"The future of Anthropology is far too fragile to be left in the hands of the anthropologists, especially pros."
Dr. Heem, alleged faultless oracle of the 20th century
It must be noted for the record, and for anyone whose attention is attracted to the quotation, that I changed it a little bit. A thorough fact-checking will show that it is almost verbatim. Almost. And, where it is found deviating from the letter of that source, it is entirely uniform with its spirit. Which is difficult to know, from a purely scientific angle.
But Science and Anthropology are not always of one mind, for example, when the numbers for the human condition simply won't add up. While the previous statement is simultaneously oversimple and nonspecific, to be sure, it serves suitably enough in describing the state of the Immediate Locality witnessed from the observation-post that I've been feverishly occupying for three years, three months and 25 days (sic).
I'm not a lawyer, yet I feel confident that, in this particular case, I don't really need to retain one to grasp the principle of that archaic ruling: In a civilization of broken studies, fragility is victory, but this Pyrrhic success is no interlude for resting on one's laurels. To the contrary. Labors must be multiplied geometrically, trajectories plotted with greater precision, sacrifices made devoid of protestations.
The willful ways of a complete amateur, who works without compensation and hence presumes a right to carte blanche, a daring combination of free-lancing and hustling in search of The Firm.
© Summer 2016