Rating: 
Summary: A far ranging, uneven, good read about the Southwest
Review: Alex Shoumatoff's book is a good read that on the plus side talks about a wide range of subjects both ancient and modern and covers everything from archeology to zoology on the scientific side. He obviously spent a long time working on the book. One of the most illuminating things about the books is its description of the feelings of the various Indian Tribes about their history and the dominant Anglo culture. His description about how some of Navajo and Hopi people feel about Tony Hillerman was very interesting. He expresses personal experience and opinions freely about everything from drug use to politics and it makes for interesting reading whether you agree with him or not. The general tone is that of an old hippie yearning for the old days when more people cared. Overall I liked the book and its rambling style. The only problem I had was it was too disjointed in theme and despite a bunch of editors working on it over the years it had several annoying errors.
Rating: 
Summary: Big, sloppy and not a good read.
Review: Alex Shoumatov's big, sloppy collection of tales and lore of the desert Southwest is tremendously disappointing. Whether the blame should be laid at the door of Mr. Shoumatoff or the publisher is a moot point - there's blame enough for both. Mr. Shoumatoff's writing has been much crisper and the editing has been at least adequate in works he's published in the New Yorker and in some of his other books. In "Legends of the American Desert," the absence of a plan or fresh theme (we know the desert is dry!) makes the book merely a patchwork of tales, many of them told before and better. A major flaw of the book is inept editing and fact-checking lapses by the staff at Knopf. One doesn't have to go far into the book to loose confidence in Mr. Shoumatoff and his publisher. On page 30, for instance Shoumatoff refers to a "Carminghia" being torched in the road. One must assume he means a Karmann Ghia, a kind of Volkswagen. On page 34 there is the gratuitous information that a New Mexico "spattercone" exploded in 1066, "the year William the Conquerer took England." On the next page Mr. Shoumatoff refers to the Amerindian weapon "atlatl" as a "thong" spear thrower. It's not. An atlatl is a notched stick serving as an extension of the arm. And so it goes. On page 49 there is a reference to the New Mexico settlement of "Orogrande." My great grandfather died there and it's Oro Grande. On page 51 there is a reference to the Spanish word "pendejo," which Mr. Shoumatoff identifies as "pubic hair." He's in the right body-ballpark, but the word means just what is sounds like and it's not hair. On page 54 Mr. Shoumatoff refers to the "South Pacific" railroad. It's the Southern Pacific. And on page 68 there is this alarming sentence, "Out on the Navajo Reservation, someone who is drunk gets hit by a car or freezes to death in an arroyo on average once a day." Struck or stranded by Carminghias no doubt. On page 76 Mr. Shoumatoff places Pueblo in New Mexico. It's in Colorado. To the Apaches he attributes the superhuman ability to ride "four of five days without stopping to sleep" while driving stolen horses. The book seems loaded with hyperbole and inaccuracies, a caution to anyone who would use it as a reference. It's not a good read either. Alex Shoumatoff can do better. The typeface gets a credit in the book. Too bad the editor doesn't. We'd know where to put the rest of the blame.
Rating: 
Summary: legends of the non-editor
Review: As many other reviewers note, Shoumatoff's powerful writing and great notes of research are really derailed in many parts here, beset with numerous inaccuracies -- the parts on the Sonoran Desert and the O'odham people, for example, as well as the Tarahumara and the Sierra Madre, beg for a local copy editor. It's really a shame; there's a lot to like in this book, and I would suggest reading it...but the usually astute Shoumatoff has set himself up as a typical, loose cannon travel writer, coming to some dubious conclusions about places he only knows as a short-sided visitor.
Rating: 
Summary: Great raw material; needs more processing.
