Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:18:05.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

It's not all about archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2018

Laurajane Smith  and
Gary Campbell
Laurajane Smith*
Affiliation:
Centre for Heritage and Museum Studies, School of Archaeology and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Gary Campbell
Affiliation:
Centre for Heritage and Museum Studies, School of Archaeology and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
*
*Author for correspondence (Email: laurajane.smith@anu.edu.au)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As the authors of the Association of Critical Heritage Studies manifesto (Campbell & Smith 2011), there are aspects of the debate piece by González-Ruibal et al. (above) that we have no trouble agreeing with, but we take issue with other elements. This paper sets up far too many straw people, based on a limited engagement with the archaeological and heritage studies literature. At its heart, and despite the radical rhetoric, Gonzalez-Ruibal et al.’s paper is another defence of archaeological expertise by archaeologists, based on a dubious equation of reactionary politics with communities and the popular.

Type
Debate
Information
Antiquity , Volume 92 , Issue 362 , April 2018 , pp. 521 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Campbell, G. & Smith, L.. 2011. Manifesto of the Association of Critical Heritage Studies. Available at: http://www.criticalheritagestudies.org/history/ (accessed 12 January 2017).Google Scholar
Hall, S. 1979. The great moving right show. Marxism Today 23 (1): 14–20.Google Scholar
IPinCH. 2016. Intellectual property issues in cultural heritage: theory, practice, policy, ethics. Available at: https://www.sfu.ca/ipinch/# (accessed 12 January 2017).Google Scholar
Kalela, J. 2012. Making history: the historian and uses of the past. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-35658-0Google Scholar
Little, B.J. & Shackel, P.A.. 2014. Archaeology, heritage, and civic engagement: working toward the public good. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast.Google Scholar
Lowenthal, D. 1996. The heritage crusade and the spoils of history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, P. & Pikirayi, I.. 2016. Community archaeology and heritage in Africa: decolonizing practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, L. 2004. Archaeological theory and the politics of cultural heritage. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203307991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, L. & Campbell, G.. 2017. ‘Nostalgia for the future’: memory, nostalgia and the politics of class. International Journal of Heritage Studies 23 (7): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2017.1321034Google Scholar
Smith, L. & Waterton, E.. 2009. Heritage, communities and archaeology. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Waterton, E. & Smith, L.. 2010. The recognition and misrecognition of community heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies 16 (1–2): 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903441671Google Scholar
Winter, T. 2013. Clarifying the critical in critical heritage studies. International Journal of Heritage Studies 19: 532–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2012.720997Google Scholar