Wedded to Privilege? Archaeology and Academic Capital

Summary

If archaeology is by definition strongly attached to certain academic ideals (or "scholastic fallacies"), to a particular secular, rationalist way of looking at the world, and to ever-proliferating specializations that require scarce technological resources and expertise; and if, moreover, academic symbolic and cultural capital is constantly and increasingly measured by membership in the correct status groups and by access to these scarce resources, can academic initiation of, or even participation in, community-based heritage and memory work ever be more than lip-service? On the other hand, if the basis for archaeology is, ultimately, field-work, i.e., a physical presence in, and impact on, real, inhabited places, does academic archaeology have a future without recourse to communities? What is the political, ethical and scientific cost of an archaeology that is wedded to privilege?

This Resource is Part of the Following Collections

• Society for American Archaeology 82nd Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC (2017)   •
• A Global Dialogue on Collaborative Archaeology

Keywords

Spatial Coverage

Record Identifiers

Abstract Id(s): 14723