Skip navigation
Skip navigation

Review of Laura McAtackney and Krysta Ryzewski (eds) Contemporary Archaeology and the City: Creativity, ruination and political action

Frederick, Ursula

Description

It has been more than 15 years since Victor Buchli and Gavin Lucas published Archaeologies of the Contemporary Past (2001), a seminal volume that took up where the Archae-ologies of Us (Gould and Schiffer 1981) left off, ostensibly kick-starting a field of research concerned with the archaeological study of the recent or ‘contemporary past’. Since that time several texts (Frederick and Clarke 2016; Holtorf and Piccini 2009; Harrison and Schofield 2009, 2010; Graves-Brown et al. 2013) have aimed...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorFrederick, Ursula
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-25T00:22:21Z
dc.identifier.issn1322-9214
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/186539
dc.description.abstractIt has been more than 15 years since Victor Buchli and Gavin Lucas published Archaeologies of the Contemporary Past (2001), a seminal volume that took up where the Archae-ologies of Us (Gould and Schiffer 1981) left off, ostensibly kick-starting a field of research concerned with the archaeological study of the recent or ‘contemporary past’. Since that time several texts (Frederick and Clarke 2016; Holtorf and Piccini 2009; Harrison and Schofield 2009, 2010; Graves-Brown et al. 2013) have aimed to undertake archae-ologies ‘in and of the present’ (Harrison 2011). Within much of this literature there is a prevailing trend to avoid delineating or defining the ‘boundaries’ of the field too strictly, whether in temporal, material, theoretical or methodological terms. Indeed, contemporary archaeology is often framed as an exploratory and nascent branch of study and its practitioners consistently emphasise the ‘always becoming’ nature of archaeology in general (Witmore 2013:139). This tone of emergence and openness lends the field a genuine excitement and sense of possibility, but at times it can also reinforce a provisional quality in the writing, as though it is proposition of what might be done
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherAustralasian Society for Historical Archaeology
dc.sourceAustralasian Historical Archaeology
dc.titleReview of Laura McAtackney and Krysta Ryzewski (eds) Contemporary Archaeology and the City: Creativity, ruination and political action
dc.typeReview
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.citationvolume36
dc.date.issued2018
local.identifier.absfor210108 - Historical Archaeology (incl. Industrial Archaeology)
local.identifier.absfor169999 - Studies in Human Society not elsewhere classified
local.identifier.ariespublicationU1021258xPUB161
local.type.statusPublished Version
local.contributor.affiliationFrederick, Ursula, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage93
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage94
local.identifier.absseo959999 - Cultural Understanding not elsewhere classified
dc.date.updated2019-05-19T08:20:00Z
CollectionsANU Research Publications

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
01_Frederick_Review_of_Laura_McAtackney_and_2018.pdf66.34 kBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  19 May 2020/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator