Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

EmboDIYing Disruption: Queer, Feminist and Inclusive Digital Archaeologies

  • Katherine Cook (a1)

Abstract

Inclusive approaches to archaeology (including queer, feminist, black, indigenous, etc. perspectives) have increasingly intersected with coding, maker, and hacker cultures to develop a uniquely ‘Do-It-Yourself’ style of disruption and activism. Digital technology provides opportunities to challenge conventional representations of people past and present in creative ways, but at what cost? As a critical appraisal of transhumanism and the era of digital scholarship, this article outlines compelling applications in inclusive digital practice but also the pervasive structures of privilege, inequity, inaccessibility, and abuse that are facilitated by open, web-based heritage projects. In particular, it evaluates possible means of creating a balance between individual-focused translational storytelling and public profiles, and the personal and professional risks that accompany these approaches, with efforts to foster, support, and protect traditionally marginalized archaeologists and communities.

Les démarches qui cherchent à promouvoir l'intégration en archéologie (y compris les perspectives allosexuelles, féministes, black ou indigènes) se recoupent de plus en plus avec celles des communautés associées au codage, à la réalisation et au piratage numérique dans le but de créer un style ‘bricolé’ de contestation et d'activisme. Les technologies numériques offrent des possibilités de remettre en question les représentations traditionnelles de personnes du passé et de nos jours de façon créative, mais à quel prix ? Dans cet article, une évaluation critique du transhumanisme et de l’ère numérique sert de point de départ à une présentation d'exemples numériques convaincants de pratique d'intégration mais aussi de l'omniprésence du privilège, de l'inégalité, du manque d'accès et des abus facilités par des projets d'accès libre sur internet concernant le patrimoine. On cherchera surtout à évaluer les moyens d’établir un équilibre entre la transposition de récits centrés sur des individus et un profil public et de prendre en compte les risques personnels et professionnels associés à ces approches dans le but de promouvoir, soutenir et protéger les communautés et archéologues marginalisés. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Integrative Ansätze in der Archäologie (einschließlich der queeren, schwarzen, feministischen oder einheimischen Anschauungsweisen) haben sich zunehmend mit der Kultur der Programmierer, Macher und Hacker überschnitten um einen einzigartigen „gebastelten” Stil von Zerrüttung und Aktivismus zu entwickeln. Die digitale Technologie bietet die Möglichkeit, konventionelle Darstellung von Personen in der Vergangenheit und in der Gegenwart kreativ infrage zu stellen, aber zu welchem Preis? Als kritische Betrachtung von Transhumanismus und des Zeitalters der digitalen Wissenschaft verfasst, beschreibt dieser Artikel überzeugende Anwendungen der digitalen Praxis aber auch die durchdringenden Strukturen des Privilegs, der Ungerechtigkeit, der Unzugänglichkeit und des Missbrauchs, die in zugänglichen, webbasierten Projekten im Bereich des Kulturerbes entstanden sind. Insbesondere bewertet die Studie mögliche Mittel eines ausgewogenen Verhältnisses zwischen auf Einzelpersonen ausgerichteten Erzählungen und öffentlichen Profilen zu finden; sie bewertet auch die die persönlichen und beruflichen Risiken, die mit diesen Ansätzen verbunden sind und die sich bemühen, traditionell marginalisierte Archäologen und Gemeinschaften zu fördern, unterstützen und schützen. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      EmboDIYing Disruption: Queer, Feminist and Inclusive Digital Archaeologies
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      EmboDIYing Disruption: Queer, Feminist and Inclusive Digital Archaeologies
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      EmboDIYing Disruption: Queer, Feminist and Inclusive Digital Archaeologies
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

