 |
 |
I do remember there was some controversy about locating WAC in DC anyway: someone (I just don't want to name names) had thought WAC was supposed to stay out of "first world" nations... Maybe that wasn't such a bad idea after all... geoff carver - SUNY buffalo [log in to unmask] the plan: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf -----Original Message----- From: Archaeological theory and associated fields of interest list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dan Hicks Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 18:12 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: archaeologists and war Further to Peter's comments, colleagues may not have seen the short statement on "WAC and WAR", and the proposal of a Conference Theme on War, recently posted on the WAC website by the organising committee - online at http://wwwehlt.flinders.edu.au/wac5/ My involvement with WAC 5 is simply as a session co-organiser. But as someone opposed to the war (and also as someone with interests in the archaeology of colonialism), I do hope that these issues will be explored in many of the themes at WAC: especially as the conference is to be held in Washington DC. Dan Hicks ............................ Dr Dan Hicks MA (Oxon) AIFA PhD Teaching Fellow Department of Archaeology, University of Bristol, 43 Woodland Road, Clifton, BRISTOL. BS8 1UU. UK tel 44 117 331 1188 fax 44 117 954 6001 email [log in to unmask] web http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Archaeology/staff/danhicks.html ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Whitridge <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:34 PM Subject: archaeologists and war > It was interesting to hear that there has been a groundswell of > opposition from poets in the U.S. to the impending war to oust Saddam > Hussein, after the White House cancelled a reception/reading that was > felt to be in danger of becoming an anti-war protest. It sounds as > though American poets, as a group, are opposed to the war, and are > taking action on that basis. I wonder if archaeologists, as a group, > are also opposed to the war, and if so how this could be acted upon. > The critique of mainstream archaeology's ignorance, insensitivity and > apathy in the context of the Gulf War (e.g., Pollock and Lutz 1994; > Bahrani > 1998) still stands, but I suspect that archaeologists have since become > more attentive to their political entanglements. > > http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/TGAM/20030131/UPOETN /International/international/international_temp/5/5/23/) > http://www.poetsagainstthewar.org/ > > Pollock, Susan, and Catherine Lutz > 1994 Archaeology deployed for the Gulf War. Critique of Anthropology > 14:263-284. > > Bahrani, Zainab > 1998 Conjuring Mesopotamia: imaginative geography and a world past. In > Archaeology Under Fire: Nationalism, Politics and heritage in the > Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, edited by Lynn Meskell, pp. > 159-174. Routledge, London. > > -- > Peter Whitridge > Archaeology Unit, Department of Anthropology > Memorial University of Newfoundland > St. John's, NF > CANADA > A1C 5S7 >