超越Weiss和b施普林格的《遣返与抹去过去:土著价值观、关系和研究》

IF 0.6 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY International Journal of Cultural Property Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI:10.1017/S0940739121000229
S. Halcrow, A. Aranui, Stephanie Halmhofer, Annalisa Heppner, Norma Johnson, K. Killgrove, G. Schug
{"title":"超越Weiss和b施普林格的《遣返与抹去过去:土著价值观、关系和研究》","authors":"S. Halcrow, A. Aranui, Stephanie Halmhofer, Annalisa Heppner, Norma Johnson, K. Killgrove, G. Schug","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This commentary debunks the poor scholarship in Repatriation and Erasing the Past by Elizabeth Weiss and James Springer. We show that modern bioarchaeological practice with Indigenous remains places ethics, partnership, and collaboration at the fore and that the authors’ misconstructed dichotomous fallacy between “objective science” and Indigenous knowledge and repatriation hinders the very argument they are espousing. We demonstrate that bioarchaeology, when conducted in collaboration with stakeholders, enriches research, with concepts and methodologies brought forward to address common questions, and builds a richer historical and archaeological context. As anthropologists, we need to acknowledge anti-Indigenous (and anti-Black) ideology and the insidious trauma and civil rights violations that have been afflicted and re-afflicted through Indigenous remains being illegally or unethically obtained, curated, transferred, and used for research and teaching in museums and universities. If we could go so far as to say that anything good has come out of this book, it has been the stimulation in countering these beliefs and developing and strengthening ethical approaches and standards in our field.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"211 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moving beyond Weiss and Springer’s Repatriation and Erasing the Past: Indigenous values, relationships, and research\",\"authors\":\"S. Halcrow, A. Aranui, Stephanie Halmhofer, Annalisa Heppner, Norma Johnson, K. Killgrove, G. Schug\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0940739121000229\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This commentary debunks the poor scholarship in Repatriation and Erasing the Past by Elizabeth Weiss and James Springer. We show that modern bioarchaeological practice with Indigenous remains places ethics, partnership, and collaboration at the fore and that the authors’ misconstructed dichotomous fallacy between “objective science” and Indigenous knowledge and repatriation hinders the very argument they are espousing. We demonstrate that bioarchaeology, when conducted in collaboration with stakeholders, enriches research, with concepts and methodologies brought forward to address common questions, and builds a richer historical and archaeological context. As anthropologists, we need to acknowledge anti-Indigenous (and anti-Black) ideology and the insidious trauma and civil rights violations that have been afflicted and re-afflicted through Indigenous remains being illegally or unethically obtained, curated, transferred, and used for research and teaching in museums and universities. If we could go so far as to say that anything good has come out of this book, it has been the stimulation in countering these beliefs and developing and strengthening ethical approaches and standards in our field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cultural Property\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"211 - 220\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cultural Property\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cultural Property","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000229","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

这篇评论揭露了伊丽莎白·韦斯和詹姆斯·b施普林格在《遣返》和《抹去过去》中的拙劣学术。我们表明,现代生物考古实践与土著遗骸将伦理、伙伴关系和合作放在首位,作者在“客观科学”与土著知识和遣返之间错误构建的二分法谬误阻碍了他们所支持的论点。我们证明,生物考古学在与利益相关者合作时,丰富了研究,提出了解决共同问题的概念和方法,并建立了更丰富的历史和考古背景。作为人类学家,我们需要承认反土著(和反黑人)的意识形态,以及由于土著遗骸被非法或不道德地获取、管理、转移和用于博物馆和大学的研究和教学而遭受的潜在创伤和侵犯民权的行为。如果我们可以说这本书有什么好处的话,那就是对这些信念的反击,以及在我们的领域中发展和加强道德方法和标准的激励。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Moving beyond Weiss and Springer’s Repatriation and Erasing the Past: Indigenous values, relationships, and research
Abstract This commentary debunks the poor scholarship in Repatriation and Erasing the Past by Elizabeth Weiss and James Springer. We show that modern bioarchaeological practice with Indigenous remains places ethics, partnership, and collaboration at the fore and that the authors’ misconstructed dichotomous fallacy between “objective science” and Indigenous knowledge and repatriation hinders the very argument they are espousing. We demonstrate that bioarchaeology, when conducted in collaboration with stakeholders, enriches research, with concepts and methodologies brought forward to address common questions, and builds a richer historical and archaeological context. As anthropologists, we need to acknowledge anti-Indigenous (and anti-Black) ideology and the insidious trauma and civil rights violations that have been afflicted and re-afflicted through Indigenous remains being illegally or unethically obtained, curated, transferred, and used for research and teaching in museums and universities. If we could go so far as to say that anything good has come out of this book, it has been the stimulation in countering these beliefs and developing and strengthening ethical approaches and standards in our field.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Cultural Property
International Journal of Cultural Property HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Different Materialities – Different Authenticities? Considerations on Watercraft Exhibited in Museums Learning and Knowledge Loss: Returning Antiquities from Fordham University to Italy Are Archaeologists Talking About Looting? Reviewing Archaeological and Anthropological Conference Proceedings from 1899–2019 How to Be a ‘Good’ Collector: Some Ethical Reflections on the Private Collecting of Cultural Heritage T. rex is Fierce, T. rex is Charismatic, T. rex is Litigious: Disruptive Objects in Affective Desirescapes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1