In defence of representation

ABSTRACT

The ‘ontological turn’ in the social sciences is premised on the critique of representation. In this essay, I defend representation against some of the major criticisms advanced in archaeology. In developing my argument, I draw insights from the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce and its incorporation in semiotic anthropology. I conclude that while it is not possible to go beyond representation, we can nonetheless improve our representational models through a ‘hermeneutics of generosity.’ Such a perspective involves opening up our interpretive practices to the agency of non-human actors not usually considered in our archaeological accounts. But it also involves engaging with descendent communities in the practice of collaborative knowledge production. These moves have the dual benefit of increasing scientific accuracy and underwriting meaningful social action.

KEYWORDS:

• Ontological turn
• representation
• interpretation
• semiotics
• hermeneutics of generosity
• collaborative archaeology
• indigenous archaeology

Acknowledgments

I thank Ed Swenson and Craig Cipolla for inviting my contribution to this special issue. An earlier version of this paper was presented at TAG - Syracuse, NY, 2019. I am grateful to Woody Aguilar, Alexander Bauer, Andrew Bauer, Craig Cipolla, Chip Colwell, Zoe Crossland, Yannis Hamilakis, Rosemary Joyce, Webb Keane, Adrienne Keene, Nick Laluk, Lynn Meskell, George Nicholas, Paula Sabloff, Artur Ribeiro, Zoe Todd, Peter Van Dommelen, and Kyle Whyte for our ongoing conversations about these issues.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. For reviews of ontological approaches in archaeology, see Alberti (2016), Cipolla (2019), Fahlander (2017), Harris and Cipolla (2017), Ribiero (2019, 2020), Swenson (2015), and Thomas (2015).

2. It is important to note that Peirce never published a synthetic account of his semeiotic and his thought changed over time. It is thus essential to consult his papers chronologically and the series published by the Peirce Edition Project is indispensible. For a comprehensive discussion of the historical development of his view of the sign, see Short (2007).

3. Here I combine Paul Farmer’s term ‘hermeneutics of generosity’ with the Indigenous concept that ‘we are all related.’ Farmer originally coined his term to describe a commitment to interpreting what others say or intend in a favourable light (Farmer 2013). The idea that we are all related is central to Lakota philosophy and represented by the phrase mitakuye oyasin (Modaff 2019).

4. Wilson and Inkster (2018) provide a Yukon First Nation example of the need to respect water as a ‘“more-than-human person,”’ as a being and relation in its own right.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Robert W. Preucel

Robert W. Preucel, archaeologist, PhD (UCLA, 1998), is Professor of Anthropology and Director of the Haffenreffer Museum of Anthropology at Brown University. He has carried out collaborative archaeological research with Cochiti Pueblo in New Mexico since 1995. He may be contacted at [email protected]