References

Hide All
Agbe-Davies, A.S. 2002. Black Scholars, Black Pasts. SAA Archaeological Record, 2: 2428.
Battle-Baptiste, W. 2011. Black Feminist Archaeology. New York: Routledge.
Beard, M. 2017. Roman Britain in Black and White. The Times Literary Supplement [online] [accessed 10, April 2019]. Available at: <https://www.the-tls.co.uk/roman-britain-black-white/>.
Brock, T.P. 2018. All of Us Would Walk Together [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <http://hsmcwalktogether.org>.
Brown, D. & Nicholas, G. 2012. Protecting Indigenous Cultural Property in the Age of Digital Democracy: Institutional and Communal Responses to Canadian First Nations and Māori Heritage Concerns. Journal of Material Culture, 17: 307–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183512454065
Claassen, C. 2000. Homophobia and Women Archaeologists. World Archaeology, 32: 173–79.
Clancy, K.B.H., Nelson, R., Rutherford, J.N. & Hinde, K. 2014. Survey of Academic Field Experiences (SAFE): Trainees Report Harassment and Assault. PLOS ONE 9(7): e102172. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102172
Compton, B. 2017. Negotiating Authenticity: Engaging with 3D Models and 3D Prints of Archaeological Things. Museum of Ontario Archaeology Notes [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Blog available at: <http://archaeologymuseum.ca/negotiating-authenticity-engaging-3d-models-3d-prints-archaeological-things/>
Compton, M.E., Martin, K. & Hunt, R. 2017. Where Do We Go from Here? Innovative Technologies and Heritage Engagement with the MakerBus. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, 6: 4953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2017.04.002
Conkey, M. 1997. Mobilizing Ideologies: Paleolithic ‘Art’, Gender Trouble, and Thinking about Alternatives. In: Hager, L., ed. Women in Human Evolution. London: Routledge, pp. 172207.
Conkey, M. 2003. Has Feminism Changed Archaeology? Signs, 28: 867–80.
Cook, K. 2017. Built on Bones [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: The Heritage Jam University of York: <http://www.heritagejam.org/new-blog/2017/10/27/built-on-bones-katherine-cook>.
Cook, K. & Compton, B. 2018. Canadian Digital Archaeology: On Boundaries and Futures. Canadian Journal of Archaeology, 42: 3845.
Crooks, R., Contreras, I. & Besser, K. 2015. Herstory Belongs to Everybody or The Miracle: A Queer Mobile Memory Project. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 11(2). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4d67f235
DeRuiter, G. 2018. What Happened When I Tried Talking to Twitter Abusers [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at The Everywhereist Blog: <http://www.everywhereist.com/what-happened-when-i-tried-talking-to-twitter-abusers/>.
Dowson, T. 2000. Why Queer Archaeology? An Introduction. World Archaeology, 32: 161–65.
DuCille, A. 1994. Skin Trade. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
Ehrenreich, B. 2010. Bright-sided: How Positive Thinking is Undermining America. New York: Picador.
Epoiesen, 2018. About Epoiesen: A Journal for Creative Engagement in History and Archaeology [online journal] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <https://epoiesen.library.carleton.ca/about/>. https://doi.org/10.22215/epoiesen
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. 1993. You Can Hide, But You Can't Run: Representations of Women's Work in Illustrations of Palaeolithic Life. Visual Anthropology Review, 9: 321. https://doi.org/10.1525/var.1993.9.1.22
Halberstam, J. 2011. The Queer Art of Failure. Durham (NC): Duke University Press.
Hassett, B.R., Pilaar-Birch, S., Herridge, V. & Wragg-Sykes, B. 2017. TrowelBlazers: Accidentally Crowd-sourcing an Archive of Women in Archaeology. In: Apaydin, V., ed. Shared Knowledge, Shared Power. Cham: Springer, pp. 129–41.
Heckadon, A., Sparks, K., Hartemink, K., van Muijlwijk, Y., Chater, M. & Nicole, T. 2018. Interactive Mapping of Archaeological Sites in Victoria. Epoiesen. https://epoiesen.library.carleton.ca/2018/02/08/interactive-mapping-archae-victoria/
Heritage Jam, 2017. Policies and Rules [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at The Heritage Jam, University of York: <http://www.heritagejam.org/policies/>.
Jones, S., Jeffrey, S., Maxwell, M., Hale, A. & Jones, C. 2017. 3D Heritage Visualization and the Negotiation of Authenticity: The ACCORD Project. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 24: 333–53.
Joyce, R.A. & Tringham, R.E. 2007. Feminist Adventures in Hypertext. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 14: 328–58.
Joyce, R.A., Guyer, C. & Joyce, M. 2000. Sister Stories. New York: New York University Press.
Kamash, Z. 2017. ‘Postcard to Palmyra’: Bringing the Public into Debates over Post-Conflict Reconstruction in the Middle East, World Archaeology, 49: 608–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2017.1406399
Lopiparo, J. & Joyce, R. 2003. Crafting Cosmos, Telling Sister Stories, and Exploring Archaeological Kknowledge Graphically in Hypertext Environments. In: Jameson, J.H. Jr, Finn, C. & Ehrenhard, J.E., eds. Ancient Muses: Archaeology and the Arts. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. pp. 193202.
Martin, K. 2017. Centering Gender: A Feminist Analysis of Makerspaces and Digital Humanities Centers. Paper presented at Institute for Digital Arts and Humanities Speaker Series [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <http://hdl.handle.net/2022/21827>.
McDavid, C. 1997. Descendants, Decisions, and Power: The Public Interpretation of the Archaeology of the Levi Jordan Plantation. Historical Archaeology, 31:114–31.
