A session at UK 32nd Annual Conference of the Theoretical Archaeological Group at the University of Bristol is looking for papers to describe archaeologists as cultural specialists and to answer questions such as: Is being an archaeologist an important form of self-categorization? — or would we be equally happy/productive/engaged/critical if we regarded ourselves as anthropologists/social scientists/craft practitioners/artists? Are there peculiarly archaeological standpoints? (See the abstract below)
The question of changing the face of archaeology of 21st century through the process of academization, professionalization and intellectualization was discussed at the World Archaeological Congress in 2008. Nowadays, it has also become equally important the personality of archaeologists since the archaeological research depends not on schools of thought and research waves but on strong individual authors with opportunity to influence and direct the archaeological researchers towards most actual problems. At the same time the archaeology requires integrity and development of professional friendship, which today is a challenge that can create even big problems.
Ffion Reynolds (Cardiff University, UK) proposes for UK TAG 2010 the topic of pluralism in research, in other words, research of the archaeological subjects from different perspectives. Such approach bridges archaeology with a variety of disciplines that also includes desructuring of archaeology as a multi-layered area of knowledge and research.
To learn more about the archaeological past, we depend extremely on the technology today. Numerous technical tools and natural disciplines help to analyze the buried or contemporary past and the material culture in such way that reveal most detailed and often unusual characteristics. For instance, who had healthier lifestyle in prehistory: sedentary or mobile communities? To answer this question, the archaeologist needs to be armed with ocean of knowledge from different disciplines keeping his/her specialization in the archaeological cultures. By answering this question, the archaeologist becomes a prehistoric cultural anthropologist, and also a creator of new problems and tasks that would bridge possibly new disciplines.
Multi-layered archaeology also means general distinction of the research archaeology from applied archaeology. Many diggers in fact have been practicing applied archaeology although their publications have ambitions of scientific works.
Then, in early 21st century there are two different processes – profilization of archaeology and broader integrations with as many as possible crossing disciplines. The future of archaeology depends on how deep culture will be embedded in the archaeologists as specialists since being an archaeologist - cultural specialist means having ability and qualification to understand the people and their culture in depth and from different perspectives.
Abstract of the session "Pluralist practices: archaeology is nothing, archaeology is everything"
Archaeological practice is distinguished by emphasis on the study of material culture. In the 1990s, after a post-structuralist, textually deconstructive phase, archaeological literature increasingly emphasised 'materiality' (e.g. Graves-Brown 2000; Miller 1998). The study of 'stuff' presents archaeologists with vast potential for subject matter, and has resulted in wide-ranging agendas for practice (e.g. Buchli 2002).
Perhaps because of this diverse potential for archaeological engagement, archaeologists have been influenced by numerous disciplines, notably anthropology and sociology, but also fine art, history, geography, poetry, and so on. It has been argued that archaeologists exist, or more specifically archaeologies are produced, in an undisciplined world (Tilley 2006, 1), where to do archaeology is to privilege an engagement with stuff.
Plural practice can result in subversive, fluid, or heterdox interpretations. Plurality can challenge us, and move us. Pluralist practices can stimulate new insights — into things, inter-relationships between things, and into our individual and cultural conditions. Without neglecting the importance of the study of stuff, we wish to emphasis processes of doing.
This session welcomes discussion of the plural engagements archaeologists can fruitfully make, and exploration of practice in archaeological undertakings. We welcome papers addressing the notion of 'archaeologist' as cultural specialist. What does being an archaeologist mean in contemporary societies? Is being an archaeologist an important form of self-categorisation? — or would we be equally happy/productive/engaged/critical if we regarded ourselves as anthropologists/social scientists/craft practitioners/artists? Are there peculiarly archaeological standpoints?
Contact Ffion Reynolds for more details at: ffionreynolds@hotmail.com
Author: Lolita Nikolova | Source: Examiner [September 26, 2010]