Archaeology will be just fine

Abstract

Many archaeologists are currently stuck in a mindset in which attention is paid exclusively to ideas that are ‘new’ and ‘revolutionary’. This fetishization of the ‘new’ leads us down a dangerous road as it promotes uncritical disdain of old ideas which remain valid and it advocates fads from neighbouring disciplines which are methodologically vapid and philosophically dubious. The objective of this paper is to question whether archaeology requires constant ‘paradigmatic change’ and my answer to this question is no. By constantly altering the status quo, archaeologists are promoting a culture in which theoretical ‘newness’ is given the spotlight and ideas are considered valid as long as they are original. Against this, I recommend a more critical view of new ideas and a revision of old ones – a culture which prioritizes the quality of archaeological theories regardless of whether they are new or old.

Lyrics for a duskier Enlightenment. In response to Alexandra Ion

“…To follow directly up on that, and to be frank, this dialogue may easily take the form of trench warfare because, and I would like to emphasize this, Ion and I, as well as the clans that we both summon in the acknowledgements to our respective articles, disagree on issues central to this discussion. This has been made clear also in several recent publications and open debates (Lindstrøm 2015; Olsen and Witmore 2015; Ribeiro 2016a, 2016b; Sørensen 2016a; 2018). What is evident in those writings, moreover, is that this disagreement is rather fundamental.…”

Agency (again). A response to Lindstrøm and Ribeiro

“…2012, 13, emphasis added). This way of pouring old wine into new bags is a strategic and conscious way to pay deeper attention to thoughts that deserve further development and rephrasing (in full agreement with Ribeiro 2016b). We might even say that ‘our job is to go where everyone has gone before, but where few have bothered to linger’ (Bogost 2012, 34).…”

Against object agency 2. Continuing the discussion with Sørensen

“…The problem of object agency in archaeology is one that goes beyond agency itself. It is a problem highlighted in another paper (Ribeiro 2016b), which is that of blindly following trends. In spite of repeated claims that archaeology is, in fact, making unique contributions to the philosophical discourse of the New Materialisms (Edgeworth 2016;Nativ 2018;Olsen et al 2012), it seems that these unique contributions exclude any critical scrutiny of New Materialism itself.…”