Latest news with #Setzler
Sydney Morning Herald
36 minutes ago
- Entertainment
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘Grave robber' posed for the cameras as he pillaged human remains
The collecting of human remains on an almost industrial scale began in the 19th century and continued long into the 20th. One of the museums most active in collecting human remains was the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC, and it was a partner in the expedition to Arnhem Land, along with the National Geographic Society. Frank Setzler was constitutionally incapable of entering an Aboriginal burial ground without thinking about how to rob it. He had form on this front, having collected many remains of Native American people earlier in his career. They were all accessioned into the Smithsonian's physical anthropology collection, one of the largest collections of human bones in the world. It is a sign of his brashness that he allowed a colleague to film his 'grave robbing', as other scientists on the expedition called it. Captured on celluloid, Setzler's actions are repellent yet compelling. Watching it now in the 21st century, with the old 16-millimetre footage converted into a digital file, it is easy to stop and start the film, or to magnify it until the image dissolves into a pixelated blur. In making the film, Setzler transformed the fleetingness of the theft into something that would last forever. His handwritten diary is as brutally candid as the film. He frankly acknowledges his duplicity towards the Bininj, as the people of west Arnhem Land call themselves. In an entry some weeks earlier, he recorded the moment he first spotted the bones. At that stage he was still getting his bearings on the hill. When a Bininj guide showed him around, he could hardly believe the abundance of human remains. But he kept his thoughts to himself: 'I paid no attention to these bones as long as the native was with me'. By the time he was ready to take the bones, he knew the site well, having spent some weeks on the plateau excavating for stone tools. Before he took the bones, he liaised with the expedition's American photographer Howell Walker, who agreed to join him on the plateau and shoot both still and moving footage of their acquisition. The film shows how they tried to make the theft a pedagogical performance, presumably to give it scientific credibility. Setzler at one point can be seen lifting and handling a skull. He points out distinctive features and then slots its jaw in place before presenting to the camera its largely toothless grin. The final seconds of the bone stealing show a glimpse of distant scenery. There is a strip of land, the grass yellow-brown. Further away lies the gleaming billabong and beyond it the mission dwellings. The sequence ends when Setzler and the expedition Australian guide Bill Harney (who suddenly appears from nowhere) cross the frame. Manhandling the now lidded crate, they disappear from the picture. The film is jarringly out of time. It stinks of the body-snatching of the 19th century. Yet we see it through the medium of cinema, that most 20th-century of art forms, and in colour no less. Another disconnect is the lack of soundtrack. We tend to expect that a colour film will have audio, but without the lecture that once accompanied it, there is nothing but deadly silence. No voice. No birdsong. Everything is mute. This sequence is part of the National Geographic Society documentary film Aboriginal Australia. Exhibited only in the US at conferences and in lecture halls, it communicates the story of the 1948 expedition to Americans. Outtakes – often disposed of by production houses – have in this case survived and they tell a most fascinating tale. Not only did Setzler perform the theft for Walker's camera, but he re-performed it in various ways, actively experimenting with his presentation. In the footage intended for public exhibition, he assumes the role of a serious field scientist making a significant discovery. That is very different from a take in which he hams it up as a madcap explorer. In that sequence, he marches into frame and feigns astonishment as he 'discovers' the very bones that he first saw weeks earlier. With cartoonish gesticulations, he signals to the out-of-frame Harney to come and look. Not until Harney is fully in view and enacting his own surprise does Setzler begin to reap his grim harvest. Amidst the jumble of takes and retakes, we see him at one point returning a skull to its crevice so he can perform the theft in a different way. Sixty years later, having recently obtained copies of the film from the National Geographic Society, I sat with the eminent elder Jacob Nayinggul on his veranda in the Banyan Camp at Gunbalanya, watching this material on a laptop. He, too, was silent – silent with rage. As the film reveals, Setzler became brasher and bolder as the expedition neared the end. His personal diary reveals pride in the ruses he went to in avoiding the scrutiny of locals. To provide manpower on his digs for stone tools, which occurred in rock shelters on Injalak (conveniently close to the ossuaries), two teenagers from the mission were assigned to him as archaeological assistants. One was Jimmy Bungaroo, who would become a well-known community leader in Maningrida later in life. The other man was Mickey (whose full name never appears in the expedition records). The pair can be seen in expedition films and photos, sifting soil that throws up great clouds of dust. Setzler supervises, wearing a protective mask. But there were no masks for the two youngsters who were actually performing the hard labour. The heat of those days was crippling. Setzler estimated that inside the tents, the temperature reached 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.3 degrees Celsius) during the day. Outside, the air was thick and stagnant. The period known to Territorians as 'the build-up' had begun. High temperatures are matched with high humidity, a sure signal that the wet season is on its way. In these conditions, it is little wonder that Setzler's workers required a siesta after a morning spent shifting and inhaling dirt. This provided the opportunity to acquire another cache of bones, as Setzler explained. 'During the lunch period, while the two native boys were asleep, I gathered the two skeletons which had been placed in crevices outside the caves. These were disarticulated ... and only skull and long bones. One had been painted with red ochre. These I carried down to the camp in burlap sacks and later packed in ammunition boxes.' On November 1 it rained. The wet season was nigh. Setzler had discovered more bones that he would have stolen, but he had nothing to pack them in. Even so, he had garnered a rich harvest. He carefully 'painted the ammunition boxes containing skeletal material and numbered them consecutively after my personal box numbers'. He screwed them shut and noted: 'These will go to US without opening in Sydney'. They were ready for transportation to their eventual destination, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington. There they would remain for the next 60 years.
The Age
36 minutes ago
- Entertainment
- The Age
‘Grave robber' posed for the cameras as he pillaged human remains
The collecting of human remains on an almost industrial scale began in the 19th century and continued long into the 20th. One of the museums most active in collecting human remains was the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC, and it was a partner in the expedition to Arnhem Land, along with the National Geographic Society. Frank Setzler was constitutionally incapable of entering an Aboriginal burial ground without thinking about how to rob it. He had form on this front, having collected many remains of Native American people earlier in his career. They were all accessioned into the Smithsonian's physical anthropology collection, one of the largest collections of human bones in the world. It is a sign of his brashness that he allowed a colleague to film his 'grave robbing', as other scientists on the expedition called it. Captured on celluloid, Setzler's actions are repellent yet compelling. Watching it now in the 21st century, with the old 16-millimetre footage converted into a digital file, it is easy to stop and start the film, or to magnify it until the image dissolves into a pixelated blur. In making the film, Setzler transformed the fleetingness of the theft into something that would last forever. His handwritten diary is as brutally candid as the film. He frankly acknowledges his duplicity towards the Bininj, as the people of west Arnhem Land call themselves. In an entry some weeks earlier, he recorded the moment he first spotted the bones. At that stage he was still getting his bearings on the hill. When a Bininj guide showed him around, he could hardly believe the abundance of human remains. But he kept his thoughts to himself: 'I paid no attention to these bones as long as the native was with me'. By the time he was ready to take the bones, he knew the site well, having spent some weeks on the plateau excavating for stone tools. Before he took the bones, he liaised with the expedition's American photographer Howell Walker, who agreed to join him on the plateau and shoot both still and moving footage of their acquisition. The film shows how they tried to make the theft a pedagogical performance, presumably to give it scientific credibility. Setzler at one point can be seen lifting and handling a skull. He points out distinctive features and then slots its jaw in place before presenting to the camera its largely toothless grin. The final seconds of the bone stealing show a glimpse of distant scenery. There is a strip of land, the grass yellow-brown. Further away lies the gleaming billabong and beyond it the mission dwellings. The sequence ends when Setzler and the expedition Australian guide Bill Harney (who suddenly appears from nowhere) cross the frame. Manhandling the now lidded crate, they disappear from the picture. The film is jarringly out of time. It stinks of the body-snatching of the 19th century. Yet we see it through the medium of cinema, that most 20th-century of art forms, and in colour no less. Another disconnect is the lack of soundtrack. We tend to expect that a colour film will have audio, but without the lecture that once accompanied it, there is nothing but deadly silence. No voice. No birdsong. Everything is mute. This sequence is part of the National Geographic Society documentary film Aboriginal Australia. Exhibited only in the US at conferences and in lecture halls, it communicates the story of the 1948 expedition to Americans. Outtakes – often disposed of by production houses – have in this case survived and they tell a most fascinating tale. Not only did Setzler perform the theft for Walker's camera, but he re-performed it in various ways, actively experimenting with his presentation. In the footage intended for public exhibition, he assumes the role of a serious field scientist making a significant discovery. That is very different from a take in which he hams it up as a madcap explorer. In that sequence, he marches into frame and feigns astonishment as he 'discovers' the very bones that he first saw weeks earlier. With cartoonish gesticulations, he signals to the out-of-frame Harney to come and look. Not until Harney is fully in view and enacting his own surprise does Setzler begin to reap his grim harvest. Amidst the jumble of takes and retakes, we see him at one point returning a skull to its crevice so he can perform the theft in a different way. Sixty years later, having recently obtained copies of the film from the National Geographic Society, I sat with the eminent elder Jacob Nayinggul on his veranda in the Banyan Camp at Gunbalanya, watching this material on a laptop. He, too, was silent – silent with rage. As the film reveals, Setzler became brasher and bolder as the expedition neared the end. His personal diary reveals pride in the ruses he went to in avoiding the scrutiny of locals. To provide manpower on his digs for stone tools, which occurred in rock shelters on Injalak (conveniently close to the ossuaries), two teenagers from the mission were assigned to him as archaeological assistants. One was Jimmy Bungaroo, who would become a well-known community leader in Maningrida later in life. The other man was Mickey (whose full name never appears in the expedition records). The pair can be seen in expedition films and photos, sifting soil that throws up great clouds of dust. Setzler supervises, wearing a protective mask. But there were no masks for the two youngsters who were actually performing the hard labour. The heat of those days was crippling. Setzler estimated that inside the tents, the temperature reached 110 degrees Fahrenheit (43.3 degrees Celsius) during the day. Outside, the air was thick and stagnant. The period known to Territorians as 'the build-up' had begun. High temperatures are matched with high humidity, a sure signal that the wet season is on its way. In these conditions, it is little wonder that Setzler's workers required a siesta after a morning spent shifting and inhaling dirt. This provided the opportunity to acquire another cache of bones, as Setzler explained. 