▪ Abstract This paper traces the conjunction of two interrelated epistemic phenomena that have begun to shape the discipline since the early 1990s. The first entails theorizing social identity in past societies: specifically, how social lives are inscribed by the experiences of gender, ethnicity, sexuality, and so on. The other constitutes the rise of a politicized and ethical archaeology that now recognizes its active role in contemporary culture and is enunciated through the discourses of nationalism, sociopolitics, postcolonialism, diaspora, and globalism. Both trends have been tacitly shaped by anthropological and social theory, but they are fundamentally driven by the powerful voices of once marginalized groups and their newfound place in the circles of academic legitimacy. I argue that our disciplinary reticence to embrace the politics of identity, both in our investigations of the past and our imbrications in the present, has much to do with archaeology's lack of reflexivity, both personal and disciplinary, concurrent with its antitheoretical tendencies. The residual force of the latter should not be underestimated, specifically in regard to field practices and the tenacity of academic boundaries.
The title, States of Conservation, deliberately references the two “states” that now occupy critical yet oppositional nodes within UNESCO’s 1972 Convention and its conservation agenda. It recalls the State of Conservation (SOC) reports commissioned by the World Heritage Center in conjunction with its Advisory Bodies that relay the condition of World Heritage properties to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee. But more critically, “states” here also refers to the most powerful, emergent players in World Heritage Site inscription and protection processes—the States Parties of the 1972 Convention. Many researchers have debated the merits and consequences of World Heritage. While this work remains critical, my own contribution specifically traces the international political pacting, national economic interests, and voting blocs through which particular states increasingly set the World Heritage agenda and recast UNESCO as an agency for global branding rather than global conservation. I contend that as the rush for World Heritage inscription increases and economic and geo-political pacting between nations intensifies, the resources, concerns, and commitments for conservation of sites already inscribed potentially declines. The politics of inscription has now spilled over into the politics of conservation and endangerment. But whereas the former seeks international status and socio-economic benefits through global branding, the latter may jeopardize protection of those same sites through the unhindered interventions of conflict, mining, exploitation, and other infrastructural developments. Whether describing World Heritage, the environment, or manufacturing, denationalized economic life goes hand in hand with renationalized political life. I draw World Heritage case studies from around the world, with a particular focus on the Historic District of Panama—one example of what happens with the cutting of conservation, and concomitantly communities, from the Convention.
SAbstracto: Este articulo esboza las posibilidades para una practica mixta, a la que yo denomino etnografia arqueologica, que enlaza la arqueologia y antropologia sociocultural. Mi trabajo de campo se ha realizado en los limites del Parque Nacional Kruger con individuos de la comunidad de Malatji, y tambi~n con ecologistas sociales, guardas del parque, interpretes y agentes del patrimonio que trabajan en el parque nacional. La investigacion contribuye y evalua criticamente el centralismo del patrimonio arqueologico de Sudafrica y sus multiples papeles en la formulacion de nuevas subjetividades en la nacion cosmopolita y postcolonial. # !.! R~sume:Cet article illustre la possibilite d'utiliser I'ethnographie archeologique comme pratique hybride permettant de faire le pont entre I'archeologie et I'anthropologie socioculturelle. Mon travail de terrain se d~roule ~ la limite du Parc National Kruger avec des individus de la communaute Malatji et aussi des sp~cialistes en ecologie sociale, des agents de la conservation, des guides interpretes et des representants du patrimoine employes du parc national. Cette recherche entend contribuer et faire une evaluation critique de la centralit~ du patrimoine archeologique en Afrique du sud et de ses r61es multiples dans la formation d'une nouvelle subjectivite dans la nation cosmopolite postcoloniale.This short, reflective piece sketches out the possibilities for a hybrid practise I refer to as archaeological ethnography--a traversing of two distinct, but necessarily enmeshed, subfields. Anthropology, particularly in North American contexts, institutionally combines archaeological and ethnographic enterprises; therefore, students can, and often do, migrate across those domains during their doctoral training. It seems then an obvious transition to undertake work that combines the field practises of respective traditions, archaeological and ethnographic, in relevant contexts. In fact, as evidenced in recent publications, conferences, and dissertation topics, many of our students are doing exactly that. u~ 0 0 r~ D "Oh t E E P. Q ,,,,,1 0 81 82 LYNN MESKELLI would argue that there is a difference between a serious ethnographic engagement and the more casual encounters many archaeologists experience in the field when simply talking to various stakeholders or seeking information to aid their research. The latter occurs frequently, and I take this form of conversation to task for a number of reasons. This critique leads to a larger discussion of the notion of"local" or "locals" a trope that has become an easy catchall for the complex and ethically necessary encounters we have with various constituencies in and around archaeological locales. "Locals" and "local communities" are not passive constituencies there for our intellectual mining, nor are they there awaiting our theoretical insights into their situations or histories. They are directly enmeshed in their own critical reformulations, political negotiations, and constitutions of theory and interpretation. I illustrate the...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.