Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:44:20.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Year 5 at Fukushima: a ‘disaster-led’ archaeology of the contemporary future

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2016

Nathan Schlanger ,
Laurent Nespoulous  and
Jean-Paul Demoule
Nathan Schlanger
Affiliation:
École nationale des chartes, 65 rue de Richelieu, 75002 Paris, France (Email: schlanger1@gmail.com) UMR 8215 Trajectoires, 21 allée de l'Université, 92023 Nanterre, France
Laurent Nespoulous
Affiliation:
Institut des Langues et Civilisations Orientales, Centre d’Études Japonaises, 2 rue de Lille, 75007 Paris, France Maison franco-japonaise, Bureau Français, Shibuya-ku, Ebisu 3-9-25, 150-0013 Tokyo, Japan
Jean-Paul Demoule
Affiliation:
UMR 8215 Trajectoires, 21 allée de l'Université, 92023 Nanterre, France Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, 3 rue Michelet, 75006 Paris, France Institut universitaire de France, 1 rue Descartes, 75231 Paris, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The triple disaster that hit eastern Japan on 11 March 2011—earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown—was a momentous event with long-term implications for archaeology and heritage. The sheer scale of the damage experienced generated a form of ‘disaster-led’ preventive archaeology, in line with the reconstruction efforts. As radioactive contamination continues to affect cultural assets including museums and monuments in the exclusion zone, the massive decontamination efforts under way bring about further heritage complications. Alongside its immediate applications, archaeology also has a wider critical role to play: with its mastery of materiality and temporality, it can help envisage the ‘contemporary future’ at Fukushima, a defining landmark of the feats and failures of late modernity.

Keywords

JapanFukushima‘disaster-led’ archaeologypreventive archaeologyradioactive decontamination
Type
Research
Information
Antiquity , Volume 90 , Issue 350 , April 2016 , pp. 409 - 424
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2016 

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

Abe, K. & UFSCBFF University of Fukushima Support Centre for a Beautiful Future in Fukushima (Fukushima Daigaku utsukushima-fukushima mirai shien sentā). 2013. Fukushima saisei to rekishi-bunka isan (Revitalization of Fukushima and historical-cultural heritages). Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha.Google Scholar
Buchli, V. & Lucas, G.. 2001. Archaeologies of the contemporary past. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dawdy, S.L. 2006. The taphonomy of disaster and the (re)formation of New Orleans. American Anthropologist 108: 719–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/aa.2006.108.4.719 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demoule, J.-P. 2012. Rescue archaeology: a European view. Annual Review of Anthropology 41: 611–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611-145854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demoule, J.-P. & Souyri, P.-F.. (ed.). 2008. Archéologie et patrimoine au Japon. Paris: Fondation Maison des sciences de l'homme.Google Scholar
González-Ruibal, A. 2008. Time to destroy: an archaeology of supermodernity. Current Anthropology 49: 247–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/526099 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, R. & Schofield, J.. 2010. After modernity: archaeological approaches to the contemporary past. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holtorf, C. & Högberg, A.. 2013. Heritage futures and the future of heritage, in Bergerbrant, S. & Sabatini, S. (ed.) Counterpoint: essays in archaeology and heritage studies in honour of professor Kristian Kristiansen: 739–46. Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C. & Högberg, A.. 2014. Communicating with future generations: what are the benefits of preserving cultural heritage? Nuclear power and beyond. European Journal of Post-Classical Archaeologies 4: 315–30.Google Scholar
Inada, T. 2014. Nihon to Furansu no iseki hogō—Kōgaku to hō, gyōsei, shimin undō (Site protection in Japan and France—archaeology and law, institutions, citizen mobilization). Tokyo: Iwanami shoten.Google Scholar
Inada, T. 2015. L’évolution de la protection du patrimoine au Japon depuis 1950: sa place dans la construction des identités régionales. Ebisu 52: 21–46. Available at https://ebisu.revues.org/1576 (accessed 12 January 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaner, S. 2011. Tidal wave: the day Japan shook. Current World Archaeology 49: 22–29.Google Scholar
Kaner, S. 2015. Archaeology in a nuclear exclusion zone: visiting Fukushima. British Archaeology 141: 46–51.Google Scholar
Kaner, S., Habu, J. & Matsui, A.. 2011. Rescuing archaeology affected by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. Antiquity 85: Project Gallery. Available at: http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/kaner329/ (accessed 12 January 2016).Google Scholar
Kikuchi, Y. 2015. Archaeology and cultural heritage in Fukushima today: four years since the Great East Japan Earthquake. Japanese Journal of Archaeology 3: 28–41. Available at http://www.jjarchaeology.jp/contents/pdf/vol003/3-1_028-042.pdf (accessed 12 January 2016).Google Scholar
Kikuchi, Y. & Nespoulous, L.. 2015. Un musée des désastres à Fukushima. Introduction par Laurent Nespoulous. Ebisu 52: 47–88. Available at https://ebisu.revues.org/1597 (accessed 12 January 2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurin, R. (ed.). 2011. Saving Haiti's heritage: cultural recovery after the earthquake. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
Mizoguchi, K. 2006. Archaeology, society and identity in modern Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489556 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negita, Y. 2012. Archaeological excavation for reconstruction. On the building of new communities. Available at: http://archaeology.jp/sites/2012/rebuilding.htm (accessed 12 January 2016).Google Scholar
Okamura, K. 2011. From object-centered to people focused: exploring a gap between archaeologists and the public in contemporary Japan, in Okamura, K. & Matsuda, A. (ed.) New perspectives in global public archaeology: 77–86. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okamura, K. 2014. Ethics of commercial archaeology: Japan, in Smith, C. (ed.) Encyclopaedia of global archaeology: 2482–85. New York: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okamura, K. 2015. Tsunami and heritage after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, in Willems, W.J.H. & van Schaik, H.P.J. (ed.) Water and heritage: material, conceptual and spiritual connections: 247–58. Leiden: Sidestone.Google Scholar
Okamura, K., Fujisawa, A., Kondo, Y., Fujimoto, Y., Uozu, T., Ogawa, Y., Kaner, S. & Mizoguchi, K.. 2013. The Great East Japan earthquake and cultural heritage: towards an archaeology of disaster. Antiquity 87: 258–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00048778 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podniesiński, A. 2015. Fukushima: the view from Ground Zero. The Asia-Pacific Journal 13 (41). Available at http://www.japanfocus.org/-Arkadiusz-Podniesi__ski/4388/article.html (accessed 12 January 2016).Google Scholar
Rico, T. 2014. The limits of a ‘heritage at risk’ framework: the construction of post-disaster cultural heritage in Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Journal of Social Archaeology 14: 157–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469605314527192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlanger, N. 2012. Preventive archaeology, in Silberman, N.A. (ed.) The Oxford companion to archaeology, volume 2: 661–65. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Willems, W. 2012. Problems with preservation in situ . Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 43/44: 1–8.Google Scholar
Zorzin, N. 2013. The political economy of Japanese archaeology: reflective thoughts on current organisational dynamics. Japanese Journal of Archaeology 1: 5–21.Google Scholar