CHAT @ TAG in Context

Abstract

Each year, the Contemporary and Historical Archaeology in Theory (CHAT) conference convenes to highlight archaeological research on the recent past. The annual gathering is a forum for critical discussion of historical archaeology and the archaeology of the contemporary world that seeks to expand the academic and political limits of archaeological thinking. In short, CHAT provides an opportunity outside of the customary conference circuit for archaeologists to present new work in a progressive and socially affective, yet rigorous, scholarly atmosphere. CHAT has taken place in the British Isles since 2003, with past events held in Bristol, Leicester, Dublin, Sheffield, London, and Oxford.In May 2009, we undertook to bring this vital discussion to North America by hosting a CHAT-themed session at the Theoretical Archaeology Group Conference (TAG) at Stanford University. This volume comprises seven papers that were presented at that session and two papers commissioned after the conference. Though the contributions are diverse, each one is crafted in the spirit of CHAT in that they each explore the recent past, stretching and challenging political, theoretical, and methodological conventions. These nine papers, focusing on archaeology from the late 19th century onward, are followed by a concluding critical commentary by Barbara Voss. This volume aims to showcase variety and individuality, as well as tease out commonalities among the wide array of archaeological projects that fall under the shared endeavor of exploring the recent past.The development and current state of our subfield has been ably covered by others (see Hicks and Beaudry 2006; in any way, but rather as a modest sampling of some of the topics and themes currently being examined by our subfield.The first two articles explore moments of destruction. González-Ruibal and Hernando trace the movements and interactions of loggers, ranchers, indigenous hunters, and police in the contested landscape of the Brazilian Amazon. The authors reveal potent material and emotive connections between South American jungle devastation and suburban American sun decks. Yazdi focuses on the aftermath of the devastating earthquake that struck the city of Bam, Iran, in December 2003. The research project began shortly after the quake hit and examines the material remains of the city's destroyed households. In a country where public expression is strictly controlled, and personal space is paramount, it is perhaps through lost and abandoned material culture that we might understand more about private life in Iran.Formation, justification, and maintenance of the nation state connect the next three papers. First, Funari and Funari demonstrate how conceptions and representations of ancient Egypt had a profound effect on the very birth of Brazil as an independent country. This ''Egyptomania'' continues to influence, as it is visually and materially tied to present day ethnic and social inequalities. Second, Samuels examines the material and ephemeral traces of utopian Sicilian villa...

Archaeologies of Emergent Presents and Futures

“…(Buchli and Lucas 2001a:14) Since the publication of these two key volumes, the archaeology of the recent and contemporary past has seen a relative explosion. Significant edited collections that deal specifically with the subfield have been published, e.g., McAtackney et al (2007), Holtorf and Piccini (2009), Harrison and Schofield (2009), Fortenberry and Myers (2010), Fortenberry and McAtackney (2012), May et al (2012), González-Ruibal (2013), Olsen and Pétursdóttir (2014), and Orange (2015); along with noteworthy articles in a range of journals, including Current Anthropology, Journal of Material Culture, World Archaeology, and Archaeologies; and monographs dealing with significant contemporary archaeological projects, e.g., Andreassen et al (2010), McAtackney (2014), and González-Ruibal (2014). A major step was the development of the Contemporary and Historical Archaeology in Theory (CHAT) conference group in Bristol in 2003; see further discussion in Holtorf and Piccini (2009:19).…”