My blog post offers examples of some of the most inspiring work that I’ve been exposed to recently. Please read about it here, and if you have time to recommend other interesting and innovative examples of field-based interpretative experimentation, I’d be excited & grateful to hear from you!
I’d also like to acknowledge the following individuals who helped me to further think through aspects of my argument (although, of course, they are not responsible for the contents of my blog post!): Tessa Poller, Oliver Harris, John Swogger, Francesco Ripanti, Peter Dunn, James Dixon, Chris Walker, Bill Caraher and Harald Fredheim.
I have the great fortune of presenting tomorrow at the European Association of Archaeologists’ annual conference, hosted this year in sunny Barcelona. I’m in an incredible session called Human, Posthuman, Transhuman Digital Archaeologies, featuring some of my heroes and professional inspirations (Friday 7 Sept, 14:00 – 18:30, Room: UB220, Hashtag:#S363). You can read many of their full papers online on Colleen’s website.
As it’s the culmination of many years of my thinking, I’m not able to circulate my 8000-word paper (it will hopefully be published in full very shortly). However I have tried to distil the argument into a few slides, copied below. In distilling the argument down so much, I’ve had to make a lot of generalising statements (a few of the most blatant of which are highlighted via *an asterisk). I do not claim there are no exceptions, and I am certainly not the first to put forward aspects of this argument. What I am hoping to do, however, is draw everything together into a workable model of practice that is not grounded in the discipline’s normative crisis mode of operation. This is my first attempt at articulating an enchantment model for archaeology.
This article calls for a rethinking of the traditional archaeological workflow, with a view to integrating the heritage interpretation tool kit and heritage interpreters themselves into our basic field methodologies.
A quick note to say that, after years of working through some of the ideas that I first presented on this topic at the CAA conference in Siena, my article on heritage interpretation & the archaeological workflow has been published in Advances in Archaeological Practice. I am preparing a more extensive blog post about the argument for Cambridge University Press, which I’ll repost here in due course. In the meanwhile, you can download the full piece at the link below & your *constructive* critique is very much welcome. Thank you for your support, & thanks to the many people who provided input on the draft version of this article & on my teams’ efforts over the years!
Download the complete and open access full-text here: Perry_2018
Access the closed-access version on the journal’s webpages here.
The full bibliographic reference is: Perry, Sara (2018) Why Are Heritage Interpreters Voiceless at the Trowel’s Edge? A Plea for Rewriting the Archaeological Workflow. Advances in Archaeological Practice 6(3): 212-227.