Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA14626 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 29 Apr 2002 13:41:09 +0100 Subject: Re: Shakers Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:34:56 -0400 x-sender: firstname.lastname@example.org x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <email@example.com> To: "memetics list" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-Id: <20020429123517.E1D8E1FD50@camail.harvard.edu> Sender: email@example.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On 04/28/02 20:00, Scott Chase said this-
>Are there *any* Shakers still around, I mean people who still practice their
To the best of my recollection, the last living Shaker, an old woman, of
course, died within the last decade.
There are no Shakers anymore. But- their legacy, i.e. their memes, are
not only still around, they are flourishing, in the furniture trade. Now,
far be it for me to say that artifacts are more important than beliefs
memetically (right...), but, guess what? they are.
Even knowing the word 'shaker' is memetic. I bet there are a thousand
cults that have come and gone that no-one has their name on their lips.
In design schools all over the world, the work of the Shakers is studied
and admired, and carried on. I studied this, not their beliefs, when I
studied the Shakers.
Theirs is a truly memetic legacy, since their genetic legacy (as if they
ever had one, really, people... beliefs are not genetic) has perished.
There is an excellent book called The Shaker Legacy about their furniture
and their philosophy of utility.
It would behoove memetics to examine the Shakers in great detail, IMHO.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 29 2002 - 14:07:45 BST