'During the lunch period, while the two native boys were asleep, I gathered the two skeletons which had been placed in crevices outside the caves. These were disarticulated ... and only skull and long bones. One had been painted with red ochre. These I carried down to the camp in burlap sacks and later packed in ammunition boxes.' On November 1 it rained. The wet season was nigh. Setzler had discovered more bones that he would have stolen, but he had nothing to pack them in. Even so, he had garnered a rich harvest. He carefully 'painted the ammunition boxes containing skeletal material and numbered them consecutively after my personal box numbers'. He screwed them shut and noted: 'These will go to US without opening in Sydney'. They were ready for transportation to their eventual destination, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington. There they would remain for the next 60 years.
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Sponsor of Georgia abortion ban spared trauma of watching brain dead loved one carry fetus
Doctors and lawyers at Emory Healthcare – but mainly the lawyers, I suspect – say that under Georgia's anti-abortion law, they are required to keep Adriana's body functioning as the fetus inside her develops. (Photo by John McCosh/Georgia Recorder) By most common measures, the life of Adriana Smith ended three months ago, when a tragic series of undiagnosed blood clots left her brain dead, with no hope of recovery. Yet today, in a hospital room in Midtown Atlanta, Adriana's body is still being kept alive by machines, without regard to her family's wishes. As someone who has been there, I know how difficult and extremely personal that decision can be, but I can only imagine what it must be like to have that choice stripped away, as it has been stripped away from Adriana's loved ones by people who don't know them, who know little of their circumstances, and deal with none of its consequences. In Adriana's case, she was nine weeks pregnant at the time the blood clots hit, which under some readings of Georgia law has meant that what remains of Adriana's body is now under government control until the fetus can be safely extracted. 'She's been breathing through machines for more than 90 days,' April Newkirk, Adriana's mother, told 11Alive News. 'It's torture for me. I see my daughter breathing, but she's not there.' Doctors and lawyers at Emory Healthcare – but mainly the lawyers, I suspect – say that under Georgia's anti-abortion law, they are required to keep Adriana's body functioning as the fetus inside her develops. They are erring on the side of caution – not medical caution, but legal caution. The law in question is the 'Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act.' or the LIFE Act. The main sponsor of that law, state Sen. Ed Setzler, says it's working as intended in this case. 'I'm proud that the hospital recognizes the full value of the small human life living inside of this regrettably dying young mother,' Setzler told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 'Mindful of the agony of this young mother's family, the wisdom of modern medical science to be able to save the life of a healthy unborn child is something that I trust in future years will lead to great joy, with this child having a chance to grow into vibrant adulthood.' Proud as he might be, Setzler isn't the one who has to watch what's left of his daughter lay lifeless in that hospital room, not alive exactly, with machines performing basic life functions, week after week. He isn't the one who has to explain what's happening to his seven-year-old grandson, Adriana's son. If the fetus survives, he also isn't the one who will have to raise the child. Doctors have warned Adriana's family that the fetus has fluid on its brain, with unknown consequences. 'She's pregnant with my grandson,' Newkirk said. 'But he may be blind, may not be able to walk, may not survive once he's born,' she said. 'This decision should've been left to us.' According to Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, however, Emory Healthcare and Setzler are misreading the legislation. 'There is nothing in the LIFE Act that requires medical professionals to keep a woman on life support after brain death,' his office said in a statement. 'Removing life support is not an action 'with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy'.' Carr's reading of the law seems to be correct. As his statement indicates, the law defines abortion as 'the act of using, prescribing, or administering any instrument, substance, device, or other means with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy,' and the withdrawal of extraordinary life-maintenance measures on a brain-dead woman would not fall within its restrictions. But this is the problem when you try to write a law into black and white, when you try to legislate what is right and what is wrong when dealing with decisions that are so personal, so intimate. Moral certainty sounds good, it may feel good, it may play well in a political campaign, but it cannot possibly make such hard choices from a distance. The law cannot act more wisely or with more love than would those who know the situation best. This story first appeared in the Georgia Recorder, a member with the Phoenix in the nonprofit States Newsroom.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Bookman: Sponsor of Georgia abortion ban spared trauma of watching brain dead loved one carry fetus
Doctors and lawyers at Emory Healthcare – but mainly the lawyers, I suspect – say that under Georgia's anti-abortion law, they are required to keep Adriana's body functioning as the fetus inside her develops. John McCosh/Georgia Recorder By most common measures, the life of Adriana Smith ended three months ago, when a tragic series of undiagnosed blood clots left her brain dead, with no hope of recovery. Yet today, in a hospital room in Midtown Atlanta, Adriana's body is still being kept alive by machines, without regard to her family's wishes. As someone who has been there, I know how difficult and extremely personal that decision can be, but I can only imagine what it must be like to have that choice stripped away, as it has been stripped away from Adriana's loved ones by people who don't know them, who know little of their circumstances and deal with none of its consequences. In Adriana's case, she was nine weeks pregnant at the time the blood clots hit, which under some readings of Georgia law has meant that what remains of Adriana's body is now under government control under the fetus can be safely extracted. 'She's been breathing through machines for more than 90 days,' April Newkirk, Adriana's mother, told 11Alive News. 'It's torture for me. I see my daughter breathing, but she's not there.' Doctors and lawyers at Emory Healthcare – but mainly the lawyers, I suspect – say that under Georgia's anti-abortion law, they are required to keep Adriana's body functioning as the fetus inside her develops. They are erring on the side of caution – not medical caution, but legal caution. The law in question is the 'Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act.' or the LIFE Act. The main sponsor of that law, state Sen. Ed Setzler, R-Acworth, says it's working as intended in this case. 'I'm proud that the hospital recognizes the full value of the small human life living inside of this regrettably dying young mother,' Setzler told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 'Mindful of the agony of this young mother's family, the wisdom of modern medical science to be able to save the life of a healthy unborn child is something that I trust in future years will lead to great joy, with this child having a chance to grow into vibrant adulthood.' Proud as he might be, Setzler isn't the one who has to watch what's left of his daughter lay lifeless in that hospital room, not alive exactly, with machines performing basic life functions, week after week. He isn't the one who has to explain what's happening to his seven-year-old grandson, Adriana's son. If the fetus survives, he also isn't the one who will have to raise the child. Doctors have warned Adriana's family that the fetus has fluid on its brain, with unknown consequences. 'She's pregnant with my grandson,' Newkirk said. 'But he may be blind, may not be able to walk, may not survive once he's born,' she said. 'This decision should've been left to us.' According to Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, however, Emory Healthcare and Setzler are misreading the legislation. 'There is nothing in the LIFE Act that requires medical professionals to keep a woman on life support after brain death,' his office said in a statement. 'Removing life support is not an action 'with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy'.' Carr's reading of the law seems to be correct. As his statement indicates, the law defines abortion as 'the act of using, prescribing, or administering any instrument, substance, device, or other means with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy,' and the withdrawal of extraordinary life-maintenance measures on a brain-dead woman would not fall within its restrictions. But this is the problem when you try to write a law into black and white, when you try to legislate what is right and what is wrong when dealing with decisions that are so personal, so intimate. Moral certainty sounds good, it may feel good, it may play well in a political campaign, but it cannot possibly make such hard choices from a distance. The law cannot act more wisely or with more love than would those who know the situation best. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
South China Morning Post
12-04-2025
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Jobs vs affordable goods: the debate at the core of Trump's tariff war
While tariffs could potentially preserve American jobs in specific industries by discouraging imports, US consumers would bear the brunt of the cost by paying higher prices at stores, according to a Pennsylvania State University economist. Advertisement Bradley Setzler, Strumpf Early Career Professor of Economics at Penn State University, said American regions with an above-average exposure to import competition from China suffered a loss of one in seven local manufacturing jobs relative to less-exposed regions, when China became a global manufacturer and exporter. And, if an American region was highly exposed, such as through furniture or textile production, it could suffer two or even three times that job loss relative to other regions, he said. 'So, you could lose two out of seven jobs, or even three out of seven jobs in local manufacturing,' Setzler said. 02:40 China raises tariffs on US goods to 125% as Xi calls on EU to resist 'unilateral bullying' China raises tariffs on US goods to 125% as Xi calls on EU to resist 'unilateral bullying' At the same time, other Americans benefited in the shape of more affordable goods, he said. Advertisement '[US President Donald Trump's] tariffs are a blunt instrument for raising the prices paid by Americans for Chinese and other foreign goods, discouraging imports and thus potentially preserving American jobs in specific industries, but at the cost of consumers potentially missing out on cheaper prices at the store,' Setzler said.
