3rd January 2008, 01:48 PM
Don't you think its strange that out of 60 students in my undergad year at UWA only a handful of students were interested in Aboriginal archaeology?
WA with Devils Lair, Riwi with 30000 year old beads and even older clearly dated art from carpenters gap at 40000 years and they are not interested.
And all the white students just love the Romans and Egypt and digging up some crappy colonial farm from the 1930s (colonial bit designed to enrage the easily enraged).
Just a thought, but couldn't white Australian archaeologists seeming reluctance to engage with Aboriginal archaeology actually reflect the fact that they are being quite thoughtful about race issues? It must feel quite uncomfortably âcolonialistâ at times to a white archaeologist working on aboriginal sites. Sticking with the more recent past allows white Australians to be actively involved in a heritage which they feel is their own. Avoiding work on Aboriginal sites may simply reflect a desire not to be seen as condescending outsiders pretending to know more about Aboriginal culture than the Aboriginal people themselves.
Furthermore I find the idea of encouraging British people to travel to Australia to work on archaeology there a bit weird. If good money is available surely it would be far better to increase the number of aboriginal archaeologists involved? They would have a greater background understanding of the issues involved and an actual cultural stake in the archaeology itself. This is similar to the debate about museums, if archaeological finds should be curated and displayed in, or near to, their point of discovery, then surely actual archaeologists working in an area should, where possible, be local people with an in depth knowledge and a stake in that heritage?
WA with Devils Lair, Riwi with 30000 year old beads and even older clearly dated art from carpenters gap at 40000 years and they are not interested.
And all the white students just love the Romans and Egypt and digging up some crappy colonial farm from the 1930s (colonial bit designed to enrage the easily enraged).
Just a thought, but couldn't white Australian archaeologists seeming reluctance to engage with Aboriginal archaeology actually reflect the fact that they are being quite thoughtful about race issues? It must feel quite uncomfortably âcolonialistâ at times to a white archaeologist working on aboriginal sites. Sticking with the more recent past allows white Australians to be actively involved in a heritage which they feel is their own. Avoiding work on Aboriginal sites may simply reflect a desire not to be seen as condescending outsiders pretending to know more about Aboriginal culture than the Aboriginal people themselves.
Furthermore I find the idea of encouraging British people to travel to Australia to work on archaeology there a bit weird. If good money is available surely it would be far better to increase the number of aboriginal archaeologists involved? They would have a greater background understanding of the issues involved and an actual cultural stake in the archaeology itself. This is similar to the debate about museums, if archaeological finds should be curated and displayed in, or near to, their point of discovery, then surely actual archaeologists working in an area should, where possible, be local people with an in depth knowledge and a stake in that heritage?