The Chronicle: Colloquy: The question

THE QUESTION

An article in this week's issue of The Chronicle examines why three scholars did not finish writing the books that might have been the capstones of their careers. One of the scholars, Stephanie Wood, studied Techialoyans, pictorial records of deeds for land in Mexico, hundreds of years old. Ms. Wood questioned the authenticity of the documents and drew attacks from some prominent Mexican scholars -- even though most researchers in the field praised her research. She abandoned a book project in part because of the reaction that her preliminary findings drew and accusations that her work would damage Mexican Indians, who have great pride in their Techialoyans. Was Ms. Wood correct to do so? What obligations do scholars have to the feelings of the people they study, and to the impact that their findings may have on them?

For further information, see this background article:

Books Unwritten, Stories Untold (4/27/2001)

: 14 RESPONSES (New 5/6)

JOIN THE DEBATE

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.