I too have seen a bit more acceptance of the idea that both "processualist"
and "postprocessualist" approaches have a place in any archaeologist's
toolbox, depending on the context. And I agree with John that some of the
more interesting theoretical developments are coming from the areas he
mentions -- I'd add to his list the growing area of "activist" archaeology,
which is engaging with theories and movements from outside archaeology in an
active way. I suppose it could be argued, though, that the activist trend is
more of a practice issue...whether it takes place in a "community" or
"public" setting, or whatever.
However, it still seems to me most of the archaeology in the US (and most of
it is done in the commercial arena -- over 80% the last I heard) operates
outside theory altogether. Recovery methods and priorities seem to be
dictated almost totally by the exigencies of time, money, and storage space
(and the privileging of prehistoric over historic, or at least over
recent-historic). Research questions, informed by "whatever" theoretical
approach, seem to have little to do with what actually happens in practice.
Surely THAT will rile someone up.
carol
**************************************
Carol McDavid, Ph.D.
Project Director, Public Archaeology, Yates Community Archaeology Project
Adjunct Asst. Professor, University of Houston
1638 Branard
Houston, TX 77006
www.webarchaeology.com
www.publicarchaeology.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Carman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: "What comes after Post-processualism???"
I thnk that there is much in what both Cornelius and Louise have said. In
many ways we are now in a period of archaeological practice -- where the
focus is upon doing archaeology (whether in a commercial or academic
context). There is a certain amount of 'mixing and matching' going on,
whether consciously or not, in the seartch for appropriate theoretical
models to be applied, and my feeling is that although processualism is the
'norm' in most of the Anglophone world at least, there are nevertheless
experiments in post-processualism in both the commercial and academic
spheres. For what it is worth, I think this may be a bit healthier than the
ideological warfare of the late 80s and early 90s!
Where I think developments in new theory formulation are taking place is in
the area of 'heritage' or 'public' or 'community' archaeologies, a branch of
the discipline until recently often considered either a-theoretical or
simply beyond theory. It is a vibrant and growing area, academically and
otherwise. Those who seek for 'what comes after post-processualism' will
find it there.
All best
John
Dr John Carman
Birmingham University Research Fellow and Senior Lecturer in Heritage
Valuation
Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity
Arts Building
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham B15 2TT
Tel: +44 (0)121 414 7493
Fax: +44 (0)121 414 3595
Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Archaeological theory and associated fields of interest list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Cornelius Holtorf
Sent: 03 June 2007 18:30
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: "What comes after Post-processualism???"
Are there any takers for a discussion I just started on ARCHAEOLOG, entitled
"What comes after Post-processualism???"?
Read more here: http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/archaeolog/
(I am trying to promote an important and timely debate here and hope that
many will disagree with what I wrote!!)
Cornelius
-----
Cornelius Holtorf
* from January 2008: Högskolan i Kalmar *
Institutionen för arkeologi och antikens historia, Lunds universitet
http://web.comhem.se/cornelius
|