New! ARCH 0330 Archaeology Under the Volcano
The volcano has come to represent a modern western conception of wild nature -- unpredictable and dangerous, ‘red in tooth and claw’ -- in authors from Byron to Freud, Derrida to Dickens. Archaeologists have brought similar attitudes to the study of volcanic eruptions such as Vesuvius and Thera in the Mediterranean world, and Xitle and Popocatepetal in Mexico. This course will begin with these literary and archaeological interpretations of volcanoes, then explore other non-western and indigenous perspectives. Our deeply embedded assumption of a sharp divide between ‘nature’ and ‘culture’ will be explored and questioned.
MWF 2:00-2:50. Instructor: Karen Holmberg
GRADING Grading will be based on class participation (25%), presentations and reaction papers (20%), a take-home midterm exam project (20%) and the final paper project (35%). Due dates are listed in the syllabus.
REACTION PAPERS
REACTION PAPER 1: The 1990 movie Joe Versus the Volcano, directed and written by John Patrick Shanley, was considered a box office flop yet has since become a cult classic. While it is obviously quite camp it also expresses a number of points about western modern life with a very dark, comic edge. We will watch and discuss this movie together in segments in class, after which students will turn in a 3-5 page reaction paper. What is the symbolic role or function of the volcano in the movie? How is Nature portrayed in relation to culture?
REACTION PAPER 2: During class we will conduct Skype video interviews with Keith Edmier (New York City) and Ilana Halperin (Glasgow), two accomplished contemporary artists who incorporate volcanic materials and geological concepts into their work. Students will have the opportunity to ask any questions they like, keeping in mind that they should elicit information that will be helpful in writing a 3-5 page reaction paper. What is each artist trying to express through their invocation of the volcano? What is the role of culture in the Nature they present? Students are welcome to compare and contrast the two artists or focus on one or the other.
GROUP PRESENTATIONS PRESENTATION 1: Choose an active volcano to follow throughout the length of the class from the Weekly Volcanic Activity Report of the Global Volcanism Program, which is run by the Smithsonian Institute and available at http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/ . For this project and the class overall, ‘The Volcanism Blog’ can also provide useful or interesting information: http://volcanism.wordpress.com/ . Numerous other sites (such as the Ecuador Field Guide http://www.ecuadorvolcanofieldguide.com/) may also be useful. Students following the same volcano will regularly present the scientific details of their volcano and updates on its activity as well as any cultural entanglements. What are the specific hazards to communities who live in the vicinity to the volcano? Is ecotourism present in the area and if so is the volcano incorporated? Is the volcano used to promote products or incorporated into songs, poetry, etc? Are there archaeological projects ongoing in the area now or in the past? If so, how do archaeologists interpret the volcano’s role? If there is no archaeological work conducted now or in the past, why do you think that the case? Groups will present a 10-15 minute synopsis of their findings to the class (as well as turn in a paper to the instructor). Smaller, informal updates will be provided throughout the class period; these will generally be presented on Fridays as updates are posted to the Weekly Activity Report on Wednesdays.
PRESENTATION 2: The online journal, Internet Archaeology, provides an innovative way to publish archaeological data that allows far more dynamic data presentation and the ability for readers to query interpretations. One recent publication in this journal was authored by your instructor. In groups, students will come up with comment suggestions/critiques based on our class readings of how the volcano is discussed and portrayed in the publication. You may suggest alternate interpretations, critique the supporting evidence used for interpretations, or question the methods used. Groups will present their comments and critiques in class and then the class as a unit will decide upon which comments you will post to the journal website. While helpful as an exercise in critical thinking, this also forms an experiment in web-based academic publication and commenting in archaeology in order to see if class comments prompt comments or critiques from others.
FINAL PAPER PROJECT An 8-10 page paper is due from each student by the final exam day and time. Each student will choose one novel that was excerpted in class to read in full and one archaeological context from a volcanic region to research in order to discuss the narratives of the volcano presented in each. A 2-3 paragraph abstract with 4-6 primary research sources due Friday, March 5. Rather than try to find a ‘perfect fit’ between a novel and an archaeology site, it is suggested that you simply choose a book and a volcanic region you enjoy and would like to study more. You may compare and contrast the role of the volcano presented in each of your chosen cases or may take a more creative way to express your points. Though you are welcome to read literary critiques of your chosen novel as preparation for the paper, the assignment entails expression of your own opinions and critiques rather than those of others. The paper length is short and hence requires an extremely concise presentation of the material. Discussions should show both a clear understanding of how the volcano is presented in each case and a thoughtful, engaged incorporation of class readings and materials.
