Proxemics [and Comments and Replies]

Author(s): Edward T. Hall, Ray L. Birdwhistell, Bernhard Bock, Paul Bohannan, A. Richard
Diebold, Jr., Marshall Durbin, Munro S. Edmonson, J. L. Fischer, Dell Hymes, Solon T.
Kimball, Weston La Barre, Frank Lynch, S. J., J. E. McClellan, Donald S. Marshall, G. B.
Milner, Harvey B. Sarles, George L Trager, Andrew P. Vayda
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 9, No. 2/3 (Apr. - Jun., 1968), pp. 83-108
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological
Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2740724 .
Accessed: 04/03/2011 19:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org
 Proxemics1

byEdwardT. Hall

WESTERN spacein manyways, of thecorrectness

MAN has conceptualized of myowninterpretations ofobserv-
rangingfromBogardus'(1933, 1959) socialspace and ed behaviorin other cultures.In interpreting the
space to Lewin's(1948) actionsof people in othercultures,the only thing
Sorokin's(1943) sociocultural
topologies.Chapple and Coon (1942) and Hallowell about which I am reasonablycertainis my own
(1955) treateddistancetechnicallywhentheydescrib- fleeting responses. Workingin a detailedway on the
ed how it is measuredin different Jammer micro-cultural
cultures.2 level(Hall 1966: 96) and onlywhereit
(1960) has dealtwiththeconceptsof space (including was possibleto detectresponseson the,affective, as
theirhistoricalunderpinnings)in physics.Proxemics,3well as thebehavioral, levelhas motivated me to con-
thestudyof man'sperception and use of space,per- centrateon my own cultureas it has been revealed
tainsto noneof thesedirectly.Is is muchcloser,in- againstthecontrasting backdropof othercultures.In
stead,to thebehavioralcomplexof activitiesand their thissense,I am in agreement withLUvi-Strauss (1966b)
derivatives knownto the ethologistsas territoriality.whenhe speaksof theanthropology of thefutureas a
It deals primarily without-of-awarenessdistance-set-sciencein whichpeoplestudythemselves. Myapproach
ting,4and owesmuchto theworkof Sapir(1927) and has beento usemyself and othersas measuring devices
Whorf(1956). (or "controls,"if you like) at thosetimeswhenwe
Because of my communications bias, the sub- have been subjectedto contrasting culturalenviron-
jectsof proxemicresearchhave generallybeen mem- ments.This last is important, forone can be no more
bersof my own culture.Like Bateson(1948), I have
learnedto dependmoreon whatpeopledo thanwhat 1 The researchreportedon in thispaperwas supportedby the
theysay in responseto a directquestion,to pay close NationalInstitute
of MentalHealthand theWenner-Gren Founda-
attention to thatwhichcannotbe consciously manipu- tionforAnthropological Research.
lated,and to look for patternsratherthan content 2 Hallowell'sintroduction to his Chapter9 (CulturalFactorsin
(Hall 1966). However,exceptin a few exceptional Spatial Orienta:ion)is particularly
3 In thecourseof thedevelopment
relevantto spaceperception.
of proxemics,theworkwas
instances, I have neverbeenable to be reallycertain spokenof as "socialspaceas bio-communication," and "micro-space
in interpersonal encounters."these wereactuallyabbreviated tech-
nical descriptions in whichthe propermeaningsof the termsof
reference wereknownonlyto a fewspecialists. Further, thewide
EDWARDT. HALL is a Professor of Anthropology in theCollege spreadinterest in activities
connected withouterspaceprovidedan
of Artsand Sciencesand a Professor of OrganizationTheory incentive to distinguish betweenmy workand thatof the outer-
in the Schoolof Businessat Northwestern University.He is spacescientists. I decidedto inventa newtermthatwouldindicate,
also currently
a consultant to government, privatefoundations, in general,whatthefieldwas about.AmongthetermsI considered
and business.Previously he servedas Directorof the United werehumantopology, chaology, thestudyof emptyspace,oriology,
StatesStateDepartment's PointIV Trainingprogram. thestudyof boundaries, chorology, thestudyof organizedspace.I
Educatedat the University of Denver(A.B.) and Columbia finallychose "proxemics" as the mostsuitablefor thataudience
University(Ph.D.), Hall has taughtat theUniversityof Denver, mostlikelyto encounter thetopicin thenearfuture.
BenningtonCollege, HarvardBusinessSchool, and Illinois 4 The following quote(Hall 1963) speaksto thematter of levels
Institute
of Technology. He has done fieldworkin Micronesia. ofawareness: "Anyculture characteristically
producesa simultaneous
His mostrecentresearch dealswiththequestionof how space arrayof patterned behavioron severaldifferent-levels
of awareness.
is perceivedin the UnitedStatesand abroad.His publications It is thereforeimportant to specifywhichlevelsof awareness one is
includeThe Silent Language,The Hidden Dimension,and describing.
numerous articles
in professionaljournals. "Unlikemuchof thetraditional subjectmatterofanthropological
The presentarticle,solicitedby the Editorof CURRENT AN- observation,proxemic patterns,oncelearned,are maintained largely
THROPOLOGY,was submitted on 6 x 67, and was sentforCA* outof conscious awarenessand thushaveto be investigated without
treatmentto 40 scholars.The following respondedwithwritten resortto probingthe consciousmindsof one's subjects.Direct
comments: Ray Birdwhistell, BernhardBock,Paul Bohannan, questioning willyieldfewifanysignificant as it willwith
variables,
RichardDiebold,MarshallDurbin,MunroS. Edmondson, J. L. suchtopicsas kinshipand housetype.In proxemics one is dealing
Fischer,Dell Hymes,Solon T. Kimball,FrankLynch,Weston withphenomena akintotoneofvoice,orevenstress andpitchin the
La Barre,Donald Marshall,J. E. McClellan,G. B. Milner, Englishlanguage.Sincetheseare builtintothelanguage,theyare
HarveyB. Sarles,GeorgeL. Trager,and AndrewP. Vayda. hardforthespeaker toconsciouslymanipulate."
Theircomments are printedin fullaftertheauthor'stextand Also see Hall (1959: Chap. 4) fora morecompletestatement
arefollowed bya replyfromtheauthor. concerning levelsofawareness tochange.
relating

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 83

than vaguely aware of one's own culturein the absence thatis writtennowhere,knownby none,and under-
of face-to-faceencounterswith people of other cul- stood by all." 8 It is this elaborateand secretcode
tures.5 that becomesconfusedwith what is popularlycon-
I firstbecame aware of my own interestin man's ceivedof as phenomenological It has long
experience.
use of space when I was trainingAmericansforservice beenbelievedthatexperience is what menshareand
overseas and discovered that the way in which both thatit is possibleto bypasslanguageby referring back
time and space were handled constituteda form of to experience in orderto reachanotherhumanbeing.
communicationwhich was respondedto as if it were This implicit(and oftenexplicit) beliefconcerning
built into people and, therefore,universallyvalid. In man'srelationto experience is basedon theassumption
1963a, I wrote: thatwhentwohumanbeingsare subjectedto thesame
"experience,"virtuallythe same data is being fed
... Americans overseas were confrontedwith a variety of to the two nervous systemsand the two brains
difficultiesbecauseof culturaldifferences in the handling respond similarly.Proxemic researchcasts serious
ofspace.Peoplestood"too close"duringconversations, and doubtson thevalidityof thisassumption, particularly
whentheAmericans backedaway to a comfortable conver- whenthecultures are different. Peoplefromdifferent
sationaldistance,thiswas takento mean that Americans culturesinhabitdifferent sensoryworlds (see Hall
were cold, aloof, withdrawn,and distinterested in the
peopleof the country.6 U.S.A. housewivesmuttered about 1966: Chaps. 10, 11). They not onlystructure spaces
"waste-space"in housesin the Middle East. In England, differently, but experience it differently,
becausethe
Americans who wereusedto neighborliness werehurtwhen sensorium is differently "programmed."9 Thereis a
theydiscovered thattheirneighborswereno moreaccessible selectivescreening or filtering thatadmitssometypes
or friendlythan otherpeople,and in Latin America,ex- of data whiferejecting others.Sometimes thisis accom-
suburbanites, accustomedto unfencedyards, found that plishedby individuals"tuningout" one or moreof
the highwalls theremade themfeel "shutout." Even in thesensesor a portionof perception. Otherwise, it is
Germany, whereso manyof mycountrymen feltat home, accomplished by screening, whichis one of themany
radicallydifferent patternsin the use of space led to un- important functions performed by architecture.
expectedtensions.
If the spatial experienceis different by virtueof
different patterning of the sensesand selectiveatten-
It was quite obvious that these apparently incon- tionand inattention to specificaspectsof theenviron-
sequential differencesin spatial behavior resulted in ment,it would followwhat crowdsone people does
significantmisunderstandingand intensifiedculture not necessarily crowd another.Therefore, therecan
shock,oftento the point of illness,for some members be no universalindexof crowding, no knownway of
of the Americanoverseas colonies. Examinationof the measuring crowdingforall cultures. Instead,whatone
very strongand deep responsesto spatial cues on the mustask is, "Are the people involvedbeingstressed,
part of overseas Americans highlightedmany of the and,if so, to whatdegree,and whatsensesare involv-
patternsimplicitin the United States. These observa- ed?" To answerquestions suchas theserequires special-
tionsdirectedmy thinkingto Whorf.As I have stated istsfrommanydisciplines, includingpathology,bio-
elsewhere(1966): chemistry, experimental psychology,and kinesics.10
The workof Gibson(1950) on perception and of Kil-
... only to a handful of people have the implicationsof
Whorf'sthinking becomeapparent.Difficultto grasp,they
patrick and others (1961) in transactionalpsychology
becomesomewhatfrightening whengivencarefulthought. have provided useful leads.
They strikeat the root of the doctrineof "free will,"
because they indicatethat all men are captivesof the 8 By "all" one assumesthatSapirmeantthemembersof a given
languagetheyspeak.7 ethniccommunity.
9 The precisemethodscan onlybe surmised by whichtheyoung
aretaughtto selectivelyattendsomethingswhiledisregarding others
It is my thesisthat the principleslaid down by Whorf andtofavoronesensechannelwhilesuppressing another.It is reason-
and his followersin relation to language apply to all abletoassume,however, thatcultureprovidesa pattern,
amongother
culturallypatternedbehavior,but particularlyto those things,fora ratherelaborateand extraordinarily detailed,but less
contrived,Skinnerian(1953) reinforcement schedulein which
aspects of culture which are most often taken for individualreinforcements are of suchshortdurationthattheyare
granted and operate as Sapir (1927) so aptly put it notordinarily isolatedout of thecontextin whichtheyoccur.The
". - - in accordance with an elaborate and secret code workof Condon (1967) and othershas demonstrated the extra-
ordinary degreeto whichpeopleare capableof responding to each
otherand coordinating theirbehaviorduringconversations. Frame-
5 The problem of self-awarenesshas been a stumbling-block for by-frame examination of moviestakenat 24 and 48 framesper
psychologists -foryears.We really do not know by what means the secondand studyof simultaneous electroencephalograms reveals
brain interpretsthe data fed to it by the senses. Recentlytherehas organized,coherent,synchronous behaviorthat is not normally
been some progressin solving thisproblem.The solutionappears to observablewithout theaid of high-speedcameras.One can putforth
hinge on contrastsbuiltinto the receptorsratherthansimple stimula- thesuggestion,intheseterms, thatpositive
andnegative reinforcement
tiohileading to a specificresponse(McCulloch 1964). cananddoesoccursubliminally.
6 One can never be sure initiallyof the true significanceof this 10 The relationship of proxemics to kinesics(Birdwhistell 1952,
sort of behavior. One learns with time to pay attentionto casual Hayes 1964, and Condon 1967) has been treatedelsewhere(Hall
remarksengenderedby the original response.Instead of saying that 1963b). Basically,and in thesimplestpossibleterms, proxemics is
a particularAmerican was cool, aloof, or distant,an Arab subject notprimarily concerned withtheobservation and recording of the
remarked:"What's the matter?Does he thinkI smell bad?" In this detailsof gesturesand body movements. Proxemicsdeals with
instance,the referenceto olfactionprovided an importantclue to architecture,
furniture,and the use of space,whereaskinesics,at
Arab distance-setting mechanisms. present,is only indirectly concernedwith the setting.Proxemic
7 By stressingthe importanceof Whorf's observations,I do not notationis simplerthan that employedin kinesics.Proxemics
mean to implythatthereis no externalrealityto be discovered,nor seeks to determinethe how of distance-setting (a questionof
do I thinkthatWhorf believed this.The realitycan remainconstant, epistemology). It is important for the proxemicist to know as
but what differentorganisms perceive is determined largely by muchas possibleaboutthe physiology of the eye,and the many
"what theyintendto do about it," in the wordsof a colleague. otherwaysin whichmanperceives distance.

84 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 e-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

PIG.1. Photoby H. Hediger,illustrating individualdistancein

the blackheadedgull. Hediger (1955, p. 66) was the firstto
describethe variousdistances
systematically employedby animals
andintroduced
theconceptof individual 26 yearsago.
distance FIG. 2. Personaldistancein pelicans.[Photoby EdwardT. Hall.]

In 1953,Tragerand I postulateda theoryof culture

basedon a linguisticmodel." We maintained thatwith
themodelwe wereusing,it mustbe possibleultimately
to link major culturalsystems(of whichtherewere
several)to the physiologyof the organism;i.e., that
thereshouldbe not only a prelinguistic base (Trager
1949) but a preculturalbase as well. In 1959, I sug- FIG. 3. Pelicans on a rail. The maintenanceof uniformdistances
gestedthe term"infra-culture" between individuals of the species can be observed on the water
be used to designate (Fig. 2), on land, and while flyingin the air. [Photo by Edward
thosebehavioralmanifestations "thatprecededculture T. Hall.]
butlaterbecameelaboratedintoculture."It followed
fromthisthatit mightbe helpfulin theanalysisof a
primary culturalsystem,suchas proxemics, to examine Hediger'suniqueworkin zoologyand anitnalbe-
itsinfra-culturalbase. A look at thevariousmanifes- havioris particularly important to proxemics. He has
tationsof territoriality(and theseare many)should devotedhimself to thestudyof whatoccurswhenmen
helpprovidebotha foundationand a perspective to and animalsinteractin the wild,in zoos, and in cir-
be used in considering morecomplexhumanelabora- cusesas well as in experimental situations.Hedigerhas
tionsof space. demonstratedthe very point that anthropologists
Muchcan be learnedin thisregardfromtheetholo- would hope to make forman,namelythatif one is
gists.12It is difficultto considerman with other to interactrealistically withany organism, it is essen-
animals,yet,in thelightof whatis knownofethology, tial to gain a basic masteryof that organism'scom-
it maybe appropriate to considermanas an organism munications systems. Hedigeris deeplycommitted to
thathas elaboratedand specializedhis extensions13 the positionthat the most commonerrorin inter-
to thepointwheretheyare rapidlyreplacingnature. pretinganimal behavioris anthropomorphizing or
In otherwords,manhas createda newdimension, the interpreting the animals'communications as though
culturaldimension, in relationto whichhe maintains theywere human.His studiesof the domestication
a stateof dynamicequilibrium. This processis one in processnotonlyunderline thenecessity of thoroughly
whichboth man and his environment participatein understanding thesensorysymbolicworldof a species
moldingeach other.Man is now in the positionof (how it marksits territory, forexample,or thecom-
creatinghis own biotope. He is, therefore, in the ponentsthatgo to makeup itsbiotope),butalso stress
positionof determiningwhat kind of organismhe will theimportance of knowingthespecificway in which
be. Thisis a frighteningthoughtin view of how little thespecieshandlesdistancebeyondstrictly territorial
we knowaboutmanand his needs.It also meansthat considerations (Hediger1950,1955,1961). For exam-
in a verydeep sense,man is creatingdifferent types ple, thereduction or elimination of theflightreaction
of peoplein his slums,his mentalhospitals,his cities, is essentialforthesurvivalof an organism in captivity.
and his suburbs.What is more,the problemsman is In addition,it providesus withan operationaldefin-
facingin tryingto createone world are muchmore itionof domestication. Hedigerdistinguished between
complex than was formerlyassumed.Within the contactand non-contact species,14 and he was thefirst
United Stateswe have discoveredthat one group's to describein operationaltermspersonaland social
slumis another'ssensorilyenriched environment. (Fried distances(see Figures1, 2, 3). He has also demon-
and Gleicher1961,Gans 1960,Abrams1965).
14 McBridedoes not entirelyagree with Hediger'sbasic dis-
11 A versionof thisoriginalseriesof postulates
was publishedin tinction
and,instead,holdsthatthereare timeswhenanimalsmay
1959. be contactand othertimeswhen theymay not. A three-way
12 Margaret Mead (1961) has also suggested thatanthropologistsfriendlypolemicbymail betweenMcBride,Hediger,and me has
havemuchto gain fromthestudyof theworksof ethologists. resolvedmanyof McBride'sobjections.It now appearsthat,like
13 The term"extension" summarizes a processin whichevolution dominancein genetics,contact/non-contact
behavioris a matter
accelerates
whenit occursoutsidethebody(see Hall 1959, 1966). of degreeand situation.

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June

1968
 apparatus,and thearbitrary separation oftheorganism
N~~~~~ fromthatworldalterscontextand in so doingdistorts
meaning;18 and (b) thedividingline betweentheor-
ganism'sinternaland externalenvironment cannotbe
pinpointed precisely.19
The organism-biotope relation-
shipcan onlybe understood if it is seenas a delicately
balancedseriesofcybernetic mechanisms inwhichposi-
tiveand negativefeedbackexertsubtlebutcontinuous
L controloverlife.Thatis, theorganism and itsbiotope
' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ constitutea single,cohesivesystem(withina seriesof
largersystems).To consideronewithout reference tothe
otheris meaningless.
Two furtherethologicalstudiesdrawattention tothe
connection betweenterritoriality and populationcon-
trol.20Christian's(1960) classicstudyof the James
Island Sika deeradvancesthethesisthatpopulations
arecontrolledbyphysiological mechanisms thatrespond
FIG. 4. One of a series of photographstaken over a two year to density.In a summary made at a symposium on
periodto recordpersonaldistancesin public settings.This particular crowding,stress,and natural selection(Christian,
settingwas a streetcarloading platformof sufficientlength that Flyger,and Davis 1961),it was statedthat:
two cars would arrive and load simultaneously-a condition that
reduced the bunching so characteristic of situationsin which only
one car at a time is loading. The loading platformwas bounded on
one side by streetcartracksand the other by a streetdense with Mortality
evidently resulted
fromshockfollowing severe
traffic.This made it possible to observe spacing comparable to metabolic
disturbance,probably as a resultof prolonged
Hediger's gulls on a rail (see Fig. 1). [Photographsby Edward T. adrenocortical
hyperactivity,
judging fromthehistologica
Hall.] material.
Therewasno evidence ofinfection, or
starvation,
otherobviouscauseto explainthemassmortality.

