Multivocality and Social Archaeology
Multivocality remains for me a key component of archaeological practice, and it remains a core aspect of the methods we are using at Çatalhöyük. But I also recognize the dangers in the term and the idea, and I wish to respond here to those dangers.
KeywordsCultural Heritage Archaeological Practice Multiple Voice Wide Consideration Local Voice
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (2000). The Inclusion of the Other. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Hodder, I. (2004). Archaeology beyond Dialogue. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
- Hodder, I. (2005). Reflexive methods. In H. D. G. Maschner & C. Chippindale (Eds.), Handbook of Archaeological Methods (pp. 643–669). New York: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
- Spivak, G. C. (1995). Can the subaltern speak? In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffiths, & H. Tiffin (Eds.), The Post-Colonial Studies Reader (pp. 24–28). London: Routledge.Google Scholar