Historical Archaeology at George Washington’s Mount Vernon
Greetings from Virginia! Though the #SHA2016 Annual Meeting is some months away, we are assisting…
The preliminary Call for Papers for the SHA 2013 conference in Leicester, UK only opened a couple of weeks ago – and already session proposals are being planned.You’ll find some of the first proposed sessions below; if you would like to participate in any of them, please get in touch with the session organisers.
Advertising your session proposal widely is the best way to attract a diverse line-up. You are very welcome to advertise your session on this blog, on the conference event page on Facebook, and sending a tweet with the hashtag #SHA2013 will earn you a retweet from SHA to its more than 1,300 followers on Twitter. Do feel free to make use of email lists too; the Histarch and CHAT (Contemporary and Historical Archaeology in Theory) lists are the obvious ones, but do consider others, such as the World Archaeological Congress for a global audience, or Britarch, if you would like to attract local speakers. The Council for British Archaeology maintains a register of many (mostly European-centred) email lists – you’re bound to know others specific to your specialism.
Here are some proposed sessions:
Archaeology of Reform/Archaeology as Reform
Megan Springate, University of Maryland
Loosely defined, reform sites are places associated with the main purpose of reforming or bettering those they serve, or society at large. They include schools, churches, protest sites, women’s holiday houses, homes of reformers, etc. This session explores similarities and differences across various types of reform sites and through time and discusses the various ways that reform processes and experiences manifest in the archaeological record. This session also explores how the archaeology of reform sites can itself be considered reformative in the context of today’s society.
Megan Springate is a Doctoral student in the Department of Anthropology, University of Maryland. Email email@example.com
Reconsidering Archaeologies of Creativity
Timothy Scarlett, Michigan Technological University
Human creativity is fundamental to understanding the transformations brought about by both globalization and immigration, the dual themes of the 2012 conference. People act and react creatively to these processes, in mundane and grand ways, individually and collectively. Thus, creativity intertwines and entangles its processes with all human interactions. The process and contexts of creative action, as well as the concept of creativity itself, can be understood from psychological, behavioral, social, humanistic, and philosophical perspectives. Individual persons and groups derive creativity from the cultural improvisations of social interactions surrounding economic, religious, technological, recreational, and familial activities; movement through spaces and among places; rituals; and the shifting practices of daily life. While archaeologists have produced numerous studies of human’s creative responses, we have given less attention to creativity itself, particularly in those archaeologies of the modern world. Scholars in the sciences and humanities have been able to describe some of the processes and contexts of creative action in the human experience, but those insights have not lead to creativity’s rationalization or “corporate domestication.”
I welcome archaeological studies that critically explore creativity from different perspectives, including:
– the social construction of creative process
– contexts of creative action, like work and play
– archaeological perspectives on creativity and the brain
– creativity and social change
– creativity and adaptation
– improvisation and creativity
– creativity and behavior
– creativity, capitalism, and entrepreneurial culture
– prehistory vs. history in understanding creativity
– detailed case studies of creative action, as critiques or assessment of creativity
Please contact Timothy Scarlett by May 1st, 2012 to express interest.