Christian's
studyin onlyone of a numberof similar
stratedthat critical distance is so precise that it can studiesof populationcollapse21 due to stressfrom
be measuredin centimeters.15 sensory overload(crowding).22
Schaifer(1956) has written about both "critical
space." and "critical situations."'While he has stressed is not accessible to direct observation.This world is made up of
the danger of drawing analogies from non-human iformation communicatedto the creaturefromthe outside in the
forms,his descriptionsof social and group responses formof messagespicked up by its sense organs."
to crowdingand his formulationof the conceptsof the 18
Social scientiststrained in the North European traditionare
Ccritical-densities"and "crises" are not only highly familiar with the trap laid by a dichotomizingof language and
suggestivefor man but appear to involve processes culture.Some of the time we make our observationsin context,but
that embrace an extraordinarilybroad -spectrumof oftenwe do not. Most, if not all, of Berelson and Steiner's(1964)
"findings"separate the organism,including man, from the matrix
living substance. of life both conceptuallyand operationally.Their interpretation
of
Recent studiesof spacingamong animals reveal that Lewin's (1935) adopted versionof Zeigarnik's (1927) studyis seen
one of the primaryfunctionsof proper spacing is to in termsof drive ratherthan of social acts. It remainedfor Spitz
permitthe completionof what Tinbergen(1952, 1958) (1964) to place Zeigarnik's work in contextagain. Berelson and
terms "laction chains." Tinbergen has demonstrated Steiner's chapter on culture is particularlyfragmented.The work
of the transactionalpsychologistsis most conspicuous for its ab-
that the life of the sticklebackand other species is sence from their work. One is left with the impressionthat for
made up of predictablebehavioralsequencesaccord'ing many Americans one does not really "know" something except
to set paradigms.If a sequence is brokenor interrupt- when it is out of context.At the risk of stating the obvious, I
to underscorewhat appears to be a growingconsensusamong
ed, it is necessaryto startover again fromthe begin- wishethologistsand ecologists that the organism and its environment
ning.16Both animals and man, according to Spitz are so inextricablyintertwinedthat to consider either as separate
(1964), require, at critical stages *in life, specific is an artifactof our own particularway of looking at things.
amountsof space in order to act out the dialoguesthat 19 See "The Biochemistryof Crowding and Exocrinology",in
Hall (1966).
lead to the consummationof most of the important 20 Other studies that have contributedto the formationof my
acts in life. thinkingare: Allee (1958); Bonner (1963); Calhoun (1962a; b);
The findingsof ethologistsand animal psychologists Christian (1963); Christian and Davis (1964); Christian,Flyger,
suggestthat: (a) each organisminhabitsits own subjec- and Davis (1961); Deevey (1960); Eibl-Eibesfeldt(1961); Erring-
tive world,17 which is a functionof its perceptual ton (1956, 1957, 1961); Frake (1960); Gilliard (1960, 1963);
Goffman (1959); Hediger (1950, 1955); Hinde and Tinbergen
(1958); Howard (1920); Levi-Strauss (1966a); Lissman (1963);
15 For a description of these distances, see Hall (1966). Lorenz (1964); McBride (1964); McCulloch (1948); McCulloch
16 The territorialconcept is complex, representinga wide variety and Pitts (1947); Parks and Bruce (1961); Portmann (1959);
of behavior patterns. Carpenter (1958), for example, lists 32 Rosenblith (1961); Schafer (1956); Selye (1956); Snyder (1961);
In the context in which I
functionsassociatedwith territoriality. Sullivan (1947); Tinbergen (1952, 1958); and Wynne-Edwards
am using the termat present,what is importantis that thesensory (1962).
with.
are notbrokenor interfered
paradigms 21 Notable among these is the work of Paul Errington(1956,
17 Lissman (1963) has the following to say on this subject: 1957, 1961). His studiesof muskratsand theirbehavioralresponses
"Study of the ingenious adaptations displayed in the anatomy, to the stress from crowding are most revealing. He states that
physiology,and behaviorof animals leads to the familiarconclusion muskratsshare with men the propensityforgrowingsavage under
that each has evolved to suit life in its particularcorner of the stressfromcrowding (italics mine).
world. Each animal also inhabits a private subjective world that 22 See my 1966 summaryof Christian'swork.

ANTHROPOLOGY
86 CURRENT
 was takenin earlymorningon
the Rome Airport.Photograph
FIG. 5 IndividualdistancesbetweenItalianson a walkwayoverlooking
a warmsummerday. [Photoby EdwardT. Hall.]

Calhoun's experimentsand observationsare also havingan objective valueoftruth whichis hardlyever,and

noteworthy for theirbehavioraldata.23He allowed inanycasenotseriously, tobedoubted.
wild Norwaysrats,whichwere amply fed, to breed
freelyin a quarter-acre pen. Tiheirnumberstabilized In mystudyof proxemics, one of myobjectiveshas
at 150 and neverexceeded200 (Calhoun 1950). With beento examinea smallsliceof lifein theUnitedStates
a populationof 150, fighting becameso disruptiveto -the experienceof space-and to learnaboutsomeof
normalmaternalcare that only a few of the young the thingsAmericanstake for granted.My emphasi
survived.The ratsdid not distribute themselves evenly has not been on eitherthe manifestor even the latent
throughout the pen, but organizedinto a dozen colo- contentbutratheron thestructural details,theimplici
niesaveraging12 ratseach (apparentlythemaximum perceptualelements.
numberof ratsthatcan live harmoniously in a natural Most individuals,tryas theywill, can specifyfew
group). ifanyof theelements thatenterintoperception.24 They
The disordersof Calhoun'sovercrowdedratsbear a can onlydescribetheend product.Thus,thestudentof
strikingresemblanceto those of some contemporary proxemics is facedwiththeproblemof developingtech-
Americans wholivein denselypackedurbanconditions. niques to isolate and identifythe elementsof space
Althoughcomparativestudies of humans are rare, perception.What he aims to achieve is a sense-dat
Chombartde Lauwe (1959a, b) has gathereddaw on equivalentofthemorphophonemic structure oflanguage
Frenchworkers'familiesand has demonstrated a statis- or thechemist's periodictableof theelements. His data
ticalrelationship betweencrowdedlivingconditions and shouldbe verifiableand theelementscapable of being
physicaland social pathology.In the United Statesa combinedwithpredictableresults.Wheredoesone look
healthsurveyof Manhattan(Srole et al. 1962) showed for proceduralmodels when exploringa new field?
thatonly 18% of a representative samplewerefreeof Descriptivelinguistics, facedwithsimilarproblems, has
emotionaldisorders while23% wereseriouslydisturbed providedmethodsapplicabletoproxemics.
or incapacitated. Sincethedaysof theSanskritgrammarians, linguist
haverecognized thatlanguageis a systemwithstructur
and regularity. All writing systems are abstractedfrom
RESEARCH METHODS AND STRATEGIES the building blocks or sounds of thelanguagerepresent
ed. These are identifiableand finitein number.The
In theForewordto Jammer's book Conceptsof Space, way to isolatethemis to obtainspokentextsas rawdata
Einsteinhas summarizedmanyof the methodological and thento recordthedetailsof speechas preciselyas
problems inproxemics: possible,usinga notationsystem thatisbasedonidentifi
able physiological processes so thatanytrained.observ
Theeyesofthescientist aredirected uponthosephenomena can make the same transcriptions. In linguistics, the
whichareaccessible to observation, upontheirappreciation physiological structure points of the system have been
andconceptual formulation. In theattempt toachievea con- workedout.Thesestructure pointswerenotknownfor
ceptualformulation of the confusingly immense body of proxemicswhen I began my research.It was clear,
observational data,thescientist makesuseofa wholearsenal however,thatintheperception ofspace,something miore
ofconcepts whichhe imbibed practically withhismother's thanthevisualsystemwas involved.The questionsthen
milk;andseldom ifeverisheawareoftheeternally problem- became:What othersystems? and, How do we know
aticcharacter ofhisconcepts. He usesthisconceptual mater- thattheyhavebeencorrectly indentified?
ial, or, speakingmoreexactly,theseconceptualtoolsof Duringtheearlystagesof myresearch, I useda wide
thought, assomething obviously, immutably given;somethingrangeof methodsand techniquesfor identifying the
elementsof space perception-notjust becauseprox-
23 It is impossible
to do justiceto Calhounin anysummary. The emics appeared to involve many different types of
full implicationof this thinkingis comprehendedonly when
virtuallyeverythinghe has writtenhas been mastered.To under-
standproperlyhis experiments conductedunderlaboratory condi- 24 Subjects included English, French,German, Swiss, Dutch,
tions,forexample,one mustbe conversant withhis earlierstudies Spanish,Arab,Armenian,GreekSouthAsian,Indian,Japanese,and
conductedin the open in a naturalsetting. West Africans.
variables,but on the theorythat what I learnedin Rican, and Spanish-Americansubjects,our goal was to
one way could be used to checkwhat I learnedin discoverthespecificways in whichtheseethnicgroups
otherways. Some of the researchtechniques,briefly code and organize theirsensesin face-to-faceencoun-
describedbelow,are: observation,experiment,inter- ters. .(My experience in interculturalrelations had
views (structuredand unstructured),
analysisof the taught me that differencesin the proxemicbehavior
Englishlexicon,and the studyof space as it is re- lead to what Goffman[1961] calls "alienation in en-
createdin literature
and in art. counters.") In the beginning,one of my assistants(a
Germanphotographer)photographedlowerclass Ame-
rican Negro subjectsinteractingwitheach other.Later
OBSERVATION
thesesubjectswere shownslidesand 8 x 10 inch prints
of themselvesand were asked what was happeningin
By observing peopleovera longperiodof timeas they the photographs.They were rarely able to tell us.
useand reactto space,onecan beginto discerndefinite However when one of the Negro subjects was given
patterns of proxemics behavior.Whilephotography is the controlof a motorizeddrive camera and told to
onlya supplement to otherformsof observation-an push the buttonwheneverhe saw somethinghappen-
extension of the visualmemory, as it were-it is an ing, he took frameafterframeof what I, as a white,
absolutelyindispensableaid in recordingproxemic middle class American,consideredidentical pictures.
behavior(see Figures4 and 5, pp. 86-87). It freezes Interviews with the Negro photographerand the
actionsand allows the investigator to examinese- subjects demonstratedthat they were acting out and
quencesover and over again. The difficulty is to recordinga highly structureddialogue in which the
photograph peoplewithoutintruding or alteringtheir cues were more subtlethan, and quite differentfrom,
behavior.Practice in using a very small camera those used by the white,middle class population. It
(Minox), which I carrywith me at all times,has would appear that in thisparticularlower class Negro
taughtme how to photographunobtrusively, and group, a great deal of informationis communicated
this has made it possibleto use largercamerasas by very small movementsof the hands and fingers.
well.25 Several thousandphotographs have thusfar These movementswere almost imperceptibleto my
been takenof people interacting undernaturalcon- studentsand me. 26
ditionsin the UnitedStates,France,England,Italy, In addition to directobservationand photographs,
Greece,and Switzerland.These photographshave another sourceof data is theunself-consciouscomment
provideddata againstwhichvisualobservations can people make as a resultof some breach of spatial eti-
be checked. quette.Such commentsoftenhelp identifythestructure
Thecameraandthephotographs itproduces areextra- points in the proxemicsystemunder study. Examples
ordinarily subtleand complextools(see Collier1967, thatoccurfrequently are statementslike these:
Byers1966,Worth1966). For proxemics, thecamera
hasservedas a recordand reminder system and a train- I wish he would stop breathingdown my neck. I can't
ing aid forstudents.It has also been veryusefulin standthat!
investigatinghowsubjects structure theirparticularper- Have you noticedhow she is always touchingyou. She
ceptualworlds.One of myassistants, a German,illus- Hecan'tseemto keepherhandsto herself.
was so closehisfacewas all distorted.
tratedthispointwhenasked to take an "intimate"
photograph followedby a, "public"photograph of a
femalesubject.I hadexpecteddistortion in theintimate Physical contact betweenpeople, breathingon people
shotand greatdetailin thepublicshot.Not at all. The or directingone's breathaway frompeople, directeye
intimateportraitwas crispand clear and the public contact or avertingone's gaze, placing one's face so
shotdeliberately out of focus". . . becauseyou aren't close to anotherthat visual accommodationis not pos-
reallysupposedto lookat peoplein public"(or photo- sible,are all examplesof thekindof proxemicbehavior
graphthem,either). thatmay be perfectlycorrectin one cultureand absol-
In ourrecentinvestigations of proxemic behaviorof utely taboo in another.
variousethnicgroupsin theUnitedStates,mystudents
andI havediscovered thatitisessential tousea member
of thegroupwe arestudying as thephotographer. Not EXPERIMENTAL ABSTRACTSITUATIONS
only does the photographer constantly interactwith
hissubjects(Byers1966),butwhathe selectsto photo- It is possibleto learn a good deal about how members
graphrepresents culture-bound choice.Photographer of a given culturestructurespace at various levels of
subjectshaveprovidedvaluableinsights on a number of abstractionby settingup simplesituationsin whichthey
pointsat whichthegroupsinvolvedwereat odds.They manipulateobjects.27 I used coinsand pencilsand asked
also have notedseriousomissionsfromphotographic my subjectsto arrangethemso that theywere "close"
textstakenby others(not of theirown group).For and "far apart" and "side by side" and "next to each
example,in photographing lowerclassNegro,Puerto
26 The research referredto is currentlyunder way and will
25 For the past threeyears,a motorizeddrive, 250-exposurebulk appear in a handbook of procedures and methods in proxemic
film 35 mm Nikon has been used. The 35 mm negativeenlarges research.
well and provides excellent detail at low cost, and the camera is 27 Little (1965, 1967) has established that the correlationbe-
somewhat less bulky than a high-quality16 mm movie camera. tweenthe way a subjectperceivestwo otherpeople, two silhouettes,
The half-frame35 mm camera has also proved to be a very con- two dolls, or two cylindersof wood is such that for all practical
venient,compact instrument.So far,the 8 mm and super-8 movie purposes they are interchangeable.One must observe, however,
cameras have not provided either the quality or the slow speeds that in all these contexts,the subject is judging spatial relations
essentialfor this work. as an outsiderand not as a participant.

88 CURRENT AN rHROPOLOGY
 other"and thento tell me whethertwo objectswere H1all: PROXEMICS
"together"or not. Arab subjectswereunableor un-
willingto makea judgments as to whethertwoobjects One sectionof ourquestionnaire dealtwithlistening
wereclosetogether or notif thesurroundtngarea was behavior28 and was designedto elicitinformation on
In otherwords,Arabssaw theobjectsin
notspecified. wheresubjectslookedat the personbeingaddressed
Americans
a context; saw theobjectsonlyin relationto forfeedback. Thisprovedtobe oneofthemostproduc-
eachother. tivesectionsof ourquestionnaire.Whatemerged from
interviewswithforeign was nota directanswer
subjects
tothequestionsbuta seriesofcomplaintsthatAmericans
neverlistenor complaints aboutwhatAmericans com-
STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS municatebythewayinwhichtheylisten.Arabssaidwe
areashamedall thetime.Whatmadethemthinkso?The
My wifeand I interviewed bothAmerican and foreign factthatwe withholdour breathand directit away
subjectsin depth,following a detailedinterview sche- fromtheotherperson.Latin Americansubjectscom-
dule.Theshortest interviews tooksixhours;thelongest plainedthatAmericans neverlistenedor werealways
lastedsixmonths andwasstillproducing datawhenthat breakingoff,a conclusiontheydrew fromthe fact
phaseoftheworkwasterminated. In thecourseofthese thatoureyeswander.The information thatwe sought
studies,itbecameapparentthatalthough theanswers of by thisline of inquiryconcernedthe type of per-
different subjectstoanyparticular question might vary, ceptualinvolvement of the two subjects.
theinterview scheduleas a wholecouldteachus much
abouthowthesubjects structured andexperienced space.
Conclusions couldbe drawnfromthewayin whichthe
ANALYSIS OF THE LEXICON
questionswereansweredand fromthedifficulties en-
countered inunderstanding particular questions.
The protocolfortheinterviews beganwitha general I have longmaintained (Hall and Trager1953,Hall
questionconcerning thehomeand household, and the 1959) thatculture is basicallya communicative process.
activitiesand namedareascontainedin thehouse.The This process occurs-simultaneously on many levels, some
homewas chosenas a starting pointnotonlybecause ofthemmoreexplicitthanothers. Languageisoneofthe
everyonehas one, but also becauseit had been our explicitlevels.Boas (1911) was thefirstanthropologist
cxperience thatsubjectscan usuallytalkaboutthecon- to emphasizethe relationship betweenlanguageand
cretefeatures of thehomeevenwhentheyfindit dif- culture.He made his pointin the simplest, mostobvious
ficultor inappropriate to talkaboutothertopics.Once way by analyzing lexicons of languages. Whorf (1956)
thehomepicture hadbeenrecorded alongwithdrawings wentbeyondBoas and suggested thatlanguage lays
and diagrams, thesamematerialwas coveredin a dif- a prominent rolein moldingtheperceptual worldof a
suchtopicsas privacy,bound- culture.He states,
ferent waybyexploring
aries,the rightsof propinquity, and theplace of the
particular homeinitssocialandgeographic Fur- We dissectnaturealonglineslaid downby our natural
setting.
niturearrangements inhomeandofficeprovidedadded languages. The categories and typesthatwe isolatefrom
dataonsocialrelationships, andso didlinguistic features theworldofphenomena we do notfindthere....
suchas wordsorconcepts thatweredifficult totranslate.
Altogether, some90 topicswerecovered.
One ofthemostvaluablefeatures ofourprotocol was *Whorfobservedthatin Hopi, timeand space are
thatit was sufficiently culture-bound to causeforeign inextricably boundup in eachother;to alterone is to
subjectsto raisequestionsthatrevealednot only the change theother. He says,
structures oftheirownproxemic systems butthetaken-
for-granted aspectsof our systemas well. ""Where do TheHopi thought worldhasno imaginary space.... In
yougo tobe alone?"-a normalquestionforAmericans other words, theHopicannot as speakers ofIndo-European
-puzzled andsometimes angered Arabs.Somerepresen- languages do, 'imagine" sucha placeas Heavenor Hell.
tativeArab repliesare, "Who wantsto be alone?" Furthermore "hollow"spaceslikeroom,chamber, hallare
"Wheredo you go to be crazy?""Paradisewithout notreallynamedobjects butarerather located....
peopleis Hell." Trespassing is thought of in theUnited
Statesas a universally recognizable violationof the
mores,yetour interviews failedto turnup anything Sapir'sand Whorf'sinfluence, extendedfarbeyond
evenapproaching thisconceptamongurbanArabs.The the confinesof descriptive linguistics, caused me to
actual structureof the interviewproved to be a reviewthelexiconofthepocketOxfordDictionary and
valuableresearchinstrument. The pointis bothsubtle to extractfrom it all theterms having spatial connota-
and important. By following a standardprotocol, then, tions such as: "over,""under,""away from,""to-
we wereconducting researchsimultaneously on two gether,""nextto," "beside,""adjacent,""congruent,"
different levels: level A was the manifestcontent, "level,""upright."Altogether, some20% of thisdic-
Answersto Questions;and level B (the more im-
portantand basic)was thecontrast in structureof two 28 It long has been taken for granted that the signal, sign, or
culturalsystems, one beingusedin contextto elicitthe message is what the social scientistconcentrateson when doing
other. The most valuable sessions turned out to be communicationsresearch. I observed some years ago that much
of the slippage in interculturalcommunicationoccurs because the
those in which foreignsubjects took issue with our speakercannot tell whetherthe person he is addressingis listening
spatial catagories. or not (Hall 1964b).

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 89

 5,000 lexical items,were staticthescenewhichis generally
tionary,or approximately in an in-
perceived
recorded.29 stant.
Theprincipal inusingartas cultural
difficulty data
is to distinguish
between theartist's
technique(which
INTERPRETATION OF ART alonerevealsthebuilding blocksof hiscreation)and
hissubject matter,whichmaybe designed to be per-
ParallelingWhorf'sthinking aboutlanguage, thetrans- suasiveand is oftencontroversial
32 because tastesin
actionalpsychologistshave demonstrated thatpercep- artdiffer. Despitesuchcomplexities,
thedataaresuf-
tionis notpassivebutis learnedand in facthighlypat- ficientlyrichtowarrantanyeffortthatis required.
terned.It is a truetransaction in whichtheworldand
theperceiver bothparticipate.A painting or printmust
therefore conform to theWeltanschauung oftheculture ANALYSIS OF LITERATURE
to whichit is directed and to theperceptual patterns of
theartistat thetimehe is creating. Artistsknowthat Anexamination ofthewriter's senseimpressions reveals
perception infact,theytakeitforgrant- muchabouthisperceptual
isa transaction; world.If a writer refers to
ed. visiontobuildhisimages itispossible toexamine these
Theartistis botha sensitive observeranda communi- images to determine whatkindof visionhe uses.Is it
cator.How well he succeedsdependsin part on the foveal, macular, orperipheral vision? Which ofGibson's
degreetowhichhehasbeenabletoainalyze andorganize numerous waysofseeingperspective doeshe employ?
perceptual data in waysthatare meaningful to hisau- Whatistheroleofolfaction andtouch?
dience.The mannerin whichsense impressions are Writers expresswhatreadersalreadyknowand
employed bytheartistrevealsdataaboutboththeartist wouldhaveexpressed iftheyhadpossessed therequisite
andhisaudience. analyticcapability,training andskills.Whenthewriter
Gideon(1962.),Dorner(1958), and Grosser(1951) succeeds, there isa closeregisterbetween hisdescriptions
have contributed to thespecificunderstanding of the andhisreader's ownsensory pattern, sincewriters evoke
way Europeanman has developedhis perceptualor- spatialimages inthereader. Thequestion I askedmy-
ganizationthroughthe ages.30For example,Grosser selfwas:"Whatcluesdoesthewriter provide thereader
comments thattheportraitis distinguished fromany thatenablehimtoconstruct a spatialimage?" It seemed
otherkind of paintingby a psychological nearness tomethatananalysis ofpassages thatarespatially evoc-
which".. . dependsdirectly on theactualinterval-the ativewouldberevealing. I askedsubjects tomarksuch
distance infeetandinchesbetween themodelandpaint- passages in a sampleofovera hundred representative
er... ." He setsthisdistanceat fourto eightfeetand novels. Thefirst texts usedwerethosewhichcontained
notesthatit createsthe characteristic "quality"of a spatialimages thatsubjects vividlyrecalled frompast
portrait, "thepeculiarsortof communication, almosta reading. Thisgroup ofpassages, elicitedfrom those who
conversation, thatthepersonwho looksat thepicture had spontaneously commented on them,ultimately
is abletoholdwiththepersonpaintedthere."Grosser's proved tobeofthemostvalue.
discussion ofthedifficultiesof ores ortening andofthe As inpainting, therepresentation ofspaceinlitera-
distortions thatoccurwhenthepainterorperceiver gets turechanges overtime,and appearsto reflect rather
toocloseto hissubjectcloselyparallelsmysubjects'de- accurately growing awareness ofthenature as wellas
scriptions of theirperception of otherswhentheyare theproxemic patterns of theculture. McLuhan (1963)
"tooclose." notes,forexample, thatthefirstreference to three-
The distinction madeby Gibson(1950) betweenthe dimensional visualperspective in literature occursin
visualfield(theimagecaston theretina)and thevisual KingLear,whenEdgarseeksto persuade theblinded
world(thestableipmage createdin themind)is essential Dukeof Gloucester thattheyindeedstandatopthe
to thecomprehension of thedifferencesin theworkof cliffsof Dover. Thoreau'sWalden is repletewith
two artistslike Hobbemaand Rembrandt. Hobbema spatialimages.Referring to his smallcabinand its
depictedthevisualworldperceivedin thesameway a influence on hisconversation, hewrites:
sceneoutsidea windowis perceived, as a summary of
hundreds, ifnotthousands, ofvisualfields.Rembrandt, ... oursentences wanted roomto unfold andform their
in contrast, paintedvisual fields.31
In effect, he made columns intheinterval. Individuals,likenations,musthave
suitable
broadandnatural boundaries,even a neutral
29 It goes withoutsayingthatunlessthe anthropologist is thor- groundbetween them... If wearemerely and
loquacious
oughlyconversant withthelanguageas it relatesto therestof the loudtalkers,thenwe canafford to standverynearto-
culture,the use of the lexiconas an analytictool is not possible. gether,
cheekto jowl,and feeleachother's butif
breath;
In thisregard,I have receivedinvaluableaid frommy colleague wespeakreservedlyandthoughtfully
wewanttobefarther
MoukhtarAni, who has devotedyearsto the preparation of an apart,
thatall animalheatandmoisturemayhavea chance
Arab-English dictionary.Ani's immersion in the lexiconsof the
twolanguageshas madeit possibleforhimto deal explicitly with
toevaporate(italics
mine).
contraststhatwouldnot otherwise be so obvious.
30 Western
identified
artis analyzable
according to theperspective
by Gibson (1950). Linearperspective
catagories MarkTwainwasfascinated withspatialimageryand
is onlyone of a itsdistortion.
He setoutto createimpossible
spatial
greatmanydifferent waysin whichobjectsare seenin depth.
31 Like all great artists,Rembrandtpaintedin depth,com-
municating on manydifferent levels.Ip someof his pictures, there 32 It is importantto emphasizethattheprocedures used in this
are twoor morevisualfields,so thattheeye jumpsfromone to seriesof studieswere not concernedwith that level of analysis
the other.He undoubtedly was ahead of his time,and he cer- that deals with art stylesor subjectmatteror contentin the
tainlyviolatedthe artmores.His recording of theinstantof per- conventional sense. Both stylistic
and contentanalysesrepresent
ceptionappearsto be extraordinarilyaccurate(forthoseof us who valid pointsof entryinto an analysisof art,but theyare more
leamedto see in the Europeantradition). It is onlyrecently that suitableto intrasystemic
analysisthanto thecomparisonof two or
popularculturehas begunto catchup withhim. moredifferent systems.
90 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
paradoxesinwhichthereader"sees"intimate detailsat Hall: PROXEMICS
incredible distances, or experiences spacesso vast that
themindbogglesat comprehending them.MostofMark THE RELATIONSHIP OFTHESPOKENLANGUAGE
Twain's distancesare visual and auditory.Kafka, in TO PROXEMICS
The Trial,emphasizes thebodyand theroleof kines-
theticdistanceperception. The vitalityofSt. Exupery's The contentof conversation is linkedto distanceand
imagesis inhisuseofkinesthetic, tactile,olfactory,and situation as wellas totherelationship oftheparticipants,
auditory perceptions. theiremotions, and theiractivity.Joos(1962) relates
linguistic analysisto distanceand situation in a manner
applicableto a proxemicframeof reference. His five
styles-intimate,casual, consultative,formal, and
frozen-canbe equatedroughly withtheintimate, per-
sonal,social-consultative, and publiczonesof United
CONCEPTS AND MEASURES Statesproxemic patterns. The factthatJoostreatslang-
uageas a transaction(introducing feedback)ratherthan
THREE CATEGORIES OF SPACE as a one-wayprocessmakeshisconceptual modelespec-
iallyapplicableto proxemics. His workis also relevant
in that it introducesthe situationaldialect (Hall
It has provedhelpfulin proxemicresearchto be able 1960b).34
to referto thedegreeto whichculturestreat.proxemic Hockett(1958) has definedcommunication as any
features as fixed,semi-fixed, or dynamic(Hall 1963a, eventthattriggers anotherorganism.(This definition
1966).,In general,walls and territorial boundariesare wouldincludetheenvironment, althoughit is notclear
treatedas fixedfeatures. However,territory maybe a thatHockettintendedthis.)Originally, he listedseven
seasonalaffair,as it is withthemigrating Bedouinof designfeatures forlanguage:
Syria,and therefore, territoryis sometimes as
classified
semi-fixed or dynamic.Furniture can be eitherfixedor
semi-fixed. Interpersonal distanceis usually treated 1) duality (unitsor cenemes thatbuildup)
informally 33and is dynamic formostpeoplesofNorth 2) interchangeability ("A" can play "B's" part,and
Europeanorigin.These distinctions are important in vice-versa)
intercultural encounters. If one persontreatsas move- 3) displacement (intimeorspace)
able thatwhichis considered fixedby someoneelse,it 4) specialization (the attachment of specific meanings
causesrealanxiety.Forexample,a Germansubject(an to specific things)
immigrant to theUnitedStates),who treatedfurniture 5) arbitrariness (there is nonecessary connection between
as fixed,had boltedto the floorthe chairon which theeventandthesymbol)
visitorssatinhisoffice.Thiscausedgreatconsternation 6) productivity (novelforms canbe created)
amongAmericanvisitors.One of myChinesesubjects
informed methatinChinaa visitorwouldnotdreamof 7) cultural transmission (as contrasted with genetic
adjustingthe furniture to conformto his unwritten transmission)
definition of an interaction distanceunlessspecifically
instructed todo so byhishost.American students inmy Later,Hockett(1960) expandedthe list to 13 in an
classes,whocovera widespectrum ofethnic, class,and effort tosharpen orclarify hisdefinition oflanguage.In
regionalcultureswithinthe UnitedStates,have been theprocesshe clearedup someproblems whilecreating
evenlydividedbetweenthosewho adjustthefurniture others.Hockett'sconceptof thedesignfeatures repre-
to conform to an informal normand thosewhodo not. sentsa breakthrough inourunderstanding ofcommuni-
cation.As a culturally elaboratedformof communica-
tion,proxemics satisfiesall of Hockett'ssevenoriginal
SOCIOPETAL AND SOCIOFUGAL SPACE designfeatures,even productivity (the architector
designer striving to createnew forms).In general,the
Anothertypeof observation to be madeby proxemic evolutionary studiesoflanguageas outlinedbyHockett
fieldworkers is whether thespaceis organizedso thatit andtheinfra-cultural basisforproxemics seemtoparal-
is conduciveto communication betweenpeople(socio- lel each other. There are some points of departure. Dis-
petal) or whether it is organizedto producesolitarity placement in time and space of an incipient but recog-
(sociofugal)(Osmond1957). Whatis sociofugal to one nizableformoccurswithterritorial marking at thelevel
cultureor subculture maybe sociopetalto another.An
Arab colleaguehas noted,forinstance, thathis small, 34 The term"situationaldialect"refersto the different forms
paneled recreationroom was "sehr-gemiittlich" or of languagethat are used in and are characteristic of specific
"cozy" to Germanfriendsbut had just the opposite situations,suchas officialese, the languageof themarketplace, and
effectonArabs,whofounditoppressive. the specializeddialectsof different and
professional,
occupational,
dialect marks the
subclassgroups.Masteryof the situational
individualas a memberof thegroup.The termsituational dialect
was originally suggested to me by EdmundS. Glennin a conver-
33 The terminformal, as used here,refersto one of threelevels sationin 1960. To my knowledgeno adequateinventory of the
of culture.The othertwo levels are formaland technical.The dialectsof anylanguageexists.Suchan inventory
situational would
formallevel of cultureis thatwhichis integrated intothe entire providean easymeasureof relativesocial complexity of a given
culture;everyone knowsit and takesit forgranted.The informal culture.Leach (1966) refersto the different "brands"of English
level is made up of thoseimpreciseattitudes thatare situational; embodying "social categories"in such a way as to indicatethat
the technicallevel is the fullyexplicatedand analyzedactivity he is referring to situationaldialects.Lantis'(1960) articlealso
(see Hall 1959). pertainsto thesituational dialect.

1968
Vol. 9. No. 2-3. April-June 91
 U)
z
0 "j
Oa

oi
a

w
z
W-[
W.0 W.
*6,;z

W
b W. Si zu
CM W z
1--ui -1
a Zzw
a: 9 W ik P -cu WJ
(\j tn
A 0 a
IL C
.1
W
a
z
j
IL
0).g2z j o
cr 0 0
39 z 39 10
1-- W W -1
tli W
10 iw W ui ig
IL 0 0 P:
"a W z U.
a z W. W 64
W 46 o W Z
ty 0: > W 0
'W S "' -, l. 0

F7= (J) go W
x (aJWOtA W -5 a *0
U)U)
Q

OD z be
Z
c(a 5 IL 0: A
8z
;t0
"D

.9j
4) 4)

W CWI
IL W ci
W ZJ
W LL. ILIIZO
0: IL z
U. IL
0
US "Lc,
g:
go:z
W
U)

Z
>z 15 W 4i
0
J
z a zW
Wla R C3
C) LL
o
'o WZ > xi 0
5 -0
> J .4

c(5 ctiz a

WZ
qj 4, a) W

W
N
W 79
W Z

F- CM

WA zw
b Ly

z
0
W > IOL

5I
W.J
a

L)
wsl 0
id,tj a
ILa U)
5 - ,
D;wv r
W
Z
(a
W

W
OD b I ; ;
g

Am
W C3
LL,
3 3 3
5 1
z
.W.
zw rz 0
0:
W a. IC

U) U)
U) cti XW
A
4)

0
J

W W
x (D W U) W
-J
C) c) W W we
W r
LO
z W=
d w'
W
.
W
W
2 J
zW
0

2:
0 Hwa ig a
cl 0
W
W
co :a us -C Le
z
W
=V

W
0

a
Le
'z
z
W
aW 6 0 L'
W 0
>
a:
to
0
0 4 -J
W
it
z ir n
to C V
W
Lt 0
to 2: I
1-9 Oj..v
SSV CZ

Co ON
X 0 0 q)
z
39 4 a W

xv
iz:. E U)
U)
:'J o uw) ti'l a
ty
W
LE
W IL
IL J)
-J Co
W a
11Z g I tot 4L IL
-J W
C\J 0 U) igs
= = 15

I-zf
U) 01 z
IL IC
a.
W C4
9 tI
.J z0 U)
U) aUZI
10-C SUt m
40121.- IC U)
CL Zi t 0 z
I z LI) ,Ws
"La
LI)
W C3

ug
z 1 W
C3
-j
0 z
LL

z I z
W
2 z W >
.14z z oz W ZW
Z W
cr Ct
F- t; 0., ,4
0
p
C3
A g W5 zz
.4
-J
>
.4
-J LL. cr
6-4 m 8 o m cwr 0 cr
in 7! - - M W 4 -4 W
 (f) 0 0

U CM 9~~~~

00

..a d

tLU (0JS T (A

U 01 f

0~~~"
u o
ob1 ~ aolMi ~ i-
>:?
X

g
/,

kg
LLL
-J I - Iil ?'a 61/ 4/

_ . ~~~~~ ~
~~~~~~~~z 'WI<

2a
<?51~~~~~~~~~ z /
;r I 118 *4 Xt, 9
5 ,Lfl S
t
~~~~~~~~~~3
-J
/

O Lii
LL- 0~~~~~~~c
LLXW
gsAw
:0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L
3gu0Egz i,ZXZ
_ wl

^ _ UZ
F i..,,-

LLXWI161~~LLI
q-1X1B1 1 la//
_ ",. . a,=. .s. .,,, z

kz L YloI?1?1
u71 1- 1
X a 91XlXl
181t1o Z/ w ' _ _ "
CEm 18 181t1
z 1X1z1g/ - 10

I..,; - SIItI
Z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Z
A.

z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Vol.t No. 2-321S

9vI Api-Jn
. 196 19
LLJ8
of mammals.When ungulatesare frightened by a to screenout enoughsound when he was working
panthertheyreleasean olfactory signfromthegland in his study.As a contrastin sensoryneeds,Fried
in theirhoofsthatwarnsothersof theirkindtraveling and Gleicher(1961) and Fried (1963) found that
the same traillaterthatthereis dangerin the bush. West End Bostoniansof Italian descent required
By presenting us with a well-laid-outschemethat greatauditoryinvolvement, and it is my interpreta-
comparescommunication systemsacross speciesand tionthatpartof theirshockat beingrelocatedaway
generalines,Hockettnot only has provideda series fromtheBostonWestSide to moremodernbuildings
of specificpointsheld up to the mirrorof life but was due to an unfamiliarand uncongenialsensory
also has relatedthemin a particularway. His points mix.Theyfeltshutofffrompeople.Americanmiddle
shouldbe takennot as absolutesbut as positionson classsubjectsworkingin LatinAmericamissvisual in-
a continuum. As an absolute,forinstance,totalfeed- volvement withtheirneighbors and feelshutoutbythe
back does not exist,becausethe speakeronly hears adobe walls thatmakeeveryLatin-American homea
and is aware of part of what he is saying.Duality privateaffair.Frenchmen, accustomed toa wideassort-
of patterning,the"smallarrangements of a relatively mentof pungentodorsas theymovealongcitystreets,
verysmallstockof distinguishable soundswhichare maysuffer a formofsensory deprivation in theAmeri-
in themselves wholly meaningless," would, by the canurbansetting withitsuniform acridsmell.
substitution of a single word ("information"for Elsewhere (1963b),I havedescribed a notationsystem
of all lifebegin- based on eightdifferent
"sounds"),proveto be a characteristic dimensions or scales forthe
ningwithRNA andDNA andendingwithcommunica- senses(1) postural-sex;(2) sociofugal-sociopetal; (3)
tiveforms thatarepresentbuthaveyettobe technically kinesthetic; (4) touch; (5) retinal;(6) thermal;(7)
analysed.It iswithlanguage,then,thatwe complete the olfactory;(8) voice loudness.This systemenablesthe
circle,beginning and endingwithspeciesotherthan fieldworker tofocushisattentionon specificbehavioral
man. segmentsthatwillultimately enablehimto distinguish
betweenthebehaviorofonegroupand thatofanother.

No KNOWN UNIVERSAL DISTANCE-SETTING MECHANISM ... inspiteoftheir apparent complexity,cultural systems

are so organized thattheircontextcan be learnedand
Observations, interviews, analysisofartand literature,controlled by all normalmembers of the group... The
all pointtothefactthatthereisnofixeddistance-sensinganthropologist knowsthatwhathe is lookingfor are
mechanism (ormechanisms) inmanthatis universal for patterned distinctions
thattranscend individual differences
all cultures.One of the complexities of proxemicre- and arecloselyintegrated intothesocialmatrix in which
searchis thefactthatnotonlyarepeopleunableto des- theyoccur.
cribehowtheysetdistances, buteachethnicgroupsets
distancesin itsownway. In fact,theirmeasuring rods Table 1 (see p. 92) showstherelationship of varying
are different. Someof theperceiveddistancesexpand distancesas experiencedby Americansof North
and shrinkaccordingto circumstances. Interpersonal Europeanheritagein relationto the different senses.
distanceis a constellationofsensory inputsthatis coded
ina particular way.Forinstance, middleclassAmerican
subjectsofNorthEuropeanextraction setmanyoftheir
interpersonal distances visually(Hall 1964a,b 1966).35 AREAS TO BE INVESTIGATED
Thisis accomplished to someextentby signalsreceived
frommuscular feedback intheeyes,gaugedbythepoint Researchinproxemics underscoreswhatanthropologists
at whichthesubjectbeginsto feelcross-eyed or hasdif- know,thatwhat is takenforgrantedin one culture
ficultyfocusing, etc.Additionalvisualreferences used maynotevenexistin another.It is therefore impossible
are thesize of theretinalimage,perceiveddetail,and to makeup a universallistof questionsforrevealing
peripheral movement. The visualinteraction of Arabs thestructure ofproxemic systems.Our experience with
is intense;theyare directlyand totallyinvolved.The the extensiveprotocolreferred to earlierwas thatit
Arabstares;theAmerican doesnot.TheArab'solfactory was at bestonly a culturallybiasedsoundingboard.
senseisactivelyinvolvedinestablishing andmaintaining Although greatpainshad beentakento maketheprot-
contact.Arabstendto stayinsidetheolfactory bubble ocol as culture-free as possible,thisturnedout to be
oftheirinterlocutor, whereasAmericans trytostayout- impossible. The followinglistofproblems forproxemic
sideofit. researchwill also reflectthe biasesof its originator's
All thesensesare ultimately involvedin settingdis- culture, notonlyin itsorganization butalso in itscon-
tanceand bear thesame relationto proxemics as the tent.
vocal apparatus(teeth,tongue,hard and softpalate,
and vocal cords)does to phonetics.If man is thought 1. How manykindsofdistancedo peoplemaintain?
of as beingin a constanttransaction withhisenviron- (It wouldbe usefulto knowthetotalrangeof human
ment,sometimes actively,sometimes passively,it can behaviorin thisrespect.)
be seen,that selectivescreeningis as necessaryas 2. How arethesedistances differentiated?
patternedstimulation of the senses.It is no wonder
thenthat one of our sublects,a Germanprofessor, 3. What relationships, and emotionsare
activities,
foundeven the solid architecture of early20th cen- associatedwitheachdistance?
turyAmericaunsatisfactory to him becauseit failed 4. In general,whatcanbe classified as fixedfeature,
semi-fixed feature,and dynamicspace?
35 Theyare notexclusivelyvisual,buttheydo havea visualbias. 5. Whatis sociofugal and whatis sociopetal?
94 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 6. Boundaries: Hall: PROXEMICS
a. How are boundaries conceived?
b. How permanent arethey? present ina givensituation. Therefore, whentwopeople
c. Whatconstitutes a violationofa boundary? ofdifferent cultures interact, eachusesdifferent criteria
d. How are boundaries marked? to interpret theother'sbehavior,and each mayeasily
e. Whenand how do you knowyou are insidea misinterpret the relationship, the activity,or the
boundary? emotions involved.
7. Is therea hierarchy of spacesfrom,forexample, Thestudyofculture intheproxemic senseis thestudy
mostintimate andmostsacredtomostpublic? ofpeoples'useoftheirperceptual apparatusindifferent
of emotional statesduringdifferent in different
activities,
8. Relatedtoboth(1) and (7), is therea hierarchy settings, and contexts. No single research
distances betweenpeople?Whoispermitted ineach,and relationships,
technique is sufficient in scope to investigate this com-
underwhatcircumstances? subject.The research technique
plex,multi-dimensional
9. Who is permitted to touch,and underwhatcir- is, therefore, a function of theparticularfacetunder
cumstances? examination at thetimeand manycall fortheinvolve-
10. Are there taboos against touching,looking, mentofmanydisciplines.36
listening,andsmelling? To whomdo theyapply? Like all basicstudiesof thecommunicative process,
11. Whatscreening needsarethere?Forwhatsenses proxemics, as I thinkofit,is moreconcerned withhow
and whichrelationships? thanwhy,andmoreconcerned withstructure thancon-
tent. The work is admittedly detailed and is apt to be
12. Whatis thenatureof thesensoryinvolvement itself to basic human situations in
forthedifferent relationships in thenormalcourseof routine. It addresses
an area of culture that is ordinarily hidden from con-
everyday life? frequently
sciousawareness. Forthisreason,proxemics
13. Whatspecific spatialneedsarethere? leadsto newinsights aboutspecificcultures, as well as
14. Whatarethespatialreferences in thelexicon? to insights intothegeneralized conceptof cultureitself.
15. Is therea special handlingof space between In formulating my thinking concerning proxemics, I
andsubordinates? have maintained that culture is an extension of basic
superordinates biologicalprocesses.While man's extensions as they
evolvemay maskthe underlying relationships which
maintainthe equilibriumof biologicalsystems,the
ABSTRACT relationships and systems are no lessreal by virtueof
beinghidden.In thewordsof Ian McHarg(1963):
Virtuallyeverything thatmanis and doesis associated
withspace.Man'ssenseof spaceis a synthesis of many
sensoryinputs:visual,auditory, olfactory, ... no speciescan existwithoutan environment,
kinesthetic, no species
and thermal. Not onlydoes each of theseconstitute a can existin an environment of itsexclusive creation, no
complexsystem(as forexample,the dozen or more species can survive, saveas a nondisruptive member of an
ecological community. Every member must adjust to other
differentwaysofexperiencing depthvisually),buteach members ofthecommunity andtotheenvironment inorder
ismoldedandpatterned byculture. Hencepeoplereared tosurvive. Manis notexcluded from thistest.
in different cultureslive in different sensoryworlds.
Whatis more,theyaregenerally unawareof thedegree
towhichtheworldsmaydiffer. 36 Although the studyof proxemics is new,the pointsmade in
Fromthestudyofculture we learnthatthepatterning the basic documentshave stimulatedresearchin anthropology
(Watson and Graves 1966), architecture (Adams; Thiel 1961),
ofperceptual worldsisa function notonlyofthespecific psychology(Little 1966; Hellersberg1966), and photography
culturebutof therelationship, activity,and emotions (Byers1966).

social perceptionof space whichhas ly or indirectlyrelatedto customary

Comments beensemi-dormant sincethefirstdec- human (and non-human)positioning
adesfollowingtheimpactofnon-Eucli- as evidencedin directbehavior,"art
by RAY L. BIRDWHISTELL dean geometry and,later,of relativity and artifact."As such,it is reminis-
theory.As one who had carefully centof the work Malinowski(excep-
Philadelphia,
Pa., U.S.A.22 VI 67 followedHall's writings,it was my tingtheemphasisof Malinowskiupon
Hall's earlierwritings,his program- vain hope that in thisdiscussion,es- theintensive analysisof particularcul-
maticarticlesin theAmericanAnthro- peciallypreparedforan international tures).Hall fullyappreciatesthe im-
pologist,and histwobooks,The Silent and professionalaudience,he would portanceof culturecontactsituations
Language and The Hidden Dimension, presentus witha systematic and or- as contexts fortheprovisionof critical
have stimulatedconsiderableinterest derlydiscourse on hispostulates,meth- data and in his discussionunderscores
among students fromvariousbehav- odology,and theoretical organization. lessonslearnedalmosttwo generations
ioral sciences.His sensitivity and per- Fromthe noteshe has presented here ago in the comparativestudies of
ceptivityabout humanspace utiliza- instead,it is difficult to assessaspects Zuni, for example,and a generation
tion and, in particular,the cultural of his positionwithoutdoingdamage ago in thestudiesof "cultureat a dis-
variabilityof space conceptionand to implicitcontexts. tance" (Benedict,Mead, Metraux,et
utilizationas illustratedin culture At its broadest,proxemicswould al.). In his presentation of data, Hall
contactsituationshave contributed to seemto be concerned abstracting
withtheinvesti- is a sensitiveculturologist,
the awakeningof an interestin the gationof all behaviorwhichis direct- pointsas patternsand makinguse o
Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968
thecomparative importof thesepoints vestigation can becomecomprehensibleumeor intensity on thepartof speak-
to arriveat generalizations about.hu- onlywhenhe straightens out theepis- ers. Comparably,increasein number
man variabilityand malleability. His temologyhere;decisionsat thislevel of kinesicsignalsor in theirextentor
conclusionthat not only does man determine researchdesign. intensity is accompaniedby variation
behavedifferently fromone cultural Of equal importis Hall's statement in paralinguistic and proxemicbehav-
contextto another,but that,by and thathe usesa "communicational" em- ior. In thesame way, thepresenceor
large,he behavesdifferently because phasis.His reportthathe has beenin- absenceof touching or itsgesturalsur-
he has internalized hissurround in the fluenced by thewritings of Whorfand rogateswas accompaniedor followed
specialand orderedwaysof his parti- Sapir and by at least certainaspects by adaptationsin the proxemic,the
cular culturereinforces a perspective of thoseof Batesondoes not ma e it paralinguistic, and the kinesicmodal-
all too oftenabsentfrom"cultureand clearwhathe meansby "communica- ities. This interdependence of com-
personality" studies,whichtendto see tion."Largeracquaintance withHall's municative modalities at thesocial in-
cultureas externaland coerciveto its writingsleaves the readerwith the teractional levelmirrors, and probably
membership. It is fromsuchworkas feelingthatHall's viewof communic- in evolutionis interinfluential with,
Hall's that anthropologists are re- ation lies somewherewithina field thenon-distinctiveness of sensorypro-
mindedthat"psychicunity"does not demarcated by HarryStackSullivan's cessesin thecentralnervoussystemof
meanthatmanis one and onlysociety transactionalism, certainaspectsof in- man and otheranimals.I cannotsee
or cultureor environment varies. formation theory, and GeorgeL. Tra- how Hall, withoutreferenceto the
When we turn fromthis over-all ger'sglobal incorporation of all cul- other interdependent modalities,can
appraisalof his workto theexamina- tureas communication. These are all study communicationby the analysis
tion of theoreticalparticulars,Hall perfectly valid positions, butan amal- of thearrangement of bodiesin space
becomessomewhatless manageable. gam of these varisized assumption or by interviewing actorsas to what
He locatesproxemics as being"much systems requires a definitiveand delin- they think they were doing or by
closer"to theordersof behavior"and eating lexicon for the reader who analysis(howeverperceptive) of their
theirderivatives knownto theetholo- wouldfollowHall's discussion. Again, viewsof theirmodesof interaction or
gistsas territoriality." He acknowledg- we are confronted with the difficulty by the counting of items in a lexicon.
es hisdebtto Hediger,Tinbergen, and of proceeding froma fuzzyconception Theseare elegantand well-tested eth-
others (particularlyCalhoun) with- of infra-cultural. Man by any defini- nographictechniques, yetat thisstage
out specifically establishing the rele- tion (exceptone whichby exclusion of the reportedwork they provide
vance of these studies to his own defines man as the only culture- little more than interesting esoterica
work. I conclude from the fact that bearing animal and the only com- for the student of communication or
he explicitly turns from Sorokin, municator) is a specializedcommuni- social organization. Data becomes evi-
Lewin, Hallowell, and Chapple and cator. Ethologyand behavioralbiol- denceonly in the contextof theory.
Coon and reiterates his concernwith ogyhave providedus withvastquan-
"out-of-awareness" behaviorthat his titiesof still only partiallyanalyzed
interest in theethologists is in thepsy- data thatsuggestthatbothcommuni- by BERNHARD BOCK*
chologicalratherthanthesociological cationand socialorganization are im- Braunschweig, Germany8 VII67
implications of theirwork.I have not manentforanimalspeciesat least as
as thefishes(and perhapsas Hall's surveyof proxemics calls atten-
beenable to gaincluesas to thisorien- primitive tion to a number of problems of great
tationfromhisreferences to "biology." far back in evolutionary historyas
I do him an live birth and bisexuality). It would importance for the sciences of man.
and "physiology." may pointsof view
injustice whenI concludethathe uses seemtenablethatbothsocial organi- Additional proxematic
thesetermsinterchangeably. It is this zation and communication (the latter mightbe:
loose treatment of thediachronicand the dynamicaspect of the former) 1) "rhythms"of density (rush
synchronic viewsof data that makes appear adaptivelywithspecialization hours,nighthours)in citylife.
it at timesinconvenient to organize and interdependent multi-individual 2) varyingwishes(of Westernin-
his data into comparableordersof activity. Sucha positiondoesnotdeny dividuals) for solitude, company,
materials. the role of physiological or psychol- crowds.
Partof thedifficulty in circumscrib-ogicalprocesses in theaccomplishment 3) the differences in atmosphere
ing or criticizingthe postulates,the of the interactive task (shorttermor betweena crowdedand a poorlyat-
methodology, or, even, the subject inextension) butdoesin a sensetrivial- tendedtheatrical performance and the
matterof Hall's discussions lies in his ize themfortheanalysisofanthropolo- different proxematic attitudes of audi-
conceptof "infra-cultural." On the gical or communicational problems. encesat thecinema,theopera,a foot-
one hand,he uses the termin a dia- Fromthispointof view,thesociolog- ball game.
chronicsense,to referto "thosebehav- ical analysisof thecontextfromwhich 4) the effectsof the geographical
ioralmanifestations thatprecededcul- one takesdata fortheanalysisof com- and thesocial environment on proxe-
turebut laterbecameelaboratedinto municationalbehavior,structure, or maticphenomena;changesof attitude
culture."("Culture,"incidentally, is evolution is the sine qua non of the on movingto a new place; chances
seenby Hall as "basicallya comunica- researchprocedure. of humanadaptability.
tive process.")On theotherhand,he Hall's ingenuous surprise thatsmall 5) alterationsin proxematicpat-
seemsto use "infraculture" in a syn- movements of thehandand bodywere ternsdue to childhoodneglect, puberty
chronicsense,to referto an underly- of relevanceto the comprehension of difficulties, or personalmisfortune; the
ingbiologicalor physiological or psy- the"lowerclass Negro" groupwhich possibility thatchildren,regardless of
chologicalneed systemor raw-mate- he studiedis revealingas to his con- culturepatterns,are moreready for
rial (in Linton'ssense)sub-stratum to ception of communication.Albert socialcontactsor are in generalbetter
culturalbehavior.It is in thisarea of Scheflenand I have been repeatedly able to bear populationdensity,than
his theorythat his dismissalor, per- impressed withthevariationand sur- adults.
haps,heuristic avoidanceof thesocio- rogatefunctioning of modalityutiliza- 6) furtherproblemsof sociability:
logical implications of his subjector tion in the analysis of ongoing inter- possible differencesin proxematicde-
object matterbecomesmostcritical. actional scenesrecordedon sound film. velopmentbetween only children and
His references to "situational"rubrics The relative positions of communi- childrenwith siblings;social class dif-
do not in my mindresolvethisun- cants (interactants) varies systemati- ferences; rural-urbandifferences;the
cally with increaseor decrease in vol- demand for company in cases of dan-

96 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 ger and distress;salutinghabitsfrom Hall: PROXEMICS
closeup and fromafar.
7) thecontrastbetweenformalpat- ilardistinctions are made,forexample, the analystmustdiscoverthe way in
ternsof attitudeand the real feelings in the series"Mr. Brown,""Brown," which the ethnographer distortsthe
and possiblydeviantbehaviourof in- "Thomas,""Tom,""Tommy."Modern culturebecauseof his own personal
dividualsand groups. youngpeople in WesternEurope are systemof perceptions,includinghis
8) the"I-You" relationat various morereadyto call each otherby their own experiences and theneurosesand/
stages(acquaintance,friendship, love, Christian names than were their or defensesthat he has created in
kinship). parents.Nicknamesand argotsserve adapting to his experience.Such a
9) the quick and easy spread of as symbolsof solidarityand exclude schemewould be anotherstep in the
culture,news,and propagandain den- strangersfrom the intimacyof the directionof understanding theprocess
selypopulatedareas and, on theother group. ofcross-culturallearning and commun-
hand, the far-reaching influenceof Hall is rightin pointingout that ication.
radio and television,even in thinly voice loudnessis proxematically rele-
populatedareas. vant. His conceptof the "situational
10) proxematicdifferencesamong dialect" is also very useful.In this by A. RICHARD DIEBOLD, JR.*
the senses: connection it is again essentialto con-
(a) near distance:touchand taste; siderlistening behaviour, as everytalk Stanford,Calif.,U.S.A. 19 vii67
(b) near or middledistances:smell; may be conceivedas a kindof cyber- For thosewho have an interest in (es-
(cf. the Germansaying: "I can't netic mechanismwith feedback.The pecially non-verbal) communicative
smell[ = stafid]him."); style varietiesof the language-e.g., behavior,one of themorestriking ob-
(c) far distances:hearingand sight. public, official, private, intimate- staclesto researchin this area is it-
Mostlywe shall finda combination revealproxematic differences. selfone of communication, in thiscase
and cross-checking of the senses,pos- An abundantsourceof proxematic with otherspecialists.Hopefullythis
sibilydirectedby reason,will,or cul- data will be the educationaland di- paper by Hall will reachsomeof the
tura pattern. dactic literatureof mankind,works scatteredaudiencethat is so engaged
11) proxematicaspects of games, and passagesin poetryand prose,pro- and helpestablishtheinterdisciplinary
dancing,parties,youthclubs,schools, verbsand parables,rulesof conduct, contactswhichare vitallyneeded.For
sports. and textbookson interpersonal rela- the benefitof thisaudience,I would
12) proxematicproblems of the tions. like to registera few generalremarks
group:thenetworkof communications with the experiencejust gained of
betweenmembers of a group,varying having completeda lengthyreview-
withdegreeof intimacy, and thepos- by PAUL BOHANNAN* articleof "anthropology and thecom-
sible solidarityof the group against parativepsychology of communicative
strangers. Evanston,III., U.S.A. 28 VI 67 behavior"(Diebold 1967).
13) proxematicproblemsof accul- Hall's observations are vital for an- "Proxemicbehavior,"as definedby
turation. thropologistsengagedin research.His Hall in thisand hisotherpublications,
14) symbolisms of contactand fel- use of "native" photographers to re- is butone perhapssomewhatarbitrar-
lowship:gestures, miming, pre-linguis- cord and then to interpretfor him ily definedcategoryof thetotalrange
tic sounds,handshakes, kisses,embra- whatwas goingon shouldbe parallel- of communicative behaviorwhichhu-
ces,partlycombinedwithutterances. ed in all branchesof ethnography. mans use in social interaction. Some
15) deviationsfromtheusualprox- Many of us have used informants as significantcaveats follow from this
ematic patternsof a group due to extensi6ns of our own sensesin exam- reminder.
adaptationto an alteredenvironment. ningtheculturewe are studying. We The firstis thatwe knowrelatively
On thispoint,theHuman Adaptabil- would do well to examinethis tech- littleas yetaboutwhatHall calls the
itySectionof theInternational Biolo- nique for the ways in whichit can "infra-cultural bases" of the human
gical Programmightfurnishessential help us to get at the crucialpointsin communicative ethogram.Indeed, we
details. the culture. should begin by askingjust what is
Keiter(1966)hintsat thewiderange Thisprocedure allowsus to examine this ethogramand whetherthe term
of humaninteraction fromthe hermit in detail the transactionsbetween "ethogram"itselfis appropriate.This
to the city-dweller and pointsto the anthropologist and informant. At the is to invokethe familiar"nature-nur-
customof thehandshakeas a "fiction" risk of ruiningthe ethnography (ex- ture"issuewhichbesetsany interpre-
of humanfellowshipevenin themass cept wherethe anthropologist is ex- tive cross-culturalor trans-specific
society.The authoralso discussesthe periencedin the culturehe is study- analysisof humanbehavior.It is to
problemof boredomreactionsin en- ing), why not study anthropologistsask questionswhich,despitetherecent
forcedcommunities suchas submarine anthropologizing? How do theymake impactof ethologyand comparative
crewsor polar expeditions. spatialadjustments? How do theyfind psychology on anthropological theory,
As to proxematic aspectsof linguis- theirown feelingsand ideas affected producesqualls in the stillpredomin-
tics, I want to commentas follows: by thoseof theirinformants? For a ately empiricist (or "culture-relativis-
From the point of lexicography, spe- longtime,I have wantedto do a field tic") climate of anthropologicalin-
cial attention shouldprobablybe paid job in association with a psycho- quiry.How muchof humancommuni-
to thelexicaldomain("Wortfeld")of analyst.Give the ethnographer suffi- cativebehavioris culturally universal?
social life; but since the relationbe- cient trainingin psychiatryto be Of those componentswhich are, to
tweenproxemicsand languageis not un-self-conscious and awareof someof what extentcan theirappearancein
onlya questionof lexicology,butalso his own defenses.Give the psycho- organicallyand functionallynormal
a matterof grammarand style,one analystsufficient anthropological train- humansbe said to be constitutionally
shouldanalyzetribal,local,and "fam- ing to understand the role of culture. determined? (For instance,can it be
ily" vocabulariesas well as normal Then let the ethnogra pher and the demonstrated that any of thesecom-
dictionaries.Moreover,the formsof analystinformone anotherverycare- ponentsare geneticallyencoded and
personaladdress,may vary according fully:the ethnographer mustdiscover endogenously released?)Is theresome
to the degreeof intimacy(cf. the use the degreeand kind of "skew" which "infra-cultural" species-specific com-
of the personalpronoun,French:tu- comesfromthepsychoanalyst's focus- municativeethogramfor Homo sapi-
vous, Germandu-Sie);in English,sim- ing on psychicviews of the culture; ens? Anthropologists would tradition-
Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 97
 ally hold thatit is impossibleto fac- "across-a-crowded-room" phenomenon. them.The young man's looking be-
tor out such species-specificcom- Each has independently taken notice havior?It could well dependon how
ponentsfrom the complexof over- of the other and occasionallygazes the girl is dressed;conceivablyeyes
lyingbehavioracquiredduringencul- across the room. What happens if are mutuallyaverted if the girl is
turationand subsequentparticipation theireyes meet?Let us say that this wearing a miniskirtwhich climbs
of theindividualin a particularsocio- eye-engagement is maintained,per- gravity-defiant duringthedancemove-
culturalgroup. And it is generally hapsbriefly, and now notetwoaspects ments.If gaze he does, do the young
concededby ethologists, evenby those of thisconfrontation: (1) its context, man'ssimultaneous facialdisplayscon-
who have been cited as extreme"in- a veryparticularsortof social-physi- veybemusedcamaraderie or lascivious
stincttheorists," that endogenousbe- cal space, i.e., a party; and (2) the scrutiny? Supposenow thatthe music
havioral responsesare increasingly communicativechannels which are permitsslow movementand bodily
moremodifiableby experientialfac- active-at thispointalmostexclusiv- contact.Use of the audio-vocalchan-
tors in the highervertebrateorders, ely the visual-gestural channel,and nel (i.e., conversation) will of course
especiallyso withtheplasticity typical with only minimalutilizationof the be facilitated;the tactilechannelwill
of human behavior.These questions total potentialrangeof signalswhich be activatedthroughvarioussortsof
beg,not becauseHall has posed them mightbe producedin that channel, body contact; each partnerwill be
directly, but becauseof theheavyun- i.e., withonlyeye-engagement and no broughtinto what Hall delightfully
derpinning of his researchin theetho- or only subliminalfacial or postural calls "the olfactorybubbleof [one's]
logical literature.Nor do I feel that displays.In short,no otherchaa?nels interlocuter;"and, contingentupon
he has obviatedthisissueby injecting are open,and interaction itselfis ten- how "closely" the two dance (and
a gratuitousexperientialrelativism uous,butcommunication did transpire. upon discrepancies in height,etc.),the
through payinghomageto Whorf. (Withincertaindistancesand barring visual-gestural channelis now attenu-
The secondcaveat is a problemof certaindefectsin thevisualapparatus, ated, at least as far as mutualeye-
ascribingto variables dependentor all save themostfunctionally disturb- engagementis concerned.And if it
independent status.If it is true that ed individuals in all sociotultural pleasesboth to do so and theydance
proxemicbehavior(or kinesic,or par- groupsare able to perceivewhether with maximalbody contact,why is
alinguistic,or however you divide they are "being looked at" [direct it (let us concentrateon chest to
up the pie) is just one of manycate- eye-engagement] as opposedto "past," breast)thatthiserogenousinvasionis
goriesof interactional behavior,what "beyond,"or "through";see, e.g. Ar- permittedor encouragedby the girl
do we knowof its functional iEldepen- gyle and Oean [1965.]; Diebold on the dance-floor and laterrebuffed
dence of other communicative sub- [1967]; Gibsonand Pick [1963]; Rie- by her on the back-porchwhen re-
systems? I take it as foregoneconclu- mer[1955]. Beinglookedat doeshave established by theyoungmanmanual-
sionthatthephysicaldistancebetween interactionalsemanticity, which pre- ly-when, we note,althoughthegirl's
an interacting dyad can "mean" quite dictablycan mean different thingsin attractionto the youngman has not
differentthings depending,among different and different
societies, things diminished, thereis a changeof con-
other variables,upon (1) the wider in different contextswithinone socie- text for theirphysicaldistance,and
temporaland spatialcontextin which ty. More intriguingis the finding eye-engagement has beenrestored? The
the confrontation takesplace and (2) thatmutualeye-engagement and sud- questionsare not so rhetorical as they
theco-occurrence or non-occurrence of den apperceptionof being looked at mightseem.
signaltransmission in one or severalof producemeasurablechangesin auto- Is all proxemicbehaviorso context-
thechannelswhichlinkthedyad (e.g., nomicactivity,thussuggesting a still specificand sensitiveto regulationby
visual-gestural, audio-visual).Regret- undetermined constitutionalcomponent manifold-channel signalling?I believe
tably we know only too littleabout for the informationprocessingin- it is. And I do not believethatmany
how these various signals mightbe volved in thistypeof visual interac- of theseeverydayinteractional situa-
mutuallycorroborative or summating tion.)We mightask whetherthegirl's tionslendthemselves readilyto experi-
in theinformation theytransmit; when unaverted gaze was somehowlinkedto mentalmanipulation in thelaboratory,
theyconflictin theinformation which this sociallyparticularproxemicset- nor to certain heuristicmeasuring
theyconvey; and how context-sensi-ting.Whatif thepair had firstnotic- techniques in naturalisticsettings.
tive theyare to theproxemicsettings ed each otherat an airport?Granted Imaginethe difficulties, for instance,
which most interestHall. And here certainsharedcomponents of psycho- of pluggingour couple above into a
forme is a crucialdilemma;forwhile social background, if the youngman polygraphin orderto tap changesin
manyof Hall's observations stemfrom "stared,"thegirlmightwell averther psychodynamic state and autonomic
contrastiveanalysesof cross-cultural gaze and striveto avoid eye-engage- activation,or attempting to filmthe
communicationand the difficulties ment altogether,supplementing this thwartedindiscretionon the back-
theseconfrontations oftenentail,we signalof non-receptivity by precons- porch.The outlook,however,is notas
do notreallyknowwhichdiscrepancy, ciousor motivatedpostural(e.g.,stan- bleak as thissuggests.What seemsto
whichchannel,emitsthe criticalsta- ding sidewaystoward the man) or be in orderis extensiveand intensive
tic. It seemsto me that we do not facial (e.g., unsmiling)cues, her pos- "field observations."Hall indicates
have as yetenoughinsightintocontext sible interestnotwithstanding. The how thismightbe fruitfully pursued
specificity and inter-channel linkages physicaldistanceseparatingthem is and how anthropologists can be and
even withinour own society,or any thesameas thatat theparty,but the have been enlistedto make a signifi-
subgroupof it, to permitunequivocal affective-social distanceis quite dif- cant contribution. I hope he will be
conclusions on thesematters. ferent. encouragedto continueprovidingus
The followingtrivialexamplegives Let us supposenow thattheprinci- with the benefitsof his advice and
some indicationof what I mean by pals have introducedthemselves and experience.
contextspecificity and channelselec- are happily dancing. But dancing
tion:The settingis an informal party, what?If the frug,the tactilechannel
well-attended, withdrinking and dan- is inoperativeand the audio-vocal, by MARSHALL DURBIN*
cing. Th.e two principalsare a young although now potentiallyopen, is
New Orleans,La., U.S.A. 19 VII 67
man and a girl, unattachedand as attenuated becauseof thephysicaldis-
yetunacquainted, who findthemselves tancerequiredby thisdancestyleand Hall's work on proxemicsand kine-
attractedto one another.How? The theextreme channelnoisewhichintru- sics has been of greatserviceto the
first "encounter" is the familiar des in the resultingspace between behavioralsciencesin generalas well
98 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 as to anthropologyin particular.I Hall: PROXEMICS
take it for grantedthathis contribu-
tionsare widelyrecognized;the com- Hockett'sconceptof designfeaturesre- tactics.I sensea certainvaguenessof
mentswhichfollowwill therefore be presentsa breakthrough in our understan- graspthroughout, whichI believefol-
criticalones, dealing especiallywith ding of communication. lows fromfailureto differentiate ap-
Hall's discussion (in otherpublications In my opinion, the concept of design propriately betweenthefactorsin hu-
as well as thisarticle)of proxemicbe- features represents a breakthrough man similarity and the factorsin cul-
havioras a communication system. only if we ask, "what type of analysis tural difference:betweenethologyand
Hall does not clearly outline the for a communicationsystem can we ethnology.This is relatedto the tac-
differences between(a) proxemicbe- provide which will account for each tical eclecticismwhichhas assembled
haviorand otherhumancommunica- of these features?" Productivity was forus a greatdeal of information on
tionsystems and(b) proxemicbehavior long recognized as a salient featureof biosocialspacingbutseemsto me defi-
and otheranimalcommunication sys- language, but not until the introduc- cientin incisiveconclusions-even pre-
tems.Pervasivethroughout hisworkis tion of a linguisticanalysis (transfor- liminary or descriptive ones.
the idea thata relationship existsbe- mational grammar) which accounted I questionwhetherethologicalprin-
tweenterritoriality in non-humans and for it did it become a significantfact ciplescan usefullrbe applied to cul-
proxemicbehaviorin humans.One is of language. In other words, and con- tural variation.Human ethologyis
led to believe,althoughhe does not trary to what Hall says (p. 95), the fundamentally unitary.If proxemics
explicitysay so, thatthelatterdevel- whys are more important than the is subjectto variationwithinthe spe-
oped fromtheformer. Fromthisview hows; content takes precedence over cies,we maytherefore regardethology
it would followthat proxemicsdeals structureif we assume that the struc- as an importantpart of the back-
with structure ratherthan with con- ture has already been mapped out to groundto studying it,buttheexplana-
tent,and indeedHall makesthisclear: a reasonable degree. Unless produc- tion of the variationmust lie else-
". . .proxemics,as I thinkof it, is tivityin proxemicbehavior is account- where.I believe it does, and I find
more.., concerned withstructurethan ed forin termsof a contentanalysis,it particularlyintriguingHall's com-
with content... (p. 95). While Hall is no more interestingthan the fact municativephrasingof the matter.I
has set about thetaskof mappingthe that a dog can be taughtto respond to would, however,preferto focus the
structure mostably, I findthiswork an infinityof stimuli. Only by ex- problemyet moresharplyby concen-
muchlessinteresting thanthestudyof amining the content side of proxemic tratingspecificallyon spatial meta-
thecontent(significance, meaning, etc.) behavior will we understandwhy the phor. I would include,as Hall does,
which the structure carries;for it is architector designercreatesnew forms verbally,graphically, plastically,and
at the point wherethe structure be- and predict how he is able to do so. architecturallyexpressed metaphor,
gins to take on myriadsignificances but I would also includebehavioral
or meaningsthat it can be identified I find it curious that Hall is so and gesturalmetaphoras well. I see
as a humanstructure ready to rely upon linquistics as a
and of interest for his proxemicsand yet deny no difficultyin so interpreting his
to anthropologists. In spiteof Hall's model
content its rightful role, since the lin- data even when the metaphorex-
emphasison structure, I am quitesure pressedis tacit,covert,or unconscious,
that in his analysishe has inevitably guist mustemploy contentor meaning and I see somepotentialgains.
had recourse to content in his analyses. It may be relevant that
(as thelinguists When Hall reportsthat no general
of the50's did-cf. Harris1951-who linguistshave only recentlybegun to descriptiveframeworkfor proxemics
maintainedthattheycould carryout recognize the pressure which content
upon structureand to account will work in all cultures,I believe
a structural analysisofa languagewith- exertsfor it in their analyses. Chomsky thisis one way of statingthatthecul-
out recourseto meaning).To the ex- ofspaceis metaphoric
tentthatanalysisin proxemics (1965) gives the following example of turalstructuring
is pure- -for metaphor has no universallimit-
ly structural, the pressure of content upon structure:
proxemicscan be com- ations. But metaphoris culturally
pared to animal territoriality only in John is easy to please. structured and can be ethnologically
a verytrivialway and cannotbe com- John is eager to please. studiedand explained.Hall seemsto
pared to otherhumancommunication me to writeoff somewhattoo easily
systems at all. Indeed,it is doubtfulif and the relevanceof awarenessand of
it can be comparedeven with non- To please John is easy.
consciousculturalpatternsto thepro-
humancommunication systemsif we blem. Surely if I avert my eyes to
acceptSebeok's(1963 : 465) definition but not:
* To please John is eager. avoid beingchargedwithwitchcraft,
of zoosemioticsas involving keepmyhandsto myselfto avoid be-
... the codingof information in cyber- A perhaps less obvious but more in- ingthought sexuallyaggressive, crouch
neticcontrolprocessesand the consequen- terestingexample is the following: to keep my head "low," or stand to
ces thatare imposedby thiscategorization keepmybodyfromreposein thepre-
where living animals functionas input/ I see the house which is big and senceof thechief,theconsciousmean-
outputlinkingdevices.... white. ings of theseusagescan be obtained
Coding processes may perhaps be I see the house which is white and frominformants and are relevantto
understoodwithoutreference to con- big. explaning them.
tent,but a categorization or subcate- and Let me nonetheless agreewithHall
gorizationprocesscan neverbe under- I see the big white house. that the moreproblematic and hence
stood unlessthe analystrefersto its moreinteresting patternsof spacingin
contentaspects;and it is preciselya but not: man are covert.Construedas meta-
special,but not yet well understood, * I see the white big house. phors,theyare the spatialprojections
type of categorizationprocesswhich of culturalvalues. I am not entirely
distinguisheshuman communication persuadedthatspace mustnecessarily
systemsfromthe communication sys- by MUNRO S. EDMONSON* be approachedas a separablesystem
temsof otheranimals. of metaphor.I considerit morelikely
Hall fails,again, tO distinguish be- New Orleans,La., U.S.A. 19.vi 67 thatvariousculturalideas can be ex-
tweenhumancommunication systems Two kinds of confusion seem to me pressedspatiallyas an alternativeor
and those of other animals when he to flaw this stimulatingarticle: one is supplement to expressingthemin other
states (p. 91): a matter of theory and the other of ways, and I would anticipatethat

Vol. 9 . No. 2-3 . April-June1968 99

theremaybe considerable variationin portantto studyolfactory reactionsin man nature,do indicatethattranscul-
the degreeto whichspace is used in social relationships,but simply to turalproxemicethnography will be as
thisfashionin different cultures. questionhow much and when it is feasible as transculturaldescriptive
The demonstration that space is useful to conceptualizethe problem linguistics. I wouldtakeHall's account
structuredin complex ways relating "emically"in termsof distinctive fea- of his personalresearchexperienceas
to thewholegamutof culturalcausa- tures,such as "in" or "out" of the testimony to a dialectic(feedback)stra-
tion is an importantcontribution to "olfactorybubble."At least some of tegy,analysisof one'sown cultureand
thescopeand sensitivity of anthropol- Hall's othervariables,suchas loudness of anotherbeinginterdependent. This
ogy,and I thinkwe are verymuchin of voice,appear to varycontinuously interpretation wouldbe consistent with
Hall's debt forhis extensiveexplora- ratherthandiscretely. the importanceof Whorf to Hall,
tion of the problem. Lebensraum, Hall's experiments in askingsubjects since Whorfstressedthe necessityof
breathing space,"tenfootpoles,"close fromdifferent culturesto arrangeob- contrastive analysisandsaw itas a way
and distantrelatives,contagion,pol- iects in various ways are extremely to transcend one'sown system.
lution,and "keepingin touch," are promising and deserveto be extended. 2) The relationbetweencross-cultu-
important metaphorsand deservethe As I am sure he realizes,thesehave ral differences and infra-cultural bases
mostpreciseand comprehensive analy- implications about the kindsof com- is sometimesunclear.The statement
sis. I wouldurgethatwe retainthe position. found characteristically in thattherecan be no universalindexof
broadviewsuggested by Hall's work graphicand plasticarts in particular crowdingmightbe takento implythat
and considermicrospatial metaphorscultures.In a cross-cultural compara- anythinggoes.The commenton etho-
in thesamefieldwithcognitive and tive study buildingupon work by logicalstudyof pathologiesinvolving
linguistic orderings of spaceand with HerbertBarry(1957) and G. P. Mur- physiological mechanisms thatrespond
themacrospatial patterns of mythol- dock (1957), I have suggestedthat a to densitysuggeststhatan ethological
ogyandcosmology. workof art is "a sortot map of the approachto manwouldfinduniversal
societyin which the artist-and his limitsnaturalto thespecies.Interrela-
public-live" (Fischer1961 :89), and tionsbetweenculturalselectivity and
byJ.L. FISCHER* that "designelementsare symbolicof biologicallybased commonalities seem
membersof the society"(p. 82). It one of the mostimportantand open
New Orleans,La., U.S.A. 17 VI67 would be very interesting to have a aspectsof proxemics.
Hall's paper on proxemicsis full of c6mparison in severalculturesbetween 3) Hall mentions culturally different
promising research suggestions,as well the arrangingof designelementsin hierarchies of modality.This question
as implications fora theory ofculture. traditionalart and thearrangingof a is importantto assessment of cultural
I will comment on one theoreticalstandardizedset of objectsin an ex- differences in the role of language,
pointandanother pointwhichis more perimentalsituation.I would expect speakingbeingselectionof one modal-
methodological. correspondences, as I think Hall ity among others. Observationson
Hall notesthathehaslookedtodes- would; and thesein turnshouldboth relative hierarchyand interplayof
criptive linguisticsfora "procedural correspondto the way people of the vocaland proxemicchannelswillbe of
model"forconstructing hisproxemic societyspace themselves physicallyin greatvalue.Can onesay anything now
theory. Morespecifically, heusespho- socialsituations, as well as to moreab- aboutdifferences betweengroupsas to
nological analysis as theguideforhis stractvariablesof social structure dis- therelativerole("functional load") of
proxemic analysis. I suspect thismay cussedinmypaper. theproxemic?
have led him to look for discrete, 4) Currentlinguistictheory,if ta-
separableanaloguesof phonemes in ken as a model,would not place pri-
areasofbehavior whereperhaps there by DELL HYMES maryemphasison phonologicalunits
are none.Questions suchas theway Pa., U.S.A.20 VII 67
Philadelphia,
and the universalsby which to ap-
peoplespacethemselves in roomsmay proachthem,but on grammatical re-
perhaps be better handled witha con- Hall's workis important to an anthro- lationshipsand their corresponding
tinuousscale ratherthanwithdis- pologyof communication and theeth- universals.A proxemicequivalentis
cretevariables. Evenin linguistics the nographyit requires.I shouldlike to perhapsto be foundin act sequences
pervasiveness of discrete variableshas raise some questionsthat may help and therulesunderlying them.
beenquestioned forsomephenomenaclarifyforus Hall's perspective. In greatparttheexamplesgivenhere
(cf. Bolinger1961). 1) The initial stresson studying are proxemicportionsof a communi-
An exampleof an excessive use of one's own cultureparallelsa call for cative lexicon, illustratingcontrasts
discrete thinking is Hall's reference to studyof one's own languageamong in semanticstructuring (e.g.,withhold
the"olfactory bubble"ofa participanttransformational linguists,a school breathand directit away fromthe
in a conversation. This is, perhaps, Hall does not mention.The linguists other person: "ashamed" signifians:
onlya figure of speech,butis seems Hall doescitehavestressed analysisof signifie).Unlike kinesics,proxemics
to me to be ratherinappropriate. A systems otherthantheirown. It is not might lack much of a syntactic
bubbleis extremely well-defined and clear how Hall can distrusthis own dimension,but discussionof face-to-
extremely regular.Theolfactory zone trained,sensitiveperceptionof proxe- face encounters suggestsotherwise.A
ofa person, on theotherhand,hasno mics in other cultures,yet rely on crucial step mightbe to move from
definite boundary andgradually fades Whorfas to Hopi metaphysics.If normsand structurepointsto their
out;if thereareanyair currents it is forcedto choose,I would take Hall. motivatedselection(cf.Hall 1964b).
irregular in shape.Olfactorysensit- At issuemay be only the degreeof 5) It is usefulto identify styleswith
ivity varies considerably, probably explicitnessin methodology achieved definingsituationsas a firststep,as
morethanothersenses, fromone in- in linguistics and in proxemics(com- withthesetassertedby JoosforAmer-
dividualto another,depending on paringhereHopi proxemics andHopi ican English(cf. Gleason1965:357ff.)
minorrespiratory diseases,allergies, grammar). or theregisters of Halliday,McIntosh
smoking habits,and probably thein- Hall's contrastsand insights, discus- and Strevens(1964:89). Modes appro-
heritedconditionof the olfactoryor- sionsof method,and development of priateto one situation,however,can
gans. The odor producedalso varies physiological structurepoints,together be usedin anotherto alludeto thefirst
accordingto seasonand temperature, wviththe possibilityof experimental or comment on thesecond(whatGum-
ventilationof the space, etc. This,of results(Watsonand Graves1966) and perz calls "metaphoricalswitching").
course,is not to say that it is unim- theuniversalbasisin infracultural hu- One needstherefore to deal withsys-
100 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
 tematicrelationsbetweenrepertoires Hall: PROXEMICS
of codes,styles,and the like, on the
one hand,and situations,on theother, by SOLON T. KIMBALL* ed time-sequences of event analysis
withone setof relationsdefining "un- seemmuchmoreappropriateas com-
marked" (normal) usage and other Gainesville,Fla., U.S.A. 31 VII 67 plementary methodological tools. Al-
sets of relationsdefining"marked" For thosewho are alreadyacquainted together, this represents a ratherex-
usage-the particularvalues that are with Hall's writingthereis nothing tensivereformulation of anthropolog-
markedbeingperhapsinsult,beseech- new in this summaryof his research ical methodand thought.
ment,comicrelief,etc. on the spatial behaviorof man-a
6) Sapir (1927 [1949:556-57]) cer- fieldwhichhe identifies by the term
tainlyanticipatesproxemics as he does "proxemics."The value of this ac- by WESTON LA BARRE*
muchof therestof contemporary eth- count,then,will not be foundin its
nographyof communication. Behind contentbut in theopportunity to exa- Durham,N.C., U.S.A. 19 VI67
of
his insistenceon the tyrannicalcon- mine the relevance proxemicsfor Hall has pioneeredin a newand subtle
sistencyin social behaviorof uncons- anthropology and otherdisciplines. area of covertculturethatis "written
ciousformsis Boas (1911), just as the We maycountas an initialpositive nowhere,knownby none,and under-
developmentin Sapir (1927, 1929, contribution thereassertion of thesig- stoodby all." His presentessayis an
1931) is behindWhorf.(Notice that nificanceof certainfundamental con- excellentand authoritativesummary
Boas did not makehis pointso much ceptsin theirapplicationto spatialas- of someof the ways in whichpeople
withlexiconsas withobligatory gram- pects of behavior.These include re- are "programmed"differently. My
maticalcategories and processes). cognitionof the infra-cultural animal remarksare intendedto be helpfulby
WhatBoas, Sapir, and Whorfheld base of man'sculturalextensions and suggesting furtherrefinements of ob-
as to the relationof languageto ha- the treatment of an organismand its servation.
bitual behavior,etc., requiresmore biotopeas a singlesystem.From the First of all, the negative instance
carefulexplicationthanit has usually examination of thevariabilities of such maybe significant. Like manyAmeri-
gottenfromeitheradmirersor critics. systems we can abstractpattern, struc- cans.fromthe northernpart of the
A varietyof systematic positionsare ture,and process.The uniformity in UnitedStates,I am stillsurprised that
possible, and have been expressed. methodpermitsanalyticalcompara- total strangerson the streetsof my
Moreover,thereare two typesof re- bilityamongall disciplinesthatstudy SouthernPiedmonttown oftengreet
lativity,and Whorf'stype,that of livingorganisms.This is an achieve- meas thoughI werea personalfriend.
structure, dependsupon the second, mentof greatsignificance. At firstI interpreted thisas extreme
thatof use (on thesepoints,seeHymes The impressive findings of theetho- friendliness that goes beyondnormal
1966). In proxemicterms,the conse- logistson the relationbetweenspace Americanextraversion. I have since
quencesof a proxemicsystemdepend and animal behaviorcited by Hall learned,however,thatit is the result
upon therelativerole of proxemicbe- certainly. add weightto his argument. of myunconsciously lookingat people
haviorin a group,and on therole of In hisreporton hisownresearch,how- in Northernurban fashion.in the
the given systemrelativeto possible ever, there is a notable absence of South, looking directly at people
others(an analogueto multilingualismthe"behavioralsequences"whichTin- impliesyou knowthem,so that,with
and code-switching). bergenfoundamong the stickleback varyingdegreesof incertitude or dif-
7) The discussionof spatial and (Tinbergen1952). The naturalhistory fidence, peoplerespondto a merelook
bodily imageryin art and literature of the time dimensionin behavior with a "friendly"greeting, a pheno-
suggestsa strikingessay by Burke shouldrankequallyin importance with menonthatcan be easilydemonstrated
(1966). thatof space. Only by understanding experimentally. Also, if forsomerea-
8) Definitionof communication as the relationbetweenthe two can we son one wants formalanonymityin
any eventthattriggers anotherorga- gain understanding of either,if our public,evenwhenpassingcloseby,by
ism makes"communication" a super- perspective is thatof systems and not not lookingat the otherpersonone
fluoustermand is incompatible with of traits. is officiallynot there (though he
an ethnographic approach,in which We shouldalso ask abouttheimpli- may remindyou later,a bit aggressiv-
muchof thepointmustbe to determine cationsforanthropology of theproxe- ely or chidingly, thathe saw you on
justwhateventsare culturally regard- micsapproach.It is reasonableto ex- the street,whichboth knew).
ed as communicative (Gerbner1966, pect,foronething,thatfuture research All this suggeststhe necessityfor
Hymes1964, 1967a). will pay closer attentionto territor- discriminatingregional differences,
9) Hall findsHockett'sfirstseven iality and spatial behaviorthan has even in one country.For example,in
designfeaturesof languageto apply researchin the past. From the new privatecolloquy,two Southernbusi-
equallywellto proxemics. He findsthe data we will be able to providean- nessmenwillstandtogether on a street-
expansionof the list to thirteenfea- swersformanyof the 15.basic prob- corner,somewhatclosertogether than
turesto clear up someproblemswhile lems which Hall lists as yet to be elsewherein the United States, but
creatingothers.Fromtheseremarksit investigated; but will this knowledge studiouslyavoid one another'seyes,
is not clearwhetheror not Hall finds informus about cultural processes? gazing about explicitlyalmost any-
the expandedlist successful in distin- Unfortunately, theansweris probably whereelse. By contrast,two profes-
guishing languagefromproxemics, and no, sincemostof theproblemsare so sional men of Northernoriginwill
it would be valuableto have his fur- phrasedthattheylead to classification standsomewhatfartherapart in pri-
therviewson thispoint. ratherthanto explanationsof the in- vate conversation, but will exchange
10) It would be good to know if dependenciesbetweenaspectsof be- repeated "frank" looks into other's
Hall considersthe notionsof (a) per- havior.This is not what Hall would eyes with "constant checking" on
sonal culture (Sapir 1938; Gooden- wish. Further,the precisionof obser- facial expressions, oftenraisingboth
ough 1963:257-77; Hymes 1964:29, vationwhichproxemicsrequiresmust eyebrowsin director skepticalgaze.
n. 8), (b) organizationof diversity be paralleledby equallypreciseobser- The contrast is so markedthatone can
ratherthan replicationof uniformity vationsfor otheraspectsof behavior. predictregionaloriginon thebasisof
(Wallace 1961), and (c) diversityof The traditional conceptsof status,role, thiscluealone.
communicative competencewithina family,etc.are too grossforsuchpur- Beyond this,thereis a contcxtual
society(Hymes1967b) to apply with poses.The orderof actionin interac- dimension.One of the reasonsthat
regardto proxemics. tion analysisand the activity-focus-watchingamateur"home movies" is
Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 101
fromthe speakerhe does not know. ated by the distanceof the listener dancingseemsmostlyto be exhibited
oftenso uncomfortable or embarras- Anotherfacet of the topographic and to be watched. Perhaps this is
singis thatthesubjects, as in a stillpho- context in proxemics:many teachers relatedto thechangefromparticipant
tograph, lookat themovietaker,whom have the reputationof having "eyes to spectatorsportsas well.
theymayknowbetterthantheviewer in theback of theirhead." The reason There is probablya status compo-
(to his discomfort)knows them- is verysimple.As theysit,students do nent in proxemicsalso. The poet
whereas,inprofessional movies,we are not ordinarily see one another'sfaces, Auden, who is not unself-conscious
accustomedto the rigid convention henceto see moreof othersand to be aboutthedignityand charismaof the
thatthe actorneverlooks directlyat seenby fewerof themfromthe back bard, who is acutelysensitiveproxe-
thecamera.Bothin moviesand on the seemsto conferincreasing anonymity mically (especially to architecture),
stage,to do so even at a distancein- and psychological privacyas theysit and who sharplydelineateshisprivate
volves the audienceand sharplydis- farthertowardthe rear of the room. and publicselves,was onlyhalf-play-
ruptsthedramaticillusionthatone is This is an illusion.Again becauseof fulwhenhe wrote"Somethirty inches
watching,unseen,a "real life" situa- thesensitivity of theeyesto peripheral frommynose/The frontierof myPer-
tion.(The factthattelevision commer- movement, all theteacherneeddo dur- son goes" (Auden 1965 4). Arthur
cialsofteninvolveactorslookingat the ingan examination is to turnhis erst- Schlesingernotedthaton the newsof
viewer is, I believe,anotherreason whileindiscriminate gaze immediately SenatorJohnKennedy'selectionto the
why some people particularlydislike upona headraisingup forthatstudent Presidencythe people who had been
themand feel theirprivacyhas been to be convincedthe teacherhas been closelyassociatedwith his campaign
rudely or oafishlyinvaded by the watchinghim specificallythe whole immediately behavedas if his space-
"gall" of total strangers actingas if time.A smileby the teachermakesit envelopehad suddenlyexpandedenor-
they knew you, and in your own even worse,in mobilizingthe guiltof mously,like someimpenetrable plate-
livingroomat that).The contrastbe- a possiblecheater.Also, an occasional glass mana inviolablythere(Schlesin-
tweenhome and professional movies strollandpauseat therearoftheroom, ger 1965). The late Presidentwas also
was brilliantly exploitedin one of the wherethestudentis seenby but does acutelysensitiveto the proxemicsof
Burton-Taylormovies when "home notsee theteacher,inducesa verypa- politicsand privacy(Schlesinger 1965
movies" were indicatedvery simply nic of honesty. : 98-104,et passim Chap. IV). With
and unmistakably by theactors'look- Thereis a sex componentof prox- respectto symbolicspace and psychic-
ing directlyintothe cameraand put- emicsto be attendedto. At faculty proxemicmeanings,we might also
ting on the self-consciousness of the partiesin theU.S.A., notoriously, men interest ourselvesin thedistinctspatial
amateurwhoknowshe'sbeing"taken." and womentend to place themselves differencesbetween Florence and
By habituallylookingintothecamera, on eitherside of an imaginaryline, Rome, London and Paris, as well as
certainmasters of ceremonies and pub- diagonalor otherwise acrosstheroom, in suchphenomena as Gauguin'sflight
lic figuresalways look amateurish, whentheysitdown.Thisis nota mat- to Tahiti and Joyce'sself-exilefrom
despitecontrivedtics of folksydis- ter of sex-relevanttopical interests, Ireland,and the discoverablereasons
embarrassment, such as touchingthe either,formanywomenbitterly com- forall these.
nose,etc. (La Barre,1964). Likewise, plain at missingthemasculineconver- Hall astutelynotesthateach animal
onlya trusted newscaster liketheAmer- sation,sincetheycan talk to women species has its "private subjective
ican WalterCronkite,with his mag- any day in the supermarket. Further- world"proxemically and ecologically.
nificentlycandid editorializingface, more,mentendto sitfarther apartand In thisconnection, von Vexkiill'ssen-
that lets you know exactlyhow he to move about morerestlessly, e.g. in sitiveKantianapproachto theoretical
feelsabouteach itemof newsand in- argument; womensitmorecloselyand biology (1926) profitablywould be
tervening advertisment can be allowed tendto keeponeplace.However,in an studiedby proxemicists. Finally,I will
to look directlyinto one's private intellectuallynon-pretentious "fun" shortlypublisha book in whichit is
livingroom. Also, his distancefrom party,everyone of theabove descrip- arguedthat the proxemicpatternsof
theTV camerais exactlyrightforboth tionsmustbe modified,even though hominids, in contrastwiththoseof ba-
dignityand friendliness. the very same people are involved. boons,similarlyterrestrial in thesame
By contrastwithall thisin movies Again, the topographyof rooms in environment as earlyAustralopitheci-
and its natural extension,televi- different housesmakesfor quite dif- nes,have a directbearingnot onlyon
sion,one of the secretsof successful ferentparties. sexual dimorphism and biomase but
viva voce publicspeakingespeciallyat Thereis also an age component in also on humanevolutionitself.
scmedistanceon a podiumis to look proxemics. In a livingroomand large
constantly intotheeyesof one specific porch we once entertained80 high
individualafteranother-notmerely school studentswith comfortin the by FRANK LYNCH, S.J.*
to samplefeedback,but also to "en- samespacein whichmorethan12 (sit-
gage" the audience(only a few get down party)to two dozen (stand-up 25 VII67
QuezonCity,ThePhilippines.
looked at, but everyone feels the party) adults would feel "crowded." Hall's workhas beenusefuland pro-
speakeris interested in one's personal Furthermore, thoughsometimesclose vocative. I wish, however,that he
reactions,and one is not an ignored enoughindeed at the studentparty, would movemorequicklytowardthe
fraction of a "captiveaudience").Fur- the young people accorded larger studyof subcultural differencesin dis-
thermore,experiencedteachers are space-bubbles at all timesto eachofthe tance-setting and give us fewerun-
aware of a topographic element in five adults presenteven thoughstu- differentiated "Americans,""Arabs,"
teaching: apple-polishers,especially dentsrepeatedly soughtout theadults. and "Greeks."Generalcategoriessuch
the prettybut not-so-bright girls,sit It is also possiblethatproxemicpat- as the latterare justifiable, and even
toward the frontof the classroom, ternsvaryin historic time.For examp- inevitable,in the early stagesof any
whereasthe more detachedand in- le, therealcontactualcloseness of dan- intercultural butI wouldlike
research,
dependentmindsclustermoreto the cing in an older generationcontrasts to see greaterattentionnow to those
rear. In my own quarter-century of with theperhapsmoreovertbut still status and regional distinctionsof
teaching,the most brilliantstudents onlysymbolicyard-apartsexualityof whichHall is so clearlyaware. My
have almostinvariablysat in the last all youthfuldances from the twist desireis promptedby thefactthatour
row. The same may be seen in other onward. Older dancing was to be researchin the mappingof Tagalog
academicpublic lecturing;the degree mutuallyexperienced;the narcissistic, disease and kinship categorieshas
of interestin thesubjectmaybe indic- sometimes dolefullyisolateindividual made it painfullyclear that every
102 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
individual within this subnational Hall: PROXEMICS
group has his own way of seeing
things,and getson withothersby the 1) The attemptto draw general tain aspectsof behavior,thena Skin-
overlapshe shareswiththem;we look metaphysicalimplicationsfrom the nerianapproachto learningis indeed
forwardto even greaterdifferences discoveryof cultural regularitiesis appropriate. Explanationof thelearn-
when we compareTagalog speakers doomedto fail.Whorf'sideas are dif- ing of proxemicbehaviorwill show
with otherFilipinos.There seemsto ficultto graspmostlybecausetheyare how the reinforcement schedulescon-
be no reasonto expectthattheuse of terribly muddled:theyare frighteningtrollingthat aspect of behaviorare
space will show significantly smaller only as ambiguousshadowsare frigh- relatedto the contingencies of a par-
inter-subcultural differences. tening.It is interesting thatHall puts ticularculture;a culturewhichkeeps
Attentionto subculturaldifferences "free will" inside'quotationmarks; the child close to the mother'sknee
will naturallyincludea studyof how theiruse meansthatnothingpreciseis untiltheage of fivewill use reinforc-
situationsare subculturally definedas to be understoodby what's inside in,gstimulidifferent fromthoseof a
calling,for instance,for one kind of them.And whenanyonesays"all men cu turewhichseparatesa child from
interpersonal space or another.Among are captives of the language they itsmotherat theinceptionof thesub-
multilinguals (as manyFilipinosare), speak," we know immediatelythat sequentpregnancy. Thusa wholestra-
theroleof thelanguageor dialectused he's tryingto give us shiversrather tegyof investigating proxemicbehav-
to open a conversation, to carryit on, thana clearmessage.The word "cap- ior can be developedon the precise
to interrupt it,or to closeit,will pre- tive" makes'sense only as it has a studyof how theseschedulesof rein-
dictablybe foundmosttellingas an significantopposite, like "escapee," forcement are relatedto othercultural
intervening variable determining in- "captor," etc. What is the contrast contingencies.
terpersonaldistance.It has been ob- here?This shiveryand mostlymean- If proxemicsis reallya branchof
served by our interviewers, among ingless talk about captives can be linguistics, however,as Hall sometimes
others,thatat timesthesituationitself replaced by two rathersimple as- seemsto believe,thenwhat a young-
calls for one language or another, sertions: sterlearnsis not behaviorat all but
while at other times the language a) Any man can say only what is a systemof rules,and the learningof
chosenas an openersignalsthe tone sayable in the language(s)he speaks. thoserulescannotbe accountedforby
of the situationand gets distinctre- b) Any man can perceivehis en- Skinnerianreinforcement (Chomsky
sultsin termsof interpersonal space. vironment only withinthe categories 1959; McClellan1966). I can see some
and distinctions available to him in reasonsfor treatingproxemicsas a
thelanguage(s)he speaks. branchof linguistics,othersfornot. I
by J.E. MCCLELLAN* Assertion (a) is a tautology con- rathersuspect, however, thatthiscon-
veying no informationwhatsoever, ceptual distinctionwill have to be
Philadelphia,Pa., U.S.A. 12 VI67 ergonothing frightening. Assertion (b) workedout with some precisionbe-
To reveal the cultural significance of is an empirical generalization which is forethe researchoutlinedat the end
particularhumanacts is the goal of interesting if not (as it stands)pre- of Hall's paper can be pursuedeffec-
all social science.Hall and his col- ciselytrue.Researchon (b) will push tively.
leagueshave demonstrated conclusiv- us to investigatethe connectionbe- In fine: proxemicshas proved an
ely that acts which establishspatial tween the neurophysiological struc- enormouslyfruitfulfield of research
relationsarnongpersonsare (as we turesof perceptionand the syntactic despitethe cloudinessof its guiding
mightnot have suspectedtheywould structures of language;and if my un- principle.The timemay come,how-
be) acts fraughtwithculturalsignifi- derstanding is at all accurate,that's ever, to tidy thingsup a bit even
cance. Those responsible for practical where the gold is. It's timeto forget whileadvancingtheempiricalresearch.
social decisionsshould be especially the vagaries of generalcommunica-
grateful forthelessonstaughtby Hall: tions theory,especiallythe seminal,
when,forexample,we evaluatevari- brilliantconfusionsof Whorf,and by DONALD S. MARSHALL*
ous plans for racial integrationin move proxemicsonto the empirical
urban schools-busing, educational basisof neurophysiology. Alexandria, V4.,U.S.A.25 VII67
parks,urban-suburban exchanes-we 2) In preciselywhatsenseis proxe- Hall's articleis a distinctcontribution
can no longerignore(as we ave in micsto be considereda branchof lin- to anthropological theory,and to ap-
thepast)thevariouspatterns of spa- guistics?If one carriesa "communi- plied anthropology, pointingout some
tialrelations created byeachproposed cations bias" to the point of saying ramifications of theapparentfactthat
solution. If itservedno otherpurpose, thatcultureis a processof communica- space may be viewedor treateddif-
theodd term"proxemics" wouldbe tion,thenone has theproblemof mak- ferentlyin variouscultures.Perhaps
an excellent mnemonic devicerecall- ing it clear how language,in the full even moresignificant is that part of
ing those subtle,unconscious, but senseof the term,differsfromother the articlewhichrepresents a begin-
emotionally potentactsbywhichmen formsof communications. One can ningeffort to relateculturaltreatment
keeptheirworldat theright distance. treatany ecologicalsystemas a pro- of space to themoreuniversalaspects
I takethepresent articleto be signif- cessof communication; in someinstan- of culturaldynamics.I am sorrythat
icantas a reflection of thefuture of ces thismodel may be quite illumin- Hall did not developthisin morede-
proxemics ratherthanas a reportof ating, in others merely distracting tail.
findings, whichareavailableingreater (Black 1962). It is alwayswell to em- The articlereflectscertainpointsof
detailelsewhere. I suspect, thoughI phasize continuity-e.g.,betweenor- view which,in myopinion,preventit
cannotproveit here,thatcertain ob- ganismand biotope,betweenculture frombeingas importanta contribu-
viousphilosophical confusions which and physiology,etc.-but it is also tionas it mighthave been.First,I do
maynothavehindered proxemic re- necessary,occasionally,to emphasize not findin it a treatment of the dif-
search initsearlystages(possibly quite differences, especiallybetweenlangu- ferentiationof individual behavior
thereverse) mayprovein thefuture age properand otherformsof com- fromthe abstractmean of groupbe-
to be formidableobstacles.Let me munications.For researchin proxe- havior. My impressionis that there
mention, just as examples,two philo- mics,thisdifference is crucial,foron may be morevariationin individual
sophicallyquestionable pointsin Hall's it depends whattheory of learning is behaviorand attitudesin thetreatment
essay(the numbercould be expanded to be employedin interpreting the of space wvithin a groupthanthereis
indefinitely if space allowed it): data. If proxemics is thestudyof cer- fromcultural aroun to cultural group.
Vol. 9 . No. 2-3. April-June
1968 103
 My secondconcernis that,without quiredin any majorarea of ethnogra- Ultimately, what may prove to be
explicitlysayingso, Hall attemptsto phic study,irrespective of who the important in proxemics is notso much
build "proxemics"into what would subjectsare and of whetherone is boundaries,but doors-methods of
appearto be a separatefieldof study. studying"structure" or "content." communication across boundaries.
Othershave attempted to do thesame My last, and perhapsmost funda- Having definedsocial space,our task
thingwith the field labeled "seman- mental,pointof difference withHall will be to discoverby what means
tics."Grantedtheimportance of both (and perhapsthisis an articleof faith boundariescan be crossed,by whom,
of thesefacetsof culture,nevertheless ratherthanreason)is withhis prefer- when,where,in what directionsand
theyremainbut two amongthe very encefortheanalysisofstructure rather withwhatcredentials. A Fijian house,
many facetsof culturalbehavior.It thancontent. To methe"why"ofwhat for example,has for boundariesfour
wouldseemto methatonceoneunder- is beingobservedseemsmuchmoresig- walls,butitis itsfourdoorsthatareso-
standsand acceptsthefactthatdiffer- nificant thanthedetailedre-analysis of ciallysignificant: One door is forvi-
entculturestreatspace,ideas,and ob- the"what."One mustagree,of course, sitorsin general,two doorsare forthe
jects differently one mustthengo on thatto analyze any subject,one first members of the householdand privi-
to moreprofound aspectsof research- must be thoroughlyaware of the legedvisitors, and one door is forthe
to the"whys" ratherthanthe"whats." "what" of thatsubject;but I believe ownerof the house and no one else.
Thirdly,I have some reservations one mustthengo on to understand the
overthefactmuchof thearticleseems "why." for it is the answerto this by HARVEY B. SARLES*
built around only a relativelyfew querywhichwill lead us to an ulti-
"facts."Presumably, Hall and his stu- mateknowledgeof "man'sways." Minneapolis, Minn.,U.S.A.31 VII67
dents have many more data upon This review of Hall's work and
whichto base generalizations. Proxe- by G. B. MILNER* thoughtsis a welcomerecognition that
micsanalysismustproducemorethan thereare othersystems of behaviorin
the differentiation of "U.S." versus London,England.17 VII 67 additionto those currentlyenjoying
"Arab" or "U.S.." versus "Central Hall's articleis very suggestiveand popularity among anthropologists.
American"of his examples. shouldlead to a hostof newinvestiga- Since I agreewholeheartedly withhis
Fourth,it seemsto me that Hall's tions,not least in our own Western positionI onlywishto tryto expand
approachdoesnotreallyreflect a deep culture. on it here.
knowledgeof photographic technique If one accepts "proxemics,"what One getsthefeelingthatHall thinks
and its possibilities,in its relationto about"proxetics"? That is, how many of spaceas a ratherstablesetof boun-
photographing individuals.My experi- dimensions of space will one have to dedcirclessurrounding eachindividual.
ence over thepast 30 years,firstas Q recognise beforeone can establishwhat These are presumablylearned as a
professional photographer and lateras thesignificant co-ordinates or opposi- distinctsystem,a systemmuch like
an anthropological fieldworker using tionsare in any one culture?For in- language.By analogy with language
photographic equipment, has persuad- stance,in Polynesiaand manyother as it has traditionally been described,
ed me thatit is not thesize of theca- partsof the world,the heightof the thissystemmustbe made up of "per-
meraone operatesthataffectstheabi- speaker'shead, above, or level with, ceptualelements", and the job of the
lity to derive"natural"photographs or below the head of the personad- proxemicist is merelyto discoverthem
of one's subjects,but ratherone's abi- dressed,is significant. Movement(ver- -and to see whetheror not elements
lityto "teach"one's subjectsthatone tical,horizontal,etc.) betweenpoints of different culturesinterfere withone
will only photographwhat is "na- in space may also have to be con- another,thuseffectively stoppingpos-
tural"and "unposed."It doesnottake sidered. siblecommunication. Becausedifferent
SouthSea islanderslong to learnthis The questionof overcrowding (sub- species live in differentcognitive
fact;I suspectthesamewouldbe true jectiveor otherwise)and of its effects worldsas a functionof theirphysio-
amongthepeoplewithwhomHall and on animalsand, by extrapolation, on logy,the proxemicist is primarilyin-
his studentsworked. Hall probably man is clearly of great importance. terestedin physiology and perception.
will cometo agreewithme thatit is L6vi-Strauss has evensuggested a pos- My primarycriticism of thisposi-
notthesize or brandof camerathatis siblecorrelation betweenhumanover- tionis muchthesameas mycriticism
significant;it is theuse of thatcamera crowdingand racialism.It is instruc- of much of linguistictheory:There
that characterizesthe photographer tive to noteany specialtechniques by is no doubtin my mindthatparticu-
who can get the kind of resultsthat means of which overcrowde com- late entities(phonemes, morphophone-
are required. munities maintain social distance in mes,perceptualentities,etc.) have a
In contrastto Hall, I seeno needfor spiteof closephysicalcontactand high kindof reality;but theydo not con-
a "specialmethodology" foranalyzing densityhousing(e.g., in London,and stitute the entire shared world. A
theculturalview and use of space: it New York also perhaps,wherein the linguistic analysisprovidesan approx-
seemsto methatthissubjectis fullyas rush-hour one tendsnot to speak to imationto a languagewhichcan be
amenableto theanthropologist's obser- peoplein thetube(subway)and where made real by nativespeakers;but it
vationas are the patternsof interac- socialintercourse generallytendsto be is not a completedescription, and it
tion betweenkinsmen,the utilization morerestricted thanelsewhere). Note, yieldsno insightinto how people use
of social power,or the otherintangi- howeverthatforcertainpolitical,re- it to communicate or to learn about
bles whichthoseof us workingin the ligiousand athleticactivities,"over- the world whichthe languageis said
fieldmustcapture,firstwithour in- crowding"seemsto be not only tol- to represent. It is fineforwritingdic-
tellect,and thenin transposition with eratedmore readily,but deliberately tionaries.
pencilor typewriter. NothingHall has encouragedand even soughtafter,for It is difficultto escape reifying
said in hisarticlepersuadesmethatthe reasonswhich may be as yet imper- whateversystem one isconcerned with,
fieldmethods forproxemics shoulddif- fectlyunderstood. but theattemptto escapeoughtto be
fersignificantly fromthestudyofother I do not thinkthatan inventory of made.Still photosare momentary ab-
facetsof man'sculturalbehavior. lexical itemsto goingto be as infor- stractionsfromlife and are usually
This particulardifference of view mativeas Hall seems to think.The quite different from a movie frame
relatesalso to mydisbelief in the"uni- Keesingsused this techniquein their extractedfromongoingmovement. As
queness"of proxemics or itsapproach. studyof Elite Communication in Sa- in the studyof language,Hall would
The needfor"sensitivity" pointedout moa (1956) with somewhatmediocre like to findthe systemand thenadd
by Hall seemsto me to be equallyre- results. meaningand contextto the system's
104 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
elementsas if they constitutedan Hall: PROXEMICS
episystem or metasystem to the basic
system. The likelihoodof findingsuch severalyears,attending, amongother systems-constituting two termsof my
a systemseems minimal. More likely, things, to spatialvariables.The poten- three-wayanalysis). In my opinion,
the handling of space, the handling of tial applicationand utilityof portable proxemics does not involvea separate
one's body, are intimately a part of videotapingare clear.It onlyremains level of unitsthatcombineintostruc-
one's being, one's language, one's to bringongoingresearch an teaching turedforms, whichthenexpressmean-
ability to exist in a complex world. in this area formallyinto graduate ing; rather,units-and-forms together
As in linguistics,the assertion that training in anthropology,a taskwhich are a level,withmeaningas another.
one systemis basic or more important is daily beingaccomplished in several In thisrespect,proxemicsis, I. think,
than others is never substantiatedand outlying universities. like kinesicsor like paralanguage.
remains on the level of "givens." As The suggestion that"dualityof pat-
in linguistics,the grammarhas become terning" is"characteristic
of all life..."
basic, the study of context and mean- by GEORGE L. TRAGER* is anotherinstanceof the same mis-
ing subordinate. But how and what apprehension.I believe, from what
one perceivesat a given momentmight Dallas, Texas, U.S.A. 5 VIl 67 littleI knowabout(not of) molecular
reflecta bad job situation as well as This is an excellentreviewarticleby biology,thatRNA and DNA involve
a particular physiological propensity. theinventor (if one mayuse theterm) units-and-structure at once in their
A most fruitfulapproach to the study of proxemics.This culturalsystemor "information code" and thus do not
of proxemics might well attempt to dimensionis so obvious,when we're have "duality"as Hockettmeantit.
build in context as a variable, rather told about it, and yet remainsout- Aside fromthis point, which needs
than as an afterthought. side theawarenessof mostpeople,in- muchmoreresearchand analysisbe-
On the other hand, Hall's list of cluding most anthropologists. Hall's forebeingfullysettled,I wantto com-
areas to be investigatedis well thought articleshoulddo muchin callingthe mendthis articleunreservedly. Data
out. If they are taken seriously,it is attentionof us all to the field of pertainingto the relatednessof the
not hard to see that the study of proxemics. proxemicsand the linguisticsof in-
proxemics could constitute a focus I do not necessarilythinkthat the dividualculturesremainto be gather-
around which a general ethnographic termproxemics is the best there is ed, and thiskindof researchseemsto
approach could be constructed.One for the area of investigation.My ob- offervast possibilitiesformakingan-
of the few missing areas, and one jectionis perhapsbasedon thefeeling thropology a trulyunified,thoughdi-
which would probably be appealing that wherethereis an -emics, there verse,data-baseddiscipline.Whenwe
to many social anthropologists,is the shouldalso be an -etics-but proxetics have done the neededbasic research,
explicit recognitionthat the handling would hardlybe a mellifluous or de- and have the data systematically dis-
of space is intimately tied up with sirable addition to the vocabulary. played,therewill be timeenough,for
social structure and that proxemics However,sincethe termproxemics is thoseinterested, to look into history
may be directly applicable for dis- beingused by the originator of work or origins.
covering the workings of any social in thefield,I shouldjudgethatwe're
organization. stuckwith it. (Some yearsago some
As the ethologist Glen McBride linguiststriedto get rid of the term by ANDREW P. VAYDA*
pointed out in a talk at the University linguist-and presumably linguistics-
butthewordhas remainedin use.) New York,N.Y., U.S.A. 10 VII 67
of Minnesotathisyear,the wise animal
husbandman does not build chicken The only place whereI would sug- I do not understand whyHall avoids
coops to give each animal so many gestsome restatement is in the treat- even raising the questionsof why
square feetof space in order to keep it mentof therelationship of thespoken thereshouldbe culturally specificdif-
content.He gives the community-the languageto proxemics. Hockett'sorig- ferencesin "spatial experience,"how
social structure- enough space to be inal list of the "designfeatures"of theymightrelateto different condi-
used as the communityorganizes its languageis mostvulnerablein itsspe- tions,and how theymightbe affected
space. cificationof "duality."Actually,lan- whentheconditions change.He might,
Concerning techniquesand methods guagehas trialityratherthanduality: forexample,have consideredthepos-
of observation and recording, more the substance(forms)is expressedby sibilitythatpopulation-specific varia-
sophisticationand more usable instru- the diacritics(sounds),and functions tionsin the toleranceof crowdingre-
mentation now exists than Hall has as meanings-see Trager (1963). I late to variationsin ecological re-
claimed. Several of us in Pittsburgh thinkHall has somewhatmisappre- quirements for populationdispersion
(Condon 1966), Birdwhistellet al. in hendedwhatHockettmeantby "dual- in land use. At the very least,such
Philadelphia, and now we in Minne- ity" (the independentstructuring of problems
mighthavebeenmentioned in
sota have worked with movies for the phonologicaland morphological Hall's listof areasto be investigated.

umweltof theirauthors,just as the I am awarethatthe taskI haveset myself

Reply originalarticlereflectsmy own par- makesexcessivedemandsupon mypen. It
is almostimpossibleto portrayin words
ticularworldview. of a systemin whichevery
byEDWARD T. HALL the functioning
In the processof reviewof these partis relatedto everyotherin sucha way
I want to thankthosecolleagueswho statements I was remindedof a dis- that each has a causal influenceon the
tookthetroubleto read and comment tinction popularized by Marshall others.Evenif one is onlytrying to explain
incomplete
on thisbriefand necessarily McLuhan (1963, 1964); namely,that a gasolineengineit is hardto knowwhere
summary of myrecentwork.The ob- thereis sucha thingas linearand non- to begin,becausethepersonto whomone
servationswere helpfuland represent linearthinking. In general,Englishand seeks to explainit can onlyunderstand the
natureof the crankshaft if he has first
a particulartypeof record.It was in- relatedlanguageslend themselves to grasped that of the connecting rods, the
to note the degreeto which
teresting theformer. to im- pistons,thevalves,thecamshaft,
Since it is difficult and so on.
the individualcommentsreflectthe prove on Conrad Lorenz's statement Unlessone understands theelements ofa
biases,and to someextentthe
interests, (1966), I am quotingit: completesystemas a whole,one cannot

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 105

understandthem at all. The more complex suspect,however,that as anthropolo- sometimes lead to ways of clarifying
the structureof a systemis, the greaterthis
gistsrearedin culturesotherthanmy what Sullivan(1947) called paratoxic
difficultybecomes-and it must be sur- own learnto use thissystemthatthey communication.
mountedboth in one's researchand in one's
teaching.Unfortunately, the workingstruc- would,in so doing,modifythesystem My pointis thatin orderto under-
and that the modifications
tureof the instinctiveand culturallyacquir- that they standall but thesimplestcommunica-
ed patternsof behavior which make up the makewill tellus something of culture. tions(as in Chomsky's"kernel"sen-
social life of man seems to be one of the I have foundmyselfin a position tences[1957]) one mustbe situation-
most complicatedsystemswe know on this analogousto ShirleyJackson'swhen ally programmed in advance.The de-
earth. the "Lottery"appeared in the New gree to which two or more implicit
Yorker. Therewas littleagreement as programsvary determines the para-
The pointis thatI have describedthe to just what it was in Miss Jackson's toxic content(culturallyengendered
basicstructure of a system(in thesense articlethat evoked such strongreac- noise)of a communication. The para-
thatLorenz [ibid] uses the term)for tions in her readers.There was no toxicelementincreases as a functionof
revealinga restricted, but apparently doubt,however,thatshe had strucka bothcomplexity (number oflevelsas in
relevantaspect of behaviorthat re- nerve.It is thissortof eventthatin- Trager'scomment[p. 105] and cul-
mainsreasonablystablebecause it func- terests me. tural distance.In general,therefore,
tions out-of-awareness. In so doing, I havelaid a greatemphasis on what I would say that the indeterminacy
thereis no implication thatothersys- people do (even anthropologists) and principleapplies to the examination
temsare notvalid pointsof entryinto notso muchemplhasis on theideasthey of culturaleventsjust as it does to
cultures.In fact,it is justtheopposite. have about theirsubject.People who the sub-atomicworld (Hall 1959);
It is also quite evidentthat different interactacrossculturallinesare con- that is, one can be ratherspecificin
culturalsystems eco- stantly and inadvertentlytouching
(social,linguistic, the examinationof any given level
nomic,temporal,and the like) inte- eachother'ssorespots.Oftentheycan- of culture, but that specificityis
grate,in waysas yetinadequately des- not bringthemselves to admitthis.I gained at the expenseof clarityon
cribed,into the largersystemof cul- have foundthatexplorations of these other levels. One would hope, of
tureas a whole.Someof thecomments sensitiveareas not onlytell me some- course,thatthiswould not alwaysbe
relate to the integrative relationship thingof the hiddenstructure of my thecase,and thatat somefuturedate
-betweensystems.I do not know the own cultureand providea way of writersof Englishwould not be tied
degreeto whichthe proxemic, system gettingat the detailsof the specific to such a linearsystem(cf.McLuhan
is applicableto all cultures.I would eventsI am studying,but also they 1959).

BONNER, JOHN T. 1963. How slime molds CHRISTIAN, JOHN J. 1960. Factors in mass
Cited
References communicate.ScientificAmerican209(2): mortalityof a herd of Sika deer (Cervus
84-86. nippon). Chesapeake Science 1:79-95.
BURKE, KENNETH. 1966. "The thinkingof 1963. The pathologyof overpopula-
ABRAMS, CHARLES. 1965. The city is the the body," in Language as symbolkc tion.MilitaryMedicine 128:571-603.
frontier.New York: Harper & Row. CHRISTIAN, JOHN J., VAGH FLYGER, and
action, pp. 308-43. Berkeley and Los
ALLEE, WARDER C. 1958. The social life Angeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress. DAVID E. DAVIS. 1961. Phenomena as-
of animals. Boston: Beacon Press. [DH*] sociated with populationdensity.Proceed-
ARGYLE, M. and J.DEAN. 1965. Eye-contact, BYERS, PAUL. 1966. Cameras don't take ings of the National Academyof Science
distance, and affiliation.Sociometry28: pictures.Columbia UniversityForum 9. 47:428-49.
289-304. [ARD*] CALHOUN, JOHN B. 1950. The studyof wild
CHRISTIAN, JOHNJ., and DAVID E. DAVIS.
AUDEN, W. H. 1965. About the house. New animals under controlled conditions. 1964. Social and endocrine factors are
Annals of the New York Academy of integratedin the regulationof growthof
York: Random House. [WL*]
Sciences 51:113-22. mammalian populations. Science 146:
BAIN, A. D. 1949. Dominance in the Great 1550-60.
Tit, Parus Major. ScottishNaturalist61: ---. 1962a. "A behavioral sink," in Roots
of behavior. Edited by Eugene L. Bliss, COLLIER, JOHN,JR. 1967. Holt, Rinehart, &
369-472. Winston. In press.
BARRY, HERBERT, III. 1957. Relationships pp. 295-316. New York: Harper &
Brothers. CONDON, W. S. 1967. A segmentationof
between child training and the pictorial behavior.MS.
arts. Journal of Abnormal and Social 1962b. Population densityand social
pathology.ScientificAmerican 206:139- CONDON, W. S., and W. D. OGSTON. 1966.
Psychology54:380-83. [JLF*] Sound film analysis of normal and
BATESON, GREGORY. 1948. "Sex and cul-
46.
CARPENTER,C. R. 1958. "Territoriality:A pathological behavior patterns. The
ture," in Personal characterand cultural Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
review of concepts and problems," in
milieu,pp. 94-107. Ann Arbor: Edwards 143(4) :338-47.
Behavior and evolution.Edited by A. Roe
Brothers.
and G. G. Simpson, pp. 224-50. New DEEVEY, EDWARD S. 1960. The hare and
BERELSON, BERNARD, and GARY A. STEINER.
Haven: Yale UniversityPress. the haruspex: A cautionarytale. Yale
1964. Human behavior. New York:
Harcourt, Brace & World. CARPENTER, EDMUND, FREDERICK VARLEY, Review,Winter.
tIRDWHISTELL, RAYMONDL. 1952. Introduc- and ROBERT FLAHERTY. 1959. Eskimo. DIEBOLD, A. R., JR. 1967. "Anthropology
tion to kinesics.Louisville: Universityof Toronto: Universityof TorontoPress. and the comparativepsychologyof com-
Louisville Press. CHOMBART DE LAUWE, PAUL. 1959a. municative behavior," in Animal com-
BLACK, MAX. 1962. Models and metaphors: Famille et habitation.Paris: Editions du munication: Techniques of study and
Studies in language and philosophy. CentreNational de la RechercheScientifi- resultsof research.Edited byT. A. Sebeok.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press. que. Bloomington:Indiana UniversityPress. In
---. 1959b. Le milieu et l'etude sociologi- press. [ARD*]
[JEM*]
BLOOMFIELD, LEONARD. 1933. Language. que de cas individuels. Informations DORNER, ALEXANDER. 1958. The way
New York: H. Holt. Sociales 2:41-54. beyond art. New York: New York Uni-
BOAs, FRANZ. 1911. "Introduction," in CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1957. SyntacticStructures. versityPiess.
Handbook of AmericanIndian Languages. The Hague: Mouton & Co. EIBL-EIBESFELDT, I. 1961. The fighting
Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 1959. Review of: Verbal behavior, behavior of animals. ScientificAmerican
40. by B. F. Skinner.Language 35:26-56. 205(6):112-22.
BOLINGER, DWIGHT L. 1961. Generality, [MD, JEM*] ERRINGTON, PAUL. 1956. Factors limiting
gradience,and theall-or-none.The Hague: -1965.Aspectsof the theoryof syntax. higher vertebrate populations. Science
Mouton. [JLF*] Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. [MD*] 124:304-7.

106 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

 , 1957. Of men and marshe.s.New Hall: PROXEMICS
York: The Macmillan Company.
1961. Muskrats and marsh manage- communication,"in The ethnographyof petence," in Research planning con-
ment. Harrisburg:Stackpole Company. communication.Edited by American An- ferenceon language developmentin dis-
FISCHER, J. L. 1961. Art styles as cultural thropologist66(6), part2.154-63. advantaged children, pp. 1-16. New
cognitivemaps. American Anthropologist --. 1964b. "Silent assumptionsin social York: Yeshiva University. [DH*]
63.79-93. [JLF*] communication,"in Disorders of com- JAMMER, MAX. 1960. Concepts of space.
FRAKE, CHARLES 0. 1960. "Family and kin- municationXLII. Edited by Rioch and New York: Harper.
ship in EasternSubanun," in Social struc- Weinstein, pp. 41-55. Baltimore: Re- JOOS, MARTIN. 1962. The fiveclocks. Inter-
ture in Southeast Asia. Edited by G. P. search Publications Association for Re- national Journal of AmericanLinguistics
Murdock, pp. 51-64. Viking Fund Pub- search in Nervous and Mental Disease. 28(2):Part V.
licationsin Anthropologyno. 29. --. 1966. The hidden dimension. New KEESING, FELIX M., and MARIE M.
FRIED, MARC. 1963. "Grieving for a lost York: Doubleday. KEESING. 1956. Elite communicationin
home,' in The urban condition. Edited HALL, EDWARDT., and GEORGE L. TRAGER. Samoa: A study of leadership. Stanford
by Leonard J. Duhl. New York: Basic 1953. The analysis of culture.Washing- AnthropologicalSeries no. 3.
Books. ton, D.C.: American Council of Learned [GBM*]
FRIED, MARC, and PEGGY GLEICHER. 1961. Societies. KEITER, FRIEDRICH. 1966. Verhaltensbiolo-
Some sources of residentialsatisfactionin HALL, EDWARD T., and WILLIAM F. WHYTE. gie des Menschen auf kulturanthropolo-
an urban slum. Journalof the American 1960. Inter-culturalcommunication.Hu- gischerGrundlage.Munchen-Basel.
Instituteof Planners27:305-15. manOrganization19(1):5-12. [BB*]
GANS, HERBERT. 1960. The urban villagers. HALLIDAY,M. A. K., ANGUS MCINTOSH and KILPATRICK, FRANKLIN P. Editor. 1961. Ex-
Cambridge:The MI.T. Pressand Harvard PETER STREVENS.1964. The linguistic plorations in transactional psychology.
UniversityPress. sciences and language teaching. London: New York: New York UniversityPress.
GERBNER, GEORGE. 1966. On defining Longmans. [DH*] LA BARRE, W. 1964. "Paralinguistics,
communication:still another view. The HALLOWELL, A. IRVING. 1955. "Cultural kinesics, and cultural anthropology,"in
Journalof Communication16:99-103. factorsin spatial orientation,"in Culture Approachesto semiotics.Edited by T. A.
[DH*] and experience,pp. 184-202. Philadel- Sebeok, A. S. Hayes, and M. C. Bateson,
GIBSON, JAMES J. 1950. The perceptionof phia: Universityof PennsylvaniaPress. pp. 191-220. The Hague: Mouton.
the visual u'orld. Boston: Houghton HARRIS,ZELLIG. 1951. Structural linguistics. [WL*]
Mifflin. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press. LANTIS, MARGARET. 1960. Vernacular cul-
GIBSON, J.J.and A. D. PICK. 1963. Percep- [MD*] ture. American Anthropologist62:202-
tion of anotherperson's looking behavior. HAYES, ALFRED S. 1964. 'Paralinguistics 16.
American Journal of Psychology76:386- and kinesics:Pedagogical perspectives," in LEACH, EDMUNDR. 1965. Cultureand social
94. [ARD*] Approachesto semiotics.Edited by T. H. cohesion: An anthropologist's view.
GIEDION, SIGFRIED. 1962. The eternal Sebeok and A. S. Hayes. The Hague: Daedalus, Winter,pp. 24-38.
present: The beginningsof architecture. Mouton. LtVI-STRAUSS, CLAUDE. 1966a. The scope
Vol. II. New York: BollingenFoundation, HEDIGER, H. 1950. Wild animals in of anthropology. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
PantheonBooks. caphivitv.London: Butterworth. 7:112-23.
GILLIARD, E. THOMAS. 1962. On the breed- 1955. Studies of the psychologyand 1966b. Anthropology: Its achieve-
ing behavior of the Cock-of-the-Rock behavior of captive animals in zoos and ments and future. CURRENT ANTPROPOL-
(Aves. Rupicola rupicola). Bulletin of the circuses.London: Butterworth. OGY 7:124-27.
American Museum of Natural History 1961. "The evolution of territorial LISSMAN,H. W. 1963. Electriclocation by
124:31-68. behavior," in Social life of Early Man. fishes.ScientificAmerican208(3):50-59.
1963. Evolution of bowerbirds. Edited by S. L. Washburn, pp. 34-57. LITrLE, KENNETHB. 1965. Personal space.
ScientificAmerican209(2):38-46. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropol- Journalof ExperimentalSocial Psychology
GLEASON, H. A., JR. 1965. Linguisticsand ogy no. 31. 1:237-47.
English grammar. New York: Holt, HELLERSBERG, ELIZABETH F. 1950. Adapta- 1967. Value congruenceand inter-
Rinehart, and Winston. [DH*] tion to realityof our culture.Springfield: actiondistances.Journalof Social Psychol-
GOFFMAN, ERVING. 1959. The presentation C. C. Thomas. ogy. In press.
of self in everyday life. New York: --. 1966. Spatial structures and images in LORENZ, KONRAD. 1963. On Agression.New
Doubleday. Japan, a key to culture understanding. York: Harcourt,Brace & World.
1961. Encounters. Indianapolis: MS. 1964. Das sogenannte Bose; zur
Bobbs-Merrill. HINDE, R. A., and NIKO TINBERGEN. 1958. naturgeschichte der Agression (the biology
GOODENOUGH, WARD H. 1963. Cooperation "The comparativestudyof species-specific of aggression). Vienna: Dr. G. Borotha-
in change. New York: Russell Sage behavior," in Behavior and evolution. Schoeler.
Foundation. [DH*] Edited by A. Roe and G. G. Simpson,pp. LYND, ROBERT S. 1948. Knowledge for
GROSSER, MAURICE. 1951. The painter's 251-68. New Haven: Yale University what? Princeton: Princeton University
eye. New York: Rinehart. Press. Press.
HALL, EDWARD T. 1955. The anthropology HOCKETr,CHARLESF. 1958. A course in McBRIDE, GLEN. 1964. A generaltheoryof
of manners.ScientificAmerican 192:85- modern linguistics. New York: Mac- social organizationand behavior.St. Lucia,
89. millan. Australia: Universityof QueenslandPress.
1956. "A microculturalanalysis of ---. 1960. The originof speech.Scientific MCCLELLAN, JAMES E. 1966. Skinner's
time." Proceedings of the Fifth Inter- American 203:338--96. philosophy of human nature. Studies in
national Congressof Anthropologicaland HOWARD, H. E. 1920. Territoryin bird Philosophyand Education4:307-32.
EthnologicalSciences, Philadelphia, Sept. life. London: Murray. MCCULLOCH, WARREN S. 1948. Teleological
1-9, 1956, pp. 118-22. HYMES,DELL. 1964. "Introduction:Toward mechanisms.Annals of the New Ycrk
1959. The silent language. Garden ethnographies of communication," in Academyof Sciences 50:259-77.
City: Doubleday. The ethnography of communication. 1964. "Reliable systemsusing un-
1960a. The madding crowd. Land- Edited by John Gumperz and Dell reliable units,"' in Disorders of Corr
scape, Autumn,pp. 26-29. Hymes, pp. 1-34. Washington, D.C.: municationXLII. Edited by Rioch and
--. 1960h. ICA participantEnglish lan- AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation. Weinstein. Baltimore: Research Publica-
guange requirementguide, part I. Wash- [DH*] tions Associationfor Researchin Nervous
ington,D.C. 1966. "Two typesof linguistic re- and Mental Disease.
--. 1963a. "Proxemics-The study of lativity," in Sociolinguistics. Edited by MCCULLOCH, WARREN S., and WALTER
man's spatial relations and boundaries," William Bright,pp. 114-58. The Hague: PITTS. 1947. How we know universals;
in Man s image in medicineand anthro- Mouton. [DH*] the perception of auditory and visual
pology, pp. 422-45. New York: Inter- 1967a. "The anthropologyof com- forms.Bulletinof MathematicalBiophysics
nationalUniversitiesPress. munication," in Human communication 9:127-47.
--.1963b. A systemfor the notationof theory.Edited by Frank X. W. Dance, MCHARG,IAN. 1963 "Man and his environ-
proxemic behavior. American Anthropol- pp. 139. New York: Holt, Rinehart,and ment,"in The urban condition.Edited by
ogist 65:1003-26. Winston. [DH*] Leonard J.Duhl. New York: Basic Books.
--.1964a. "Adumbrationin intercultural --.1967b. "On communicative com- MCLuHAN, MARSHALL. 1963. The Guten-

Vol. 9. No. 2-3 . April-June1968 107

 burg galaxy. Toronto: Universityof --. 1938. Why cultural anthropology Study.ThomasA. C. RennieSeries in
Toronto.Press. Psychiatry1:7-12.
needs the psychiatrist. New York: McGraw-
Social Psychiatry.
-, Media. New
1964. Uitderstanding [DH*] Hill.
York:McGraw-HilL 1949. Selected writingsof Edward SULLIVAN,HARRYSTACK.1947. Conceptions
MEAD, MARGARET. 1961. Anthropology Sapir in language, culture,and person- of modern psychiatry. Washington:
among the sciences.AmericanAnthropol- ality. Edited by David Mandelbaum. William Alanson White Psychiatric
ogist 63:475-82. Berkeley:Universityof California Press. Foundation.
MURDOCK,G. P. 1957. Worldethnographic SCHAFER, WILHELM. 1956. Der kritische THIEL, PHILIP. 1961. A sequence-experience
sample. American Anthropologist 59: raum und die kritischesituation in der notation for architectural and urban
664-87. [JLF*] Kramer.
tierischensozietat. Frankfurt: space. Town Planning Review, April, pp.
OsMoND,HUMPHREY. 1957. Functionas SCHLESINGER,ARTHUR M., JR. 1965. A 33-52.
the basis of psychiatric ward design. thousand days.Boston:Houghton Mifflin. TINBERGEN, NnKo. 1952. The curious
Mental Hospitals (ArchitecturalSupple- [WL*] behavior of the Stickleback. Scientific
ment)April,pp. 23-29. SEBEOK,T. A. 1963. Review of: Porpoises American 187(6):22-26. [ST*]
PARKES,A. S., and H. M. BRUCE. 1961. and sonar, by WinthropN. Kellogg - 1958. Curious naturalists.New York:
Olfactorystimuliin mammalian reproduc- (Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, Basic Books.
tion.Science 134:1049-54. 1961) and Communicationamong social TRAGER,G. L. 1963. Linguistics is lin-
PORTMANN, ADOLF. 1959. Animalcamou- hees, by Martin Lindauer (Cambridge: guistics.Studies in Linguistics:Occasional
flage.AnnArbor:University of Michigan HarvardUniversityPress,1961). Language Papers, no. 10. [GLT*]
Press. 39:448-66. [MD*] UEXKULL,J. VON.1926. Theoreticalbiology.
REuscH, JURGEN.1961. Therapeutic com- SELYE, HANS. 1956. The stressof life. New New York: Harcourt, Brace. [WL*]
munication.New York:Mouton. York: McGraw-Hill. WALLACE, ANTHONYF. C. 1961. Culture
ROE, ANNE, and GEORGE G. SIMPsON. SNYDER, ROBERT. 1961. Evolution and and personality. New York: Random
Editors.1958. Behaviorand evolution. integrationof mechanismsthat regulate House. [DH*]
New Haven:Yale University Press. population growth.National Academyof WATSON,MICHAEL,and THEODOREGRAVES.
ROSENBLITH,WALTER A. 1961. Sensory Sciences47:449-55. 1966. An analysisof proxemic behavior.
communication. New York: The M.I.T. SPIrz, RENA A. 1964. The derailmentof AmericanAnthropologist 68:971-85.
PressandJohnWiley& Sons. dialogue. Stimulusoverload,action cycles, WHORF, BENJAMINLEE. 1956. Language,
SAPIR, EDWARD. 1929. The statusof lin- and the completion gradient.Journalof thought, and reality. New York: The
guisticsas a science.Language5:207- the American PsychoanalyticAssociation TechnologyPress and JohnWiley & Sons.
214. 12:752-75. WYNNE-EDWARDS, V. C. 1962. Animal
---. 1931. Conceptual inprimi- SROLE, LEO, et al. 1962. Mental health in
categories dispersion in relation to social behavior.
tivelanguages.Science74(578). [DH*] the metropolis:The Midtown Manhattan New York: Hafner.

veryinteresting, particularly numbers

OUR READERS WRITE 1) possiblerelationship betweena set
data and a setof ethnolog-
of linguistic
(Continued frompage 82) ical and social data; 3) dependency
of linguisticborrowingon cultural
Insteadof devotinga singlearticleto anatomists,palaeontologists (see D.F. diffusion;and 4) synthesisof linguistic
influencesof severalfactorson -con- Robertsin AJPA, #2, 1966) or will principlesas a science(includingthe
temporary familylife,as suggested
by we remainan adjunctto cultural? They Americanschool, the Prague Circle,
PhilippeGarigue(CA 8:145), a more need us, but can we affordto need and the Soviet School). Regarding
satisfactoryevaluation may be one them,and still do creative,publish- No. 1, it would be very usefulto
reviewarticleforone or two related able researchon a scholarlylevel consultProf.J. L. Fischerof Tulane
factorsexertingsuchinfluence. whichwill satisfythedemandsof the University.To deal withNo. 4, a CA
institutionforeminencein the field? panel should be set up. (A case in
L. K. MAHAPATRA Will thesynthesizer be sufficiently re- point is the concept of "American
Orissa,India cognizedto survive?Also,whatabout School" which does not appear to
the positionof womenin anthropol- exist.) OLGA S. AKHMANOVA
A review article dealing with the ogy, esp. physical anthropology, in
cultural dynamics of population ourlargerinstitutions? Moscow,U.S.S.R.
migration(immigration,emigration,
internalmigration, etc.). It wouldbe CHARLOTTE M. OTTEN It wouldbe usefulifCA wouldpublish
especiallyinterestingto consider:(1) DeKalb, Ill.. U.S.A. a listof Foundations and othergrant-
quantitativeaspects(scales & trajec- givingagenciesthat will accept ap-
toriesof migratory flowoverthepast I like Ritchie'sidea (CA 8:145) of an plicationsfromindividuals.Too many
50-60 years); (2) qualitativeaspects assessmentof the Human Relations only concernthemselveswith large
(major culturechangefactorsrelated Area Files. It could includereferences sums for institutions, whereas an-
to significant
humanmigrations, con- to booksand good articlesfromthose thropology is stilloneof thedisciplines
temporary and historical);(3) special who have successfullyusedthefilesin whereusefulworkcan be done on a
attentionto world areas, countries, research, to guidethosewho coulduse one man basis.
societiesin whichmigration is or has suggestionson applications of thefiles. JAMES H. CHAPLIN
beena prominent factorin culturalre- Uganda
organizationand/orspecifickindsof RALPH S. RIFFENBURGH
"development." Pasadena,California,U.S.A.
JOHN B. CORNELL
A full scale appraisal of the origin
of domesticatedcorn (maize) with
Austin, Tex.,U.S.A. Although I disagree with Roberto botanistsand archaeologistsmating
Escalante'sgeneralappreciation of van theirdata.
I wouldliketo see a discussion of the der Merwe'sarticle(I have no doubt NoRMAN B. TINDALE
of
ptlace physicalanthropology (human that CA was right to publish it), I Adelaide,Australia
iology)in the disciplineas a whole: thinkEscalante'ssuggestions (See CA
are we going to become geneticists, 7:491) forpossiblelinguistic topicsare onpage224)
(Continued
108 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY