Title: Sauer and "Man's Role in Changing the Face of the Earth"
Abstract: Published slightly more than thirty years ago, in Changing Face of has assumed a prominent place in geographical literature and research. Correspondence between Carl 0. Sauer and William L. Thomas, originator of idea for symposium, reveals how structure, themes, and choice of participants evolved. Reviews are basis to determine contemporary assessment of book. It is influential in global-scale integrative thinking about environment. T HINKING on a global scale in an integrative fashion about mankind's effects of his occupance on earth is commonplace and second nature in 1980s. But it was not always so. shift a local to a global viewpoint through intermediate regional and continental scales has been slow and halting. One of first and most influential examples of a holistic, integrative interpretation of past, present, and future was in Changing Face of Earth, a collection of essays published thirtyone years ago.1 volume validated interdisciplinary approach, heightened environmental consciousness of English-speaking world, and exerted an unprecedented influence on development of a unified approach to environmental issues. Since 1956, more than 10,000 copies of this seminal volume have been sold, a fact that attests to its continued influence and freshness as of most impressive contributions to man/ nature theme produced in United States.2 Although essays in Role were not written exclusively by geographers (only fifteen of fifty-three contributors were geographers) or intended to cater solely to their needs, volume has held an important, highly visible place in discipline. Paradoxically its central message-the importance of interplay between mankind and environment as a focus of study-was ignored, if not rejected by geography during 1950s and 1960s. Initially geographers equated environment with sterile philosophical debate about determinism and possibilism, and they later were enticed by mysteries of new positivism. Meanwhile, other branches of knowledge adopted orphaned approach. F. Kenneth Hare remarked * I wish to acknowledge helpful suggestions of many persons, including David Hooson, Brian Blouet, James J. Parsons, and Peter Haggett, who read manuscript. ' Man's in Changing Face of Earth (edited by William L. Thomas; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956). 2 Daniel W. Gade, Growing Recognition of George Perkins Marsh, Geographical Review 73 (1983): 341-344, reference to 341. * DR. WILLIAMS is a lecturer in geography, School of Geography, and a Fellow of Oriel College at University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom OX1 3TB. This content downloaded 207.46.13.72 on Sun, 07 Aug 2016 05:26:59 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms SAUER AND MAN'S ROLE in 1969, Sometimes I think that geography as a science deliberately steps out of phase with climate of times.3 In article I examine origin of idea and its subsequent mutation into Role through a consideration of scope, structure, themes, and participants in symposium that preceded publication of collection. Research involved an examination of unpublished correspondence of contributors and organizers, particularly Carl O. Sauer, chairman of symposium, and William L. Thomas, organizer of conference and editor of collection.4 In addition, examination deepens understanding of thoughts and feelings of Sauer, one of most fertile and agile geographical minds to flourish in North America. His intellectual influence beyond discipline has probably been unrivaled in geography.5 Finally I assess influence of collection on subsequent inquiries about mankind and earth. ORIGIN OF MAN'S ROLE On 1 October 1953, William L. Thomas, a geographer who was assistant director of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, invited Sauer to be chairman of a conference on theme, man's impact as a dynamic agent in changing face of earth, in June 1954. Sauer accepted and fruitful cooperation began. origin of idea is well documented, although evolution and delineation of its final form and particular flavor have not been appreciated. In 1949 foundation financed XXIX International Congress of Americanists in New York, and that experience came idea for a massive assessment of anthropology. Thomas worked with Alfred L. Kroeber during 1950 to plan for an international symposium on anthropology in June 1952, to which approximately eighty scholars were invited to a discussion, stimulated by fifty papers distributed in advance of meeting. proceedings were taped and then were transcribed and edited for publication, something that had probably never been done previously in academic circles.6 Encouraged by success of that conference, Thomas proposed one on theme of man's role to be hosted by New York Academy of Science. purpose was for geography and anthropology to establish themselves in academy. Only later when plans for symposium outgrew financial and organizational capacity of academy and after National 3F. Kenneth Hare, Environment: Resuscitation of an Idea, Area No. 4 (1969): 52-55, reference to 53. 4Sauer Papers, Bancroft Library Archives, University of California, Berkeley, California. 5 Michael Williams, The Apple of My Eye: Carl Sauer and Historical Geography, Journal of Historical Geography 9 (1983): 1-28; J. Nicholas Entrikin, Carl O. Sauer, Philosopher in Spite of Himself, Geographical Review 74 (1984): 378-408. 6 Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory (prepared under chairmanship of A. L. Kroeber; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953); An Appraisal of Anthropology Today (edited by Sol Tax and others; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953). 219 This content downloaded 207.46.13.72 on Sun, 07 Aug 2016 05:26:59 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE GEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW Science Foundation provided a subsidy of $15,000 for conference organization and publication did Wenner-Gren Foundation become sponsor and host.7 SCOPE OF THE SYMPOSIUM From beginning Thomas clearly envisaged Sauer as the logical person to give impetus to such a vast undertaking.8 In terms of Sauer's abhorrence of large, organized structures and professionalized academe, he surprisingly replied almost immediately that he was anxious to participate and was honored to have such a key position, although he was aghast, excited and somewhat scared by responsibility. He fulfilled his promise to write in detail and installments with a sustained fierce torrent of advice, questions, reflections, and personal reminiscences for next twenty months.9 Sauer's first remarks about proposed conference were both practical and philosophical. To stage it within eight months was not possible because of his commitments and probably those of others and also because matter was on his mind, which was the kind of mind that needs time. He thought proposed program admirable but needed stiffening with a historical accent to counter reductionist tendencies of social scientists. Here he was articulating his long-standing, deeply held feelings about role of time and perversion of true spirit of academic inquiry by social scientists. inclusion of anthropologists might rectify problem, but he contended that young anthropologists were becoming social scientists, attempting to theorize and universalize, rather than culture historians. Participation by Europeans was helpful because they know past is living and that it can be made to speak to us. word dynamic in title worried him. It was an academic catchword for persons who thought all processes were short-run and recurrent and who considered themselves free from past, sons of Daedalus who are confident that we have new knowledge that enables us to start here and now, to whom anything that happened before them is antiquarian.'0 Thomas ultimately accepted all these suggestions in pursuit of his goal to promote symposium that Sauer had already dubbed Man's Impact on Changing Face of Earth. Conceptual planning for conference was delayed in order to include historical element. Thomas suggested that it be incorporated by staging a similar but smaller conference on man's Pleistocene habitat. Sauer was ecstatic: changes Pleistocene to present were pertinent to his current work on early man and diffusion of culture at a global scale. He predicted that conference would make scientific history as an inventory 7 William L. Thomas to Michael Williams, 15 December 1981; Man's Role, footnote 1 above, xxi-
Publication Year: 1987
Publication Date: 1987-04-01
Language: en
Type: article
Indexed In: ['crossref']
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 30
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot