{"title":"消费者、策展人、“社区”、争论和COVID-19时间。联系和观点","authors":"S. Wallace","doi":"10.1017/S1380203822000186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Reification of ‘community’ and community engagement by professional curators of material culture has recently been critiqued in ways which highlight the diversity of cultural identities and priorities among the general public. When not acting as coherent local communities under professional supervision, people are otherwise curating culture in public space within frameworks of spiritual and creative expression, place significance and identity. Employing primarily secondary sources, I address recent outdoor public curation practices in the West, and consider such deposits in relation to cultural-heritage management, a perspective in which they have hitherto been little addressed. Although these practices typically use accumulations of themed objects to achieve visibility and audience, I conclude that they are ultimately more focused on the individual than on the community, with linkages within and between them highly digitally enabled. Apparently intensified by the effects of recent COVID-19 travel lockdowns, the practices are also linked by their typical colonization of transit spaces (thereby accessing audiences who are also expected participants), by their conscious ephemerality (with deliberate innocence about end destinations of the objects used), and by their use of mundane consumer artefacts. All these features pose challenges to their management, and curated deposits are often contested or removed by official curators or managers of public space, even as the same entities appropriate similar tropes to engage customers. With resurgent interest in tangible culture and physical place following pandemic-era overloading in the virtual domain, with travel habits potentially using different routes, at altered times, and with use of social media continuing to grow, such activities may see increased participation. This analysis suggests that imaginative proactive official treatment of these curations (e.g. by municipal authorities, heritage site curators, rangers or other property owners/managers) could avoid conflict with creators and also help reduce enduring public ‘innocence’ about the disposability of consumer objects. Treatment could involve encouraging ongoing adaptation (digitally recorded and disseminated) of the curated objects in situ by their transitory public audiences.","PeriodicalId":45009,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological Dialogues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consumers, curations, ‘community’, contestation and the time of COVID-19. Linkages and perspectives\",\"authors\":\"S. Wallace\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1380203822000186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Reification of ‘community’ and community engagement by professional curators of material culture has recently been critiqued in ways which highlight the diversity of cultural identities and priorities among the general public. When not acting as coherent local communities under professional supervision, people are otherwise curating culture in public space within frameworks of spiritual and creative expression, place significance and identity. Employing primarily secondary sources, I address recent outdoor public curation practices in the West, and consider such deposits in relation to cultural-heritage management, a perspective in which they have hitherto been little addressed. Although these practices typically use accumulations of themed objects to achieve visibility and audience, I conclude that they are ultimately more focused on the individual than on the community, with linkages within and between them highly digitally enabled. Apparently intensified by the effects of recent COVID-19 travel lockdowns, the practices are also linked by their typical colonization of transit spaces (thereby accessing audiences who are also expected participants), by their conscious ephemerality (with deliberate innocence about end destinations of the objects used), and by their use of mundane consumer artefacts. All these features pose challenges to their management, and curated deposits are often contested or removed by official curators or managers of public space, even as the same entities appropriate similar tropes to engage customers. With resurgent interest in tangible culture and physical place following pandemic-era overloading in the virtual domain, with travel habits potentially using different routes, at altered times, and with use of social media continuing to grow, such activities may see increased participation. This analysis suggests that imaginative proactive official treatment of these curations (e.g. by municipal authorities, heritage site curators, rangers or other property owners/managers) could avoid conflict with creators and also help reduce enduring public ‘innocence’ about the disposability of consumer objects. Treatment could involve encouraging ongoing adaptation (digitally recorded and disseminated) of the curated objects in situ by their transitory public audiences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archaeological Dialogues\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archaeological Dialogues\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203822000186\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological Dialogues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203822000186","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Consumers, curations, ‘community’, contestation and the time of COVID-19. Linkages and perspectives
Abstract Reification of ‘community’ and community engagement by professional curators of material culture has recently been critiqued in ways which highlight the diversity of cultural identities and priorities among the general public. When not acting as coherent local communities under professional supervision, people are otherwise curating culture in public space within frameworks of spiritual and creative expression, place significance and identity. Employing primarily secondary sources, I address recent outdoor public curation practices in the West, and consider such deposits in relation to cultural-heritage management, a perspective in which they have hitherto been little addressed. Although these practices typically use accumulations of themed objects to achieve visibility and audience, I conclude that they are ultimately more focused on the individual than on the community, with linkages within and between them highly digitally enabled. Apparently intensified by the effects of recent COVID-19 travel lockdowns, the practices are also linked by their typical colonization of transit spaces (thereby accessing audiences who are also expected participants), by their conscious ephemerality (with deliberate innocence about end destinations of the objects used), and by their use of mundane consumer artefacts. All these features pose challenges to their management, and curated deposits are often contested or removed by official curators or managers of public space, even as the same entities appropriate similar tropes to engage customers. With resurgent interest in tangible culture and physical place following pandemic-era overloading in the virtual domain, with travel habits potentially using different routes, at altered times, and with use of social media continuing to grow, such activities may see increased participation. This analysis suggests that imaginative proactive official treatment of these curations (e.g. by municipal authorities, heritage site curators, rangers or other property owners/managers) could avoid conflict with creators and also help reduce enduring public ‘innocence’ about the disposability of consumer objects. Treatment could involve encouraging ongoing adaptation (digitally recorded and disseminated) of the curated objects in situ by their transitory public audiences.
期刊介绍:
Archaeology is undergoing rapid changes in terms of its conceptual framework and its place in contemporary society. In this challenging intellectual climate, Archaeological Dialogues has become one of the leading journals for debating innovative issues in archaeology. Firmly rooted in European archaeology, it now serves the international academic community for discussing the theories and practices of archaeology today. True to its name, debate takes a central place in Archaeological Dialogues.