Current Realities, Idealised Pasts: Archaeology, Values and Indigenous Heritage Management in Central Australia

Thorley, Peter

doi:10.1002/j.1834-4461.2002.tb01632.x

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current generation of leaders, artists and schoolteachers is bringing the past to life through their desire to engage with historical images and narratives (cf. Thorley 2002). Reflecting on their struggles and achievements in the face of adversity, Western Desert communities are laying a foundation to imagine a desired future and move forward with confidence amid significant challenges posed by increasing government control and the threat of outstation closures.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experiments in self-determination: Histories of the outstation movement in Australia

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experiments in self-determination: Histories of the outstation movement in Australia

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While new information about past lifeways can yield a more nuanced and thereby valued heritage experience to some, there are numerous other ways in which the past can come to be deemed significant (Carver, 1996; Lipe, 1984; Samuels, 2008). Descendant communities in particular may ascribe aspects of informational value, as well as social, aesthetic and/or spiritual significance to ancestral materials and landscapes (Anawak, 1994; Thorley, 2002). Recent approaches to archaeological site management, couched in anthropological notions of significance and multivocality, have highlighted the diversity of heritage valuations possible when the perspectives of multiple ‘stakeholder’ groups are engaged with (Samuels, 2008; Smith, 2004).…”

Section: Vulnerable Cultural Landscapes Of Kugmallit Baymentioning

confidence: 99%

The map is not the territory: Applying qualitative Geographic Information Systems in the practice of activist archaeology

O'Rourke

2018

Journal of Social Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to concerns regarding the social relevance of North American archaeology, it has been suggested that the tenets of ‘activist scholarship’ can provide a framework for a more publically engaged archaeological discipline. Maps have long been employed in the public dissemination of archaeological research results, but they can also play a role in enhancing public participation in heritage management initiatives. This article outlines how the goals of activist archaeology can be achieved through the mobilization of qualitative Geographic Information Systems practices, with an example of how ‘grounded visualization’ methods were employed in assessing the vulnerability of Inuvialuit cultural landscapes to the impacts of modern climate change.

show abstract

“…This includes community-based archaeological research in North America (for example, see Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson, 2008;Derry and Malloy, 2003;Kerber, 2006;Little and Shackel, 2007;Million, 2005;Nicholas and Andrews, 1997;Shackel and Chambers, 2004;Silliman, 2008;Swidler et al, 1997) and globally (for example, see Delle, 2003;Green et al, 2003;Greer et al, 2002;Merriman, 2004;Meskell, 2009a;Moser et al, 2002;Paz, 2010;Raharijaona, 1989;Sen, 2002;Smith, 2006;Smith and Waterton, 2009;Thorley, 2002;collection in World Archaeology 34[2]). Many of these community-based and neighborhood projects, like others, acknowledge and shape action around cosmopolitan values like obligations and responsibilities to others.…”

Section: Limitations Of Community-based Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Heritage, Neighborhoods and Cosmopolitan Sensibilities: Poly-Communal Archaeology in Deerfield, Massachusetts

Hart¹

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Defining what is valued as "heritage" is fraught with inequities of social and political power. Though often perceived as "experts" on the past, archaeologists are just one of many stakeholders with interests in how pasts are used in the present. Twenty-first century archaeologists face the challenge of engaging in discourses and actions with diverse individuals and communities about the meaning, value, and treatment of heritage sites and interpretation. As a result, archaeologists are increasingly working to reorient and restructure social relations by engaging multiple stakeholder groups in heritage work, especially those that have been previously left out of the process. This has resulted in the collaborative study of historical contexts and processes with diverse stakeholders engaging in heritage work rooted in particular places.Heritage, used here in the broad sense to mean that which is identified as valuable and significant about the past to meet the needs of contemporary people (Carman, 2005;Graham et al., 2000;Smith, 2006), is actively constructed and engaged in the present. As such, it comprises "work," meaning activity, effort, and labor on the part of people (Smith, 2006: 13). Based on individual and collective values and social norms, people give some objects and places significance over others, elevating them to "heritage" and imbuing them with new meaning. The values and ethics of archaeologists and other practitioners in heritage disciplines (e.g., art history, architecture, history, museology) play a central role in this process. Archaeology, another kind of "work," is a physical and social intervention that shapes, and is shaped by, heritage values. It is a tool for producing material heritage and provides a means of accessing media (e.g., objects, features, sites, landscapes) through which people remember, organize, think about, experience, and otherwise deploy the past. In this essay, I suggest that cosmopolitan values -referring to a sense of interrelatedness with and responsibilities to others -can be used to orient participants navigating the complexities of "neighborhood" and other forms of community-based archaeology when multiple communities and stakeholders are involved. I decouple "community" from geography, and use "neighborhood" to refer to shared space and landscapes that root present day people. Communities form around shared interests, but they do not always share the spatial nearness that is a defining aspect of a neighborhood (as it refers to both people and places). While communities can transcend both space and time (for example, see Anderson, 1991: 9;Crooke, 2007; Smith and Waterton, 2009), neighborhoods attach people to places and localities. Neighborhoods are not bounded isolates, but rather multidimensional nodes in complex social networks. The concept of neighborhood paired with an archaeological perspective allows us to consider contemporary social, political, and economic configurations, while also considering such configurations through time. However, archaeology ro...

show abstract

Current Realities, Idealised Pasts: Archaeology, Values and Indigenous Heritage Management in Central Australia

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Experiments in self-determination: Histories of the outstation movement in Australia

Experiments in self-determination: Histories of the outstation movement in Australia

The map is not the territory: Applying qualitative Geographic Information Systems in the practice of activist archaeology

Heritage, Neighborhoods and Cosmopolitan Sensibilities: Poly-Communal Archaeology in Deerfield, Massachusetts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About