form in both Java and Bali where nearly three quarters of Indonesia's population live and swidden more common in the less central regions. Having looked at the system the book turns to an examination of the systems historical development. Of particular note is Geertz's discussion of what he famoulsy describes as the process of "agricultural involution". This is his description of the process in Java where both the external economic demands of the Dutch rulers and the internal pressures due to population growth led to intensification rather than change. What this amounted was increasing the labour intensity in the paddies, increasing output per area but not increasing output per head.

Reference

Agricultural Involution: The Process of Ecological Change in Indonesia. By Clifford Geertz. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 1963.

Thought and Change is the most important early work by Ernest Gellner. In this book Gellner outlines his views on what is "modernity". He looks at the processes of social change and and historical transformation and perhaps most forcefully the power nationalism. Maleŝević and Haugaard argue that Gellner's method, the socio-historical method, by which as he sets out a powerful sociology of specific philosophical doctrines and ideologies, from utilitarianism and Kantianism to nationalism. (The chapter specifically dealing with nationalism was later expand to form the basis of Gellner's most famous work (1983) Nations and Nationalism). They note that rather than looking at philosophies' internal coherence Gellner places them in their historical context. By doing this he explains their origins and their likely influence. Modernity for Gellner is "unique, unprecedented and exceptional" and these characteristics are sustained by the growth of economies and increases in cultural uniformity.

The Source

(1965) Thought and Change, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson; Chicago: University of Chicago Press (with the imprint 1964). Pp. viii + 224.

Reference

Category:Sociology books

Caroline Moser is an academic specialising in social policy and urban social anthropologist. She is primarily famous for her field-based approach to research on the informal sector genrally - but particularly aspects such as poverty, violence, asset vulnerability and strategies for accumulation in the urban setting. Gender analysis is central to her approach. She has looked at many countries particulalry in the Americas. These countries include Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala and Jamaica.

She has also researched community participation, looked at the social dimensions of economic reform, the role of human rights, social protection and responses of the urban environemnt to climate change.

Education

Prof Moser has a Ph.D. from Sussex University, (1975) a Post Graduate Diploma from Manchester University (1968) and a BA from Durham University (1967)

Career

Her career has included time at University College London(1978-1986)London School of Economics (1986-1990), the World Bank (1990-2000), the Overseas Development Institute (2001-2002), the New School, New York(2002-2003) and the Brookings Institution (2004-2007) and the University of Manchester (2007-present).

Source

[Staff Profile Manchester University Professor Caroline Moser Position: Professor of Urban Development and Director GURC]

[ODI Profile]

Key Works

Moser, C. (1993) Gender Planning and Development: Theory, Practice and Training, New York and London, Routledge.

[[

IDDP Timeline

2000

The idea of investigating the potential utilisation of supercritical steam for electricty production. Three leading energy companies in Iceland and the government form consortium called the Iceland Deep Drilling Project IDDP

2002

Two IDDP workshops funded by the International Continental Scientifc Drilling Programmer (ICDP) held

2003

Feasibility Report published

2004

First IDDP well site chosen. HS Orka hf. offeres existing well, RN-17, located in Reykjanes, to be deepened

2005

2000

2000

If you're ever, gentle reader, in Bolton, I strongly recommed a visit to

the Bolton Museum, which houses, along with many other interesting local artifacts, the archive of and ardent group known as the Bolton Whitmanians. The Bolton Whitmanians formed in 1885, and used to meet in a house on Eagle Street owned by their leader, James Wallace, an architectural draughtsman, to celebrate the life and writings of the great Walt. They liked to commemorate his birthday with a suitably en plein air tea-party, in the course of which they'd sing a hymn especially composed in his honour, and drink communally from an ingeniously designed loving-cup, embellished with Whitmanian scenes - and which is now on permanent display in the museum's collection. The archive is a treasure trove of photographs and correspondence. Whitman never, alas, visited Bolton in person, but he was delighted to learn he was the object of veneration in this northern English town, and responded earnestly to their enquiries and adulation. Two of the band (its leader, Wallace and Doctor John Johnston) actually made the pilgrimage to Camden, New Jersey to visit their now ageing idol, and were graciously received. Indeed Whitman was so touched by their devotion, that when his pet canary died he had it stuffed and asked his close friend Dr Bucke to make a present of it to the Bolton Whitmanians, which he did on his next trip to England in 1891. This canary bird was the very one that had inspired the short poem Whitman published in the New York Herald on March 2nd, 1888: 'Did we count great, O soul, to penetrate the themes of mighty books, / Absorbing deep and full from thoughts, plays, speculations? / But now from thee to me, caged bird, to feel thy joyous warble, / Filling the air, the lonesome room, the long forenoon, / Is it not just as great, O soul?' It too, perched on some life-like foliage, mid-warble, is on view in the Bolton Museum, and the sight of it when I visited a couple of years back brought tears to my eyes.

Financial markets in development, and the development of financial markets

Jeremy Greenwooda and Bruce D. Smithb,

a Department of Economics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627-0156, USA

b Department of Economics, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712-1173, USA

Geology of Iceland

Kverkfjoll Source: Iceland Tourist Board

Iceland lies astride the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and is an integral part of the global mid-oceanic ridge system. It is the largest supramarine part of the mid-oceanic ridge system. Iceland has developed on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge as a landmass between the submarine Reykjanes Ridge to the southwest and the Kolbeinsey Ridge to the north, and has been active during the last 20-25 million years, broadly coinciding with the time-span of active volcanism in Iceland. Being a hot spot above a mantle plume, Iceland has been piled up through voluminous emissions of volcanic material with a much higher production rate per time unit than in any region in the world. It has grown by rifting and crust accretion through volcanism along the axial rift zone, the volcanic zones, which in terms of the plate tectonic framework marks the boundary between the Eurasian and North American plates. Accordingly the western part of Iceland, west of the volcanic zones, belongs to the North American plate and the eastern part to the Eurasian plate, with the oldest rocks outcropping in northwest and in eastern Iceland. To complicate the picture there are also rocks of similar age in Western Iceland and in the centre of northern Iceland, due to movements of the hot spot and the volcanic zones. The rate of spreading is calculated as 1 cm in each direction per year.

Geology and Geological History Iceland is built almost exclusively of volcanic rocks, predominantly basalts. Silicic and intermediate rocks - rhyolites, dacites and andesites - constitute about 10% and sediments another 10% of it.

The main rock formations. The rocks of Iceland can be divided into four main formations: (1) The Upper Tertiary Plateau Basalt Formation, (2) The Upper Pliocene and Lower Pleistocene Grey Basalt Formation, (3) The Upper Pleistocene Palagonite (Hyaloclastite) Móberg Formation and (4) The Postglacial Formation, which besides Postglacial lavas includes sediments as till and glacial sediments from the retreat of the last ice cover and marine, fluvial and lacustrine sediments and soils of Late Glacial and Holocene age.

The Tertiary Basalt Formation comprises eastern and southeastern Iceland, the main part of Western Iceland and the western part of northern Iceland, altogether about half the country's area. In eastern Iceland, basalt lava flows, mainly tholeiitic, form about 80% of the volcanic pile above sea-level, which has a stratigraphic thickness of about 10,000 m. Silicic (rhyolitic) and intermediate rocks and detrital beds form the rest. Dykes are common and intrusions of gabbro and fine-grained granite (granophyre) occur, especially within ruins of differentiated central volcanos. Beds of tephra and ignimbrite are found in and around many of the central volcanoes.

The oldest rocks so far K/Ar dated above sea level are about 14 million years old. Thus, the oldest basalts are no older than the Middle Miocene and much younger than the basalts in Britain, Greenland and the Faroes. This accords with the theory of ocean-floor spreading.

In the Tertiary Icelandic basalts, lava vesicles are usually filled with quartz minerals such as rock crystal, jasper and chalcedony or with zeolites. Zeolites from Teigarhorn in Berufjörður are found in museums all over the world. The Helgustaðir mine in Reydarfjörður remained the world's main supplier of the transparent Iceland spar (optical calcite) for centuries.

Intercalated between the plateau basalts, especially in northwestern Iceland, are plant-bearing sediments and thin layers of lignites. Species found include beech, maple, vine, liriodendron and conifers. The mixed forests of conifers and warmth-loving broad-leaf trees indicate a warm-temperate climate. The warmth-loving trees gradually disappeared during the Pliocene when the climate slowly grew cooler and the first glacial sediments, tillites, turned up. The thin layers of lignites are inferior in quality as fuel seams, although they have been used on a small scale in some places.

The Pleistocene rocks are confined mainly to a broad SW-NE trending zone between the Tertiary plateau basalt areas, and they are also exposed on the peninsulas Tjörnes, Snæfellsnes and Skagi. The Pleistocene rocks are divided into two formations and the limit between them is the last magnetic reversal, occurring about 700,000 years ago. In the Pleistocene Formation there are three main facies:

1) Interglacial basalt lava flows which are generally grey in colour and of coarser texture than the Tertiary ones. The Grey Basalt Formation, where the interglacial basalt layers remain a dominating facies, is mainly exposed along the inner border of the Tertiary basalt areas and in the central part of southern Iceland.

2) Subglacially formed pillow lavas, breccias and brownish tuffs, known as palagonite (móberg), rich in hydrated and otherwise altered basaltic volcanic glass. The share of silicic and intermediary rocks in the Pleistocene Formation is similar to that in the Tertiary ones. The main rhyolitic massifs are the Torfajökull area and Kerlingarfjöll.

3) Glacial, fluvial, lacustrine and marine sediments are interbedded between lava flows. The thickest series of marine strata are found on the Tjörnes peninsula in northern Iceland, where the arrival of Pacific molluscs commenced about 3 million years ago, after the first opening of the Bering Strait.

Stratigraphic studies indicate about fourteen Upper Pliocene and Pleistocene glacial periods. During the main ones the country was almost completely covered by ice. Broad-leaf and conifer forests disappeared during the Lower Pleistocene, but birch, willow and mountain ash survived all theglacial periods, and alder all except the last two.

During the Pleistocene glacial periods, thick ice blanketed the volcanic activity, which consequently took place mainly under water (meltwater) and thus under conditions similar to the submarine parts of the World Rift System. The volcanos which built up subglacially in the volcanic zones mainly depict two types, ridges and table mountains. The ridges are steep-sided and serrated and run in parallel lines, NE-SW in southern Iceland, N-S in northern Iceland. The table mountains are isolated mountains, circular to sub-rectangular. They consist of a shield volcano resting on a socle of pillow lavas and palagonite tuffs and breccias. The lava shields were formed by subaerial outflow of lava when the socles had grown high enough to protrude through the ice cover. The prototype of such table mountains is Herðubreið (1,682 m), north of Vatnajökull. (http://www.iceland.is/country-and-nature/nature/Geology/)

Available online 24 July 1998. Abstract

What is the relationship between markets and development? It is argued that markets promote growth, and that growth in turn encourages the formation of markets. Two models with endogenous market formation are presented to analyze this issue. The first examines the role that financial markets — banks and stock markets — play in allocating funds to the highest valued use in the economic system. It is shown that intermediation will arise under weak conditions. The second focuses on the role that markets play in supporting specialization in economic activity. The consequences of perfect competition in market formation are highlighted.