Border assemblages between surveillance and spectacle: What was Moria and what comes after?

Hamilakis, Yannis

doi:10.1111/aman.13693

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Social scientists, including anthropologists and archaeologists, have shown that boundaries have unstated rationales and effects (Soto 2018). Hamilakis's (2022) discussion of the techno-politics encountered by migrants at Moria, a refugee camp located on the Greek island of Lesvos, is exceptional in this account. The materiality of razor wire, checkpoints, and guard doors merges "humanitarianism and securitism" as one element in a nested assemblage that is "also an apparatus of classification, labeling, grouping, and segregation" (Hamilakis 2022, p. 218).…”

Section: Border Assemblagesmentioning

confidence: 90%

The Work of Boundaries: Critical Cartographies and the Archaeological Record of the Relatively Recent Past

Hauser

2022

Annu. Rev. Anthropol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discussions of boundaries have enjoyed a renaissance in anthropological archaeology of recent years, especially as conversations surrounding forced migration and border walls look toward the material record for clarification about what borders are and what they do. Since 1995, when the Annual Review of Anthropology last addressed a similar issue, numerous methodological and conceptual changes in the field have led to a large proliferation in the literature. A brief Google Scholar search of the words “archaeology,” “boundaries,” and “work” between 1995 and the present produces 365,000 results and makes one point clear: Archaeologists have had a lot to say about the topic. By framing this review around the work of boundaries, I signal two trends in the field of archaeology with conceptual and methodological implications. The first trend is the increased centrality of materiality as a theoretical register as new questions relating to object agency, human/nonhuman boundaries, and new models of environmental archaeology have populated the literature. In such climates it is important to focus on boundaries as a kind of assemblage of actants that takes on agencies beyond notions of territory. Associated border, crossing, transnational, and refuge assemblages are discussed. The second trend is the increased attention to boundary work in archaeology. Whether it is in the form of postcolonial/decolonizing archaeologies, new materialities/symmetrical archaeologies, or contemporary archaeologies, there has been increased pushback against attempts to define anthropological archaeology along processual lines. In this article I review one thread of that literature, critical cartographies, and how they have used the archaeological record to develop radical renditions of political space where boundaries are involved. I focus on scholarship surrounding the relatively recent past (ca. 1200 CE to the present). Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology Volume 51 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

Section: Border Assemblagesmentioning

confidence: 90%

The Work of Boundaries: Critical Cartographies and the Archaeological Record of the Relatively Recent Past

Hauser

2022

Annu. Rev. Anthropol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The structural causal link is maddeningly apparent to those taking a long‐term archaeological perspective on so‐called contemporary issues (Kiddey, forthcoming). Unethical bordering practices include incarcerating border crossers in centers and camps that frame migrants as “Other” (Hamilakis, 2022), spatially and socially separated from “citizens,” while simultaneously imposing constant movement on those detained, in the form of processes of categorization, circulation, relocation, and deportation (Katz, 2022). The array of checkpoints, policing, incarceration, and forced medical examinations, including compulsory pregnancy checks, that border crossers are forced to undergo includes material traces from the use of medical instruments, chemicals, weapons, and locks (Radzinwinowiczówna, 2018).…”

Section: Counter‐myth 1: Archaeology Can and Should Be A Politically ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Archaeology in 2022: Counter‐myths for hopeful futures

Berihuete‐Azorín,

Blackmore,

Borck

et al. 2023

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archaeology in 2022 features more calls than ever for a socially and politically engaged, progressive discipline. Archaeologists increasingly respect and integrate decolonizing and Indigenous knowledge in theory and practice. They acknowledge and embrace the fluidity and diversity of sexes and genders, past and present. They document patterns of migration, ancient as well as contemporary, to combat retrograde and racist narratives that remain pervasive in the public sphere. At the same time, the field has a deep‐seated conservative bastion toward which many scholars retreat, arguing for an “objective” past that is free of political implications or interpretive ambiguity. As anarchist archaeologists, we see the myth of the objective past as one of many interconnected myths that have provided the basis for an archaeology that reifies and proliferates the current social order. We deconstruct myths relating to capitalist and colonialist ideologies of “human nature,” the assumed inevitability of the current order, and fatalistic commitment to dystopian or utopian futures. As alternatives, we present counter‐myths that emphasize the contingent and political nature of archaeological praxis, the creative and collaborative foundation of communities, the alternative orders that archaeology uncovers, and the role of a hopeful past for constructing the possibilities of different futures.

show abstract

‘NO MORE WALLS IN THE SEAS’: Migration graffscapes and migrants’ messages while en route to and in Europe

Uzureau,

Rota,

Verhaeghe

et al. 2024

Journal of Refugee Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores forced migrants’ use of graffiti writing along their precarious and fragmented migration journeys. Previous research has recognized the use of graffiti by activist groups, yet existing empirical evidence of the materiality of life in transit and of forced migrants’ reactions to it remains scarce. Our analysis reveals how graffiti documents migrants’ agentic reactions to the uncertainty and adverse experiences they faced along their irregular journey. It shows how people on the move, who are stuck in transit situations, voice complex feelings, reclaim their identities and narratives, and denounce political struggles and restrictive migration policies. We argue that they use graffiti to cope with the uncertainty of their journey by nurturing solidarity and hope, and by producing a guidebook of supportive and protective advice addressed to the community of unauthorized travellers.

show abstract

Border assemblages between surveillance and spectacle: What was Moria and what comes after?

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

The Work of Boundaries: Critical Cartographies and the Archaeological Record of the Relatively Recent Past

The Work of Boundaries: Critical Cartographies and the Archaeological Record of the Relatively Recent Past

Archaeology in 2022: Counter‐myths for hopeful futures

‘NO MORE WALLS IN THE SEAS’: Migration graffscapes and migrants’ messages while en route to and in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About