McDavid, C. 1998. Levi Jordan Plantation [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <http://www.webarchaeology.com/html/Default.htm>
McDavid, C. & Brock, T.P. 2015. The Differing Forms of Public Archaeology: Where We Have Been, Where We Are Now, and Thoughts for the Future. In: Gnecco, C. & Lippert, D., eds. Ethics and Archaeological Praxis. New York: Springer, pp 159–83.
Morgan, C. 2009. (Re)Building Çatalhöyük: Changing Virtual Reality in Archaeology. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress, 5: 468–87.
Morgan, C. 2015. Punk, DIY, and Anarchy in Archaeological Thought and Practice. Online Journal in Public Archaeology, 5: 123–46. https://doi.org/10.23914/ap.v5i0.67
Morgan, C. 2017. The Queer and the Digital: Critical Making, Praxis, and Play in Digital Archaeology. Paper presented at Theoretical Archaeology Group 2016, Southampton. Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw_J_Hy9WS0>.
Morgan, C. & Pallascio, P.M. 2015. Digital Media, Participatory Culture, and Difficult Heritage: Online Remediation and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. Journal of African Diaspora Archaeology and Heritage, 4: 260–78.
Moser, S. 1998. Ancestral Images: The Iconography of Human Evolution. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press.
Nelson, R.G., Rutherford, J.N., Hinde, K. & Clancy, K.B.H. 2017. Signalling Safety: Characterizing Fieldwork Experiences and their Implications for Career Trajectories. American Anthropologist, 119: 710–22.
Pálsson, G. & Aldred, O. 2017. En-counter maps. Epoiesen. https://doi.org/10.22215/epoiesen/2017.1
People of Color in European Art History, 2018. Mission Statement. Medieval POC [online] [accessed 2 May 2019]. Available at: <http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com>.
Perry, S. 2014. Digital Media and Everyday Abuse. Anthropology Now, 6: 8185.
Perry, S. 2018. Six Fieldwork Expectations: Code of Conduct for Teams on Field Projects [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at The Archaeological Eye Blog: <https://saraperry.wordpress.com/2018/05/04/fieldwork-code-of-conduct/>.
Perry, S., Economou, M., Young, H., Roussou, M. & Pujol, L. 2017. Moving Beyond the Virtual Museum: Engaging Visitors Emotionally. In: Goodman, L. & Addison, A., eds. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia. Dublin: UCD & University of Ulster, pp. 229–37.
Richterich, A. 2016. ‘Do Not Hack’: Rules, Values, and Communal Practices in Hacker- and Makerspaces. Paper Presented at AoIR 2016. Selected Papers of Internet Research 2016: The 17th Annual Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers. Berlin, Germany [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <https://spir.aoir.org/ojs/index.php/spir/article/view/8384>.
Riley, D.M., McNair, L.D. & Masters, S. 2017. An Ethnography of Maker and Hacker Spaces Achieving Diverse Participation. Poster presented at the 2017 Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <http://hdl.handle.net/10919/82443>.
Rogers, M. 2015. Making Queer Love: A Kit of Odds and Ends. Hyperrhiz, 13 [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: http://hyperrhiz.io/hyperrhiz13/missives-of-love/queer-love-info.html
Rogers, M. 2017. Soft Circuitry: Methods for Queer and Trans Feminist Maker Cultures (unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Women's Studies, University of Maryland). Available at: <http://hdl.handle.net/1903/20310>.
Smith, A. 2017. Social Innovation, Democracy and Makerspaces. SWPS, 2017-10. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986245
Taylor, N., Hurley, U. & Connolly, P. 2016. Making Community: The Wider Role of Makerspaces in Public Life. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, May 7-12.
Tringham, R. 1991. Households with Faces: The Challenge of Gender in Prehistoric Architectural Remains. In: Gero, J. & Conkey, M., eds. Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 93131.
Tringham, R. 1994. Engendered Places in Prehistory. Gender, Place, and Culture, 1: 169203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663699408721209
Tringham, R. 2014. Dead Women Do Tell Tales: Ghosts [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: Heritage Jam, University f York: <http://www.heritagejam.org/exhibition/2014/7/10/dead-women-do-tell-tales-ghosts-ruth-tringham>.
Tringham, R. 2015. Creating Narratives of the Past as Recombinant Histories. In: Van Dyke, R.M. & Bernbeck, R., eds. Subjects and Narratives in Archaeology. Boulder (CO): University Press of Colorado, pp. 2754.
Ulysse, G.A. 2018. Reflecting on Boundaries, Protection, and Inspiration. Anthrodendum [online] [accessed 14 March 2019]. Available at: <https://anthrodendum.org/2018/05/22/reflecting-on-boundaries-protection-and-inspiration/>.
Wajcman, J. 2004. TechnoFeminism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Weismantel, M. 2013. Towards a Transgender Archaeology: A Queer Rampage Through Prehistory. In: Stryker, S. & Aizura, A.Z., eds. The Transgender Studies Reader 2. New York: Routledge, pp. 319–34.
Wylie, A. 1997. The Engendering of Archaeology Refiguring Feminist Science Studies. Osiris, 12: 8099.
Wylie, A. 2001. Doing Social Science as a Feminist: The Engendering of Archaeology. In: Creager, A.N.H., Lunbeck, E. & Schiebinger, L., eds. Feminism in Twentieth-Century Science, Technology, and Medicine. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, pp. 2–-45.

Keywords

EmboDIYing Disruption: Queer, Feminist and Inclusive Digital Archaeologies

  • Katherine Cook (a1)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed