[Jacob-list] Primitive trait list/Unimproved

[Susan L. Nielsen]

On Fri, 20 Jul 2001 Jacobflock at aol.com wrote:

> Or are the terms "primitive" and "unimproved" in the context of the Jacob 
> breed the same?

"Primitive" has always been a problematic word. If we accept the
meaning "original," or "simple, undeveloped," or "belonging to the 
first times," (entries from 3 common dictionaries easily at hand 
here), then Jacobs, or any sheep standing in front of us, cannot be 
primitive. They have been among the survivors of the Ark ;-) for 
countless generations, and are clearly not primitive in the sense 
of "undeveloped." They are as complex and as much the product of
the passing of time as we are.

_However_, there are certain traits we recognize as retentions of
an earlier condition, which have been selected against in the
majority of extant (note, I did not say "modern") breeds. And
it's the constellation (that fine word!) of those traits and
other desired traits that we are calling "primitive."

Often, the word "primitive" is value-laden. In behavior, we consider 
"primitive" to be a negative condition. In human societies, we think 
of "primitive" as meaning sort of quaint, remnant populations of 
socially and technologically backward people, also a negative sense. 
Back when I was a student of Anthropology (sometime in the Cretaceous), 
the word "primitive" was carefully reserved for truly Primitive 
things: artifacts from technically precedent times, remains of clearly 
antecedent organisms. Things and conditions that exist in our own time, 
but which are simpler, or which reflect less selected development, or 
which are less differentiated because they have not branched into 
distinct lines of development or interest are _not_ called primitive.

Partly this is a result of our more sensitive times. But in greater
part it is because people working in a field need terms of precision,
and the word "primitive" just means too many things to too many 
people. 

In the case of our sheep, I think one of the things we value most is 
the complexity of the genome. We call the appearance of these sheep
"primitive," but what we mean is that they reflect a more complete
condition, in which various features are present which have been
selected out of more common commercial breeds. So in this one example, 
when we say "primitive," we do not mean "simple." We mean "complex." 
We mean they carry the potential for expression of traits that have 
been lost in the history of selection for specific marketable sheep 
traits.

So I would agree that we need another term for this condition. I'm
not sure "unimproved" is the one, because it, too, carries a certain
implied meaning: unimproved = less than something else. Perhaps,
over the weekend, I can think hard on words. Doggone this language 
thing. You'd think, as long as we've been using it, we'd have come 
up with enough words to cover the possibilities. Maybe we need to 
try to think in a less primitive way... ;-)

Susan
--
Susan Nielsen, Shambles Workshops      		|"...Gently down the  
Beavercreek, OR, USA -- snielsen at orednet.org  	|stream..." -- Anon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------	
Purveyors of fine honey, Jacob Sheep, Ashford spinning products
			and Interweave books