Key Pages:

Home

Posted at Oct 19/2011 07:49PM:
Madison:

After reading both Alcock's and Davis's articles I was struck by the concept of "mutability of memory" in the present day. While people come to form part of their identity as a product of certain inividual memories and past expereinces, how does the history of ones own gender/race/ethnicitiy/sexuality and/or country of origin speak to their lived experience and how they choose to identify themselves on a daily basis?

In relation to Alcock's points on Ancient Greece and Davis's on Ancient Mayan cities, how can the structures, texts, artifacts and documents we have on these societies be viewed "correctly" without the acknowledgement that these societies may have manipulated and mutated certain parts of their built environment in order to communicate a message of power to later generations?

How should we continue to excavate remains and teach history with the awareness that what is being taught may have been possibly steered in a direction that would encourage the outlook we have on cultures, especially of ancient greece. Compared to many other Ancient civilization, ancient greece, specifically that of certain monuments such as the Parthenon are highly documented and historically taught as a prosperous brilliant society --- generation after generation. Though the site experienced degree of looting and destruction at the end of the classical period, it is rarely discussed amongst certain academic settings. Though it is impossible to "control" someone else's individual or social memory, where we do go from here considering we have an awareness that a lot of what we have conjured from specific societies could have been both a product of the cultures choice OR that of specific events where the remains were plundered......?

I am aware that there is not one answer to this question, but it is something I am very interested in discussing and exploring!

Posted at Oct 19/2011 09:53PM:
Katherine Haves: 1) Professor Alcock writes about accepting "the ongoing massaging of memory" and that we must do the best we can (35). Can social memory assist in this process or does it hinder explanations of different versions of memory? How does this relate to past discussions we have had relating to individual vs. group memory?

2) In Professor Alcock's study of the Agora, how are multiple commemorative messages expressed? How can different audiences interpret these several messages?

3) Jack Davis poses the question: "Can there be a dialectical relationship between memory studies and archaeological field procedures?" (252). What are some possible criticisms or strengths of his and Alcock's responses?

Posted at Oct 19/2011 10:50PM:
Cally Tomlinson:In Alcock's study of the Agora we see the complexities of the ruling Roman attitude towards Greek objects of cultural significance. There is an apparent tension between the imperialist treatment of a conquered territory, and a respect for past greatness. Comparable perhaps, are the Egyptian Obelisks we now find in Renaissance sculpture, another consequence of the empire. These, and more recent examples such as the Elgin Marbles, beg the question; how can we distinguish between imperialist appropriation and a historically concious desire to preserve? Is this a question still relevant to modern archaeology and the treatment of significant artifacts (I'm thinking of our earlier discussions of 9/11 and the Auschwitz Museum). What does a stipulation such as NAGPRA suggest, and can we extend its principle to other instances?

Posted at Oct 19/2011 11:33PM:
oweerasinghe: Oliver Weerasinghe: Since Omur was discussing the notion of landscapes on Tuesday, I think it would be appropriate to continue that topic in light of Alcock's study of the Agora. Someone asked on Tuesday about the difference between memories of Urban landscapes. Since we have looked primarily at rural landscapes or sites of monuments, perhaps we should take some time to examine more urban memory settings. How does memory of a landscape change in a modern city? Our modern urban landscapes are vastly different from those of the ancient past: do we react to changes in our landscapes as Athenians did to those that occurred in the Agora? How, in other words, do different kinds of landscapes relate?

Aly Abouzeid: As I read through the Davis Reading I was intrigued by the question, What exactly is the relationship between remembering, forgetting and material culture? Alcock describes the role of memory politics in changing how each generation perceives the past, does the onset and aftermath of violence and change lead to the analysis of whats worth remembering or rather what needs to be forgotten? The stripping of the Parthenon and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier are made to remember and reawaken an ancient past but forget the present, where do these erased memories go and where do they belong?

Kirah Nelson:

Archaeology and memory studies allows a  space where we can investigate the past communities’ understanding of their own past through material objects which allowsome insight into the minds of individuals sharing similar realities. For example, Alcock addresses the complexity of Greek attitudes to becoming yet another piece of the vast Roman Empire, and the appeal of nostalgia to a peoplewith already established rich cultural roots. Nostalgia as an active process of cultural strength and, to a certain extent, rebellion, and not a glorified defeatist attitude frames later acts of carefully preserving the classical Greek past and shrouding events that may have tainted it, so to speak, throughthe destruction of material evidence and memories of occupation. My thoughts on this use of nostalgia mirror the concept of reflecting on the past as an encouraging memory practice by also viewing nostalgia as the practice of reflecting on amore hopeful future. Perhaps not with the Roman Empire standing between a country and freedom, but in less limited spaces where the future remains a fluid, fluctuating possibility. Reflecting on the future can be understood as a form of nostalgia inthat a repressed community that does not maintain strong ties to a Classical past share ideals of political and cultural freedom as communal dreams which function as escapes from a not so peaceful present. What are your thoughts on not only social memory but also social dreams, so to speak, and aspirations both functioning as facets of nostalgia?

Omur Harmansah:

These are all excellent questions. I wanted to bring up the issue of nostalgia also- that shows up in the excellent epigraph to Chapter 2- "where you find the present tense and past perfect". In the context of Roman Greece and the changing feelings about the past by Romans and the locals, I wonder we could discuss nostalgia as a memory practice or a form of engagement with the past. Is nostalgia a productive/creative relationship with the past or is it detrimental to progress? Can it be considered as a political strategy- a negotiation of one's own identity? How did nostalgia effect the fate of Greek cities under the Roman rule? What is imperialist nostalgia as Sue discusses it?