Review: At the end of "Legends" Alex Shoumatoff mentions that the book had 8 editors in the course of its making. Nine must have been the magic number, for I've rarely seen a book published in sloppier form. Misspellings, typos, convoluted grammar, dates flung hither and thither without the slightest regard for accuracy... on p.35 he implies that Teotihuacan was built over 5000 years ago and that corn from this culture reached what is now known as New Mexico by "3600". I enclose that in quotes because he doesn't specify whether he means before the present or before Christ. Either way, it's a long time before Teotihuacan was built. Pre-Columbian history is one of my favorite topics, so I pushed on in spite of this blundering. But on p.45 he pranced right into another pet peeve of mine, the reporting of populations of continents that had no census bureaus. He states the population of the Americas to be "fourteen million or so", at the time of Columbus' "discovery". The quotes around discovery are his, meant to display his politically correct Aboriginal American point of view. Unfortunately, if you're going to go down that road, you have to call it something other than America, because Amerigo Vespucci was European and if the Europeans didn't discover it, they certainly have no right to name it. Editor #9 should place the word "guess" somewhere before the fourteen million. Then he or she should flip forward to p.76 where it is stated that the population in Mexico at the time of the conquest was thirty million. Not the Americas, just Mexico. If we can assume that Mexico's share of the 14 million in 1492 was 5 million, and that in just 27 years it swelled to 30 million, then Alex Shoumatoff has "discovered" the greatest pre-war baby boom in history! At the close of the fifteenth century the Mexicans were adding almost a million babies a year! Before the advent of Catholicism! Granted, some latitude must be given when the title of a book is Legends, but perhaps Shoumatoff should give some little signal (such as italicization) when he's about to take off on his magic carpet to La-La Land. Of course, that still wouldn't give much cover to such egregious blunders as that of the snow snakes on p.44: "...perhaps eleven thousand years ago, the Bering Strait had frozen solid, creating a corridor between Alaska and Asia that enabled many forms of life to cross continents...various reptiles--frogs, snakes, including the pit viper--hopped or slithered over the bridge." Now really, are we to believe that 8 editors and the author himself don't know about cold blooded animals? What if this book were to fall into the hands of some of our nation's third graders? Would they enter the fourth grade thinking rattlesnakes slithered 12 miles across frozen ocean? Think, Alex, think! It's a pity the book is such a mess, since there's much of interest in it. I'd always wondered where the expression "missionary position" came from, and Shoumatoff provides a plausible explanation. The saga of Clayton Lonetree was intriguing, as was the sidebar of the crass Brit who came to make a documentary about Lonetree's release from prison and the purification ceremony that followed. He was in it solely for the money, and was soundly rejected by Lonetree's family. The whole theme of profiting from American Indians in one way or another is dealt with several times from different angles. Shoumatoff mentions how one tribal leader refuses to give out info on linguistics unless he is paid: "We don't give out that kind of information for nothing. We're wise to you guys."; to which Shoumatoff responds that he's a "great believer in the free exchange of information", a response that is a little puzzling in light of this book's $30 price tag. Perhaps it wouldn't seem inappropriate to Shoumatoff for the man to charge money for his knowledge if he gave himself the title of linguistic consultant, and had an office on the campus of a prestigious university. One stumbles into a no man's land between capitalism and spirituality and scholarly research. There is another chapter that deals with the ferocious competition among archeologists to find the earliest human settlement in the Americas. If that tribal rep were to have his way, all the old bones and potsherds being dug up would have to be paid for, which doesn't strike me as so unreasonable. On the other hand, some tribal reps would prohibit any digging at all, and all remains currently in museums would have to be returned to the ground. On still another hand, if the digging were to go on with payments made to indigenous peoples, how would it be decided which tribe would receive the money? What would really be interesting would be to pay the tribal rep for the info, then follow the money trail. Would he split it equally with the other members of his tribe or keep it for himself? Would he be taxed on the income if Shoumatoff were to deduct the figure from his own income as a business expense? Can the US government tax an Indian tribe? Would wholesaling relics and ruins be more profitable than bingo? Could that possibly be a way of protecting the land from profiteers who would destroy its beauty through the excessive mining and logging that is detailed elsewhere in the book? One wonders, finally, how this relic of 19th century segregation called the reservation, which comprises a huge percentage of the American Desert, has survived to the 21st.
Rating:
Summary: Great raw material; needs more processing.
Review: At the end of "Legends" Alex Shoumatoff mentions that the book had 8 editors in the course of its making. Nine must have been the magic number, for I've rarely seen a book published in sloppier form. Misspellings, typos, convoluted grammar, dates flung hither and thither without the slightest regard for accuracy... on p.35 he implies that Teotihuacan was built over 5000 years ago and that corn from this culture reached what is now known as New Mexico by "3600". I enclose that in quotes because he doesn't specify whether he means before the present or before Christ. Either way, it's a long time before Teotihuacan was built. Pre-Columbian history is one of my favorite topics, so I pushed on in spite of this blundering. But on p.45 he pranced right into another pet peeve of mine, the reporting of populations of continents that had no census bureaus. He states the population of the Americas to be "fourteen million or so", at the time of Columbus' "discovery". The quotes around discovery are his, meant to display his politically correct Aboriginal American point of view. Unfortunately, if you're going to go down that road, you have to call it something other than America, because Amerigo Vespucci was European and if the Europeans didn't discover it, they certainly have no right to name it. Editor #9 should place the word "guess" somewhere before the fourteen million. Then he or she should flip forward to p.76 where it is stated that the population in Mexico at the time of the conquest was thirty million. Not the Americas, just Mexico. If we can assume that Mexico's share of the 14 million in 1492 was 5 million, and that in just 27 years it swelled to 30 million, then Alex Shoumatoff has "discovered" the greatest pre-war baby boom in history! At the close of the fifteenth century the Mexicans were adding almost a million babies a year! Before the advent of Catholicism! Granted, some latitude must be given when the title of a book is Legends, but perhaps Shoumatoff should give some little signal (such as italicization) when he's about to take off on his magic carpet to La-La Land. Of course, that still wouldn't give much cover to such egregious blunders as that of the snow snakes on p.44: "...perhaps eleven thousand years ago, the Bering Strait had frozen solid, creating a corridor between Alaska and Asia that enabled many forms of life to cross continents...various reptiles--frogs, snakes, including the pit viper--hopped or slithered over the bridge." Now really, are we to believe that 8 editors and the author himself don't know about cold blooded animals? What if this book were to fall into the hands of some of our nation's third graders? Would they enter the fourth grade thinking rattlesnakes slithered 12 miles across frozen ocean? Think, Alex, think! It's a pity the book is such a mess, since there's much of interest in it. I'd always wondered where the expression "missionary position" came from, and Shoumatoff provides a plausible explanation. The saga of Clayton Lonetree was intriguing, as was the sidebar of the crass Brit who came to make a documentary about Lonetree's release from prison and the purification ceremony that followed. He was in it solely for the money, and was soundly rejected by Lonetree's family. The whole theme of profiting from American Indians in one way or another is dealt with several times from different angles. Shoumatoff mentions how one tribal leader refuses to give out info on linguistics unless he is paid: "We don't give out that kind of information for nothing. We're wise to you guys."; to which Shoumatoff responds that he's a "great believer in the free exchange of information", a response that is a little puzzling in light of this book's $30 price tag. Perhaps it wouldn't seem inappropriate to Shoumatoff for the man to charge money for his knowledge if he gave himself the title of linguistic consultant, and had an office on the campus of a prestigious university. One stumbles into a no man's land between capitalism and spirituality and scholarly research. There is another chapter that deals with the ferocious competition among archeologists to find the earliest human settlement in the Americas. If that tribal rep were to have his way, all the old bones and potsherds being dug up would have to be paid for, which doesn't strike me as so unreasonable. On the other hand, some tribal reps would prohibit any digging at all, and all remains currently in museums would have to be returned to the ground. On still another hand, if the digging were to go on with payments made to indigenous peoples, how would it be decided which tribe would receive the money? What would really be interesting would be to pay the tribal rep for the info, then follow the money trail. Would he split it equally with the other members of his tribe or keep it for himself? Would he be taxed on the income if Shoumatoff were to deduct the figure from his own income as a business expense? Can the US government tax an Indian tribe? Would wholesaling relics and ruins be more profitable than bingo? Could that possibly be a way of protecting the land from profiteers who would destroy its beauty through the excessive mining and logging that is detailed elsewhere in the book? One wonders, finally, how this relic of 19th century segregation called the reservation, which comprises a huge percentage of the American Desert, has survived to the 21st.
Rating:
Summary: Biased, but perhaps helpful...
Review: I have to admit that what I write may be somewhat biased because I'm the author's oldest son, but I have some information which may be helpful to some readers who might otherwise be disillusioned regarding some of the facts and errors in the book, sloppyness of the editing, and other factors of the book which may contribute to an otherwise "sloppy" read. For one, the book is (hardcover version) exactly 533 pages long. And in each page are at least 3 astute facts or contain at least something interesting, usually odd, but at least ammusing to keep the reader going. In any case, the read actually does work, as seen from evidence from various critics and from many of you guys. Despite your pet peeves (looks like the theme of critics on this particular page is "people who know about the area who are annoyed"), it actually does read well and while one might get bored or be occationally mislead, it is fairly comprehensive, and most importantly ties together the various aspects of culture and history to portray what seems to be *reality* of life in the Southwest and what factors influence that. But otherwise, consider for one that he never really strays from who he is or ever pretend to be someone he isn't. I currently live in Vermont and out of fear (and because I often find myself doing exactly what he's doing, but in rural Vermont), I run Vermont plates. Even when I was 12 (the year we lived in New Mexico), I thought it particularly odd he had no quams about leaving his New York plates on his Chevy pickup, and despite the story he tells, he never goes out of his way to orient the read as if this is a history by a New Mexican for a New Mexican. Consider what the book does. If it was another book by another New Mexico historian about New Mexico, for one, it wouldn't have attracted nearly the attention it did, and secondly it would be considered "a history," and would probably be and would be considered a heck of a lot more boring than Legends of the Desert. In case, the book is designed to *introduce* the reader to the Southwest. Why would someone well versed in New Mexico go out of their way to read about what they already know? I suppose you guys are the exceptions. Remember that this book was on the cover of the New York Times book review, and at the time attracted a lot of attention (certainly a lot more than any of his other books), in terms of positive reviews and general publicity. Despite what may be facts that are wrong, annoyances, it is still *paints the picture* of a place where things are a little different, and certainly very interesting once you get your first glimpse. It paints good sides and it paints bad, but most importantly, it paints. Therefore, take it with a grain of salt and enjoy the read. That's what I did. You'll find it tremendously interesting, and get introduced to a whole new world.
Rating:
Summary: Indians 1, Palefaces 0
Review: I take this book as a hippy memoir of trips taken, interviews held, and amusing anecdotes jotted down.The author mixes in some historical research, but that is really not he point of the book and he should not be faulted for inaccuracies. It is a pleasant travelogue through the Amerian Southwest, biased yet still interesting. A map or two would have helpd a great deal, and photographs are a neglected must.
Rating:
Summary: A Little Suspect
Review: I've explored a little southwestern desert over the 19 years I've lived in the West and believed I was learning from the book and was certainly enjoying it. I discovered an error that tipped me off to do a little research here on what I was reading. As I learn of all the other errors, the book now seems a little suspect. I'm scratching my head wondering if I should continue. I think not, even though I was truly enjoying it. P.S. The author referred to the place where the Mormons, in search of a short route to the Pacific, chipped and dynamited their way through the redrock canyon wilderness near Escalante, Utah, approaching the Colorado River, to make room for their wagons and handcarts. The author referred to that place as "Hole in the Wall." It should be "Hole in the Rock." Hole in the Wall is a place in Johnson County, Wyoming where Butch, Sundance and assorted outlaws used to hide from the law (the members thereafter known as "The Hole in the Rock Gang").
Rating:
Summary: Tourist writing too fast...
Review: I've got to agree with several of the other reviews that this is a poor book about the southwest, he did seem to get facts wrong or what I have learned from over 25 years living here was wrong - the Anasasi are always refered to here as "The Acient Ones" never the "The Enemy Ancestors". I got the feeling that during his visit here people were just putting him on, he was falling for it and put it in this book. This book reminds me of "The Solace of Fierce Landscapes" by Belden Lane who was also not a desert resident, from St Lewis, but trying to write a meaningful book about the desert. You need to live in the deseret for a long, long time before it 'happens' to you, and for most people it never does. To think you are going to go on vacation and then write a meaningful book about the desert is completely missing the point. Come out and sit on a rock for ten years - then write.
An additional point to note is that a golf course is the negation of the desert.
Rating:
Summary: "Legends" is a proper title for this book
Review: If there has ever been a demonstration for the necessity of a good editor, this is it. "Legends" seems to be a loose aggregate of a huge pile of note cards without much shape or accuracy. Every page or two I find a mistake. These mistakes are often minor (like mis-copying the name of Baron v. Egloffstein from Walace Stegner's superior "The Hundreth Meridian"), but it certainly undermines everything else the author says. Aside from that the author is rather hypocritcal - he sneers at the racist Anglos in the Southwest, but has no problem refering to Chinese owners of dry cleaners as a mafia. He complains about the waste of water in the arid Southwest, but he makes sure to play a round of golf whenever he finds a green. I find the book rather irritating, and the only thing that keeps me going is the fact that the disjointed nature of the narrative makes it of no consequence if you read the book in daily five minute increments. If you want to read about the history of the Southwest, try Wallace Stegner's books, Anne Zwinger's "Deserts of the Southwest" or "Cadillac Desert", but don't waste your time or money on this.
|
