Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 20 Mar 1997 16:07:44 -0800 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hello everyone,
I am pleased to see so many people are tired of the unproductive
dichotomizing in archaeology. I hope that it has run its course.
The interesting question seems to me now to be of another variety-
now that we have so many rich and diverse theoretical perspectives, should
we be concerned with creating a new synthesis that will tie these ideas
together? I for one do not think that a synthesis is required, but we do
need to consider how the various intellectual systems relate to one
another- hegemony, ecohistory, ethnogenesis, etc. We should work to
understand how people in society act within all of these simultaneous
configurations of cultural reality.
Anyway, I have been rather excited by the commentary in the new reader by
Preucel and Hodder:
Preucel, Robert W. and Ian Hodder
1996 Contemporary Archaeology in Theory: a reader. Blackwell
Publishers Ltd, Cambridge, MA.
My best to all,
Tim Scarlett
|
|
|