Summary
Doing Archaeology as a Feminist:
Moving from Theory to Practice
In April 1998, nine archaeologists, one historian, and a philosopher
gathered for an advanced seminar on the implications of feminist
commitments for the discipline of archaeology. Although their areas
of interest were enormously diverse, they shared a conviction that
feminist insights make a constructive difference not just "at
a conceptual, theoretical level," as co-organizers Alison Wylie
(University of Western Ontario) and Margaret Conkey (University of
California, Berkeley) put it, "but to all aspects of archeological
practice: fieldwork, data analysis, teaching, and writing, as well
as relationships with the various communities and publics that have
an interest in archaeology."
From the outset, "Doing Archaeology as a Feminist" was
marked by the goal of moving from theory to practice. Because "our commitment
to feminism permeates the way we are in the world," said Conkey, "we
began by integrating it into the traditional SAR seminar format." Three
break-out groups identified issues for discussion in each paper, then rotating
chairs facilitated presentations in which each speaker called on the next. This
fostered a collaborative, rather than a competitive, approach, and participants
were able to identify the crosscutting themes quickly at the beginning of the
week.
Central to the seminar's working definition of feminism
were two ideas—first, that although sex and gender systems are inextricably
connected to other contextual factors such as race and class, they organize our
lives in fundamental and distinctive ways. Second, any inequalities created by
these systems should be challenged. "Doing archaeology as a feminist," then,
is decidedly different from developing a "feminist archaeology," which
implies the development of a subdiscipline rather than a constructive approach
to the existing science.
The resulting variety of feminist practices identified
during the seminar week included the exploration of multiple scales of analysis,
a commitment to acknowledging human agency, a recognition of the complexity of
explanation and a willingness to question ideals of certainty, and a concern
for contextualizing research and taking responsibility for its ethical and political
implications. Above all, doing archaeology as a feminist reflects a commitment
to ensuring that gender is taken into account whenever it makes a difference.
In their papers, participants addressed issues ranging
from the concrete dimensions of archaeological practice—such as the masculinist
culture of most fieldwork—to the conceptual framework of the discipline,
reflected in questions about "the gender of theory." Conkey asked, "Who
gets to develop theory, on what topics, and with what impact on the research
agenda of the discipline?"
The seminar week ended on a strong note with plans to "extend
the collaborative structure of the seminar to the structure of the book, integrating
our papers, e-mail texts, and discussion transcripts in a creative way," Wylie
said.
