Method & Theory...A recent post from my colleague over at
Middle Savagery reminds me that for some of us...it physically makes us happy to read theory...I agree...Like Levi
Straussian myths, for me some theory is "good to think."
At the same time I am reminded by one of my current students who is taking a "Method and Theory in Archaeology" class that many of his colleagues in the program simply have not been exposed to, and are not comfortable talking about "theory."...many of these folks see theory as strange, alien, and "not useful."
I have encountered these two groups of people my whole academic career. At the University of Memphis and the University of Arkansas, I was the frustrated "theory guy" in heavily method-oriented programs...However, when I went to the University of Texas at Austin, although I was finally satisfied with the rich theoretical program there, I also began to realize the importance of the
connections between methods and theory...and I felt that some of my colleagues at UT may be very theoretically
sophisticated, but not very fluent in good archaeological methods.
I do not see these two entities as diametrically opposed opposites...I see them as inextricably connected...Obviously this should not be a radical idea (
praxis anyone?), but time and again one meets "theory" people and "dirt archaeologists." Close friends and colleagues even mistakenly stereotyped my long-time collaborator
James Davidson and myself--he was the method guy and I was the theorist...this woefully underestimates Davidson's theoretical savvy and (I think) my practical background.
I am a "dirt archaeologist"...I have years and years of contract archaeology underneath my belt (and over 20 "technical reports"), but I am also proud of my theoretical engagement...and I firmly believe that there is no such thing as "non-theoretical" archaeology...only archaeologists who do not acknowledge what theoretical interests they serve.
Part of the problem is a lack of great examples that connect archaeological methods and theories in a solid (and easily accessible) way...How many books have you read (especially in historical archaeology) that have an eloquent theoretical section weakly linked to the actual artifacts and excavated contexts...they read like two unrelated monographs. I long to see more work that is sound in both its methods and theories.
I'll close by pointing to one literary model I think we should look at...Check out
Larry McMurtry's book Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen...If the
rootsy, plain-spoken western writer can draw sophisticated connections between
Bejamin, storytelling and the West Texas community hub known as the Dairy Queen...theory can be accessible to anyone.
Labels: archaeology, Benjamin, McMurtry, method, theory
Archaeologists for Social Justice...Upon returning from the
SAA meetings in Austin, Texas, I was talking on the phone with
James Davidson, one of my closest
colleagues. We were talking about how different the
SAAs feel from other meetings--such as the
Society for Historical Archeology meetings or the humongous AAA meetings (for the non-anthropologists out there, that's the
American Anthropological Association, not the American
Automotive Association...we can unpack your
dominant discourse, but we cannot change your tire).
What's the difference between the conferences?..well, it might best be explained with a story...James and I were talking about overhearing a conversation between prehistoric archaeologists who were saying "historical archeology was o.k.....but all that politics seems to get in the way of the archeology."...Wow...
The mandate for political engagement is one thing that I love about what I do...yes, sometimes I lament that I could move faster if I did not need to arrive at some consensus between the various elements in the descendant communities that I deal with...and, yes, sometimes it can be scary knowing you are about to make a political stand that will make you very unpopular with a large part of your audience...but overall, the idea of archaeologists for social justice is something that makes archaeology "a good thing to do"...that takes it beyond just finding cool things in the ground (which is, of course, a selfish pursuit)...
My generation of archaeologists witnessed the transition--
NAGPRA and the reverberations of the
African Burial Ground project in the early 1990s. Our mentors often took great offense at these developments...my generation was clearly split--either they thought that political responsibility was a long time coming (like James & I did), or they decided to stand with their mentors to protect the power of science to speak as it pleases. That is what James and I were feeling at the
SAAs...to play off of the title of a friend
's SAA symposium...it was the "great divide" of political
engagement (she was attempting to address the "great
divide" between historical and prehistoric archaeology).
I for one am proud that there is a new generation of
archaeologists out there that see our
discipline as clearly linked with politics and social justice...They became anthropologists in a post-
NAGPRA world and for them it is second nature not only to consider the political implications of their work, but also to consider ways that their work can make a difference in the world...a couple of examples (who are
friends and
therefore not randomly chosen)...
Ed Tennant (
Ph.D. candidate at the
University of Florida) turned his interest in the history of
Chinese labor migration into an interest in worker's rights and "hidden slavery" around the world...and
Carl Carlson-Drexler (
Ph.D.
student at the
College of William and Mary) united his Quaker upbringing with his passion for battlefield archaeology to reinvent conflict archaeology as an explicitly anti-war
endeavor...
there are many more that I know and could mention...
I see folks like Carl and Ed (and Mary Brennan and
Colleen Morgan) as the fulfilment of a prophesy that I heard from Tom Green (co-author of "
NAGPRA is Forever") back in 1996...He
said "wait...when the next generation of archaeologists come around, consultation with tribes will be second nature."...It looks like some of the next generation are taking it one step further.
Labels: archaeology, nagpra, politics, SAA
