I was trained in the '50s as a New Critic. I remember what literature was like before the New Critics, when people stood up and talked about Shelley's soul and such things.
I think feminism has had a major impact on anthropology.
Two people have been really liberating in my mind; one is Wittgenstein and the other is Burke. I read Burke before he was a secular saint, before everyone was reading him.
I do think the attempt to raise consciousness has succeeded. People are very aware of gender concerns now.
I think the American university system still seems to be the best system in the world.
Anthropology never has had a distinct subject matter, and because it doesn't have a real method, there's a great deal of anxiety over what it is.
Gender consciousness has become involved in almost every intellectual field: history, literature, science, anthropology. There's been an extraordinary advance.
I agree with Chomsky in almost nothing. When it comes to innate structures and so on, I'm very skeptical.
Anthropology in general has always been fairly hospitable to female scholars, and even to feminist scholars.
I don't feel that an atmosphere of debate and total disagreement and argument is such a bad thing. It makes for a vital and alive field.
I don't have the notion that everybody has to write in some single academic style.
I think of myself as a writer who happens to be doing his writing as an anthropologist.
I don't write drafts. I write from the beginning to the end, and when it's finished, it's done.
I had a hard time convincing students that they were going to North Africa to understand the North Africans, not to understand themselves.
I don't think things are moving toward an omega point; I think they're moving toward more diversity.