Þóra Pétursdóttir | University of Oslo (original) (raw)
Papers by Þóra Pétursdóttir
Archaeological Dialogues, 2023
What legitimizes archaeological work in an age of global climate change, socio-political crises a... more What legitimizes archaeological work in an age of global climate change, socio-political crises and economic recession? On what topics should archaeology focus its research questions, and what forms of archaeological engagement are not merely justifiable but able to make a difference in light of such challenges? Today, there is a tendency, we argue, that archaeological responses to current challenges are expected to align with a specific mode of conduct, political stance and genre, where, for example, a very particular notion of activism, responsibility and ethics is dominating. There is no denial that current challenges call for immediate instrumental reactions, but we contend that valuable reactions canor even mustvary, and that more fundamental and slow ontological and epistemological change should also be nested within these responses. In this article, we explore what it means to carewhat it means to be concernedin the Anthropocene through archaeological practice and aesthetic engagement. By highlighting the relations between ethics and aesthetics, we explore ways in which we get in touch with the objects of concern, placing undecidability and speculation as dispositions equally important to urgency and impact.
Arkæologisk Forum, 2021
The need for a joint Nordic platform for archaeological theory has recently been reflected upon o... more The need for a joint Nordic platform for archaeological theory has recently been reflected upon on the pages of this journal. Is there a need for a Nordic TAG? Are there issues that pertain to a particularly Nordic theoretical debate? And if so, why is it that this seemingly ideal venue tends towards hibernation every now and then? These questions will be discussed here, though not fully answered. Most importantly, however, with this short comment we are happy to inform you that the Nordic TAG will be returning this coming spring. Hosted jointly by the Department of Archaeology, Conservation and History and the Museum of Cultural History, both part of the University of Oslo, the aim is set for lively conversations and constructive arguments in late April 2022. We hope to see you there!
Nordicum-Mediterraneum
Book review of: Caspar Jørgensen and Morten Pedersen (eds.), Industrial Heritage in Denmark: Land... more Book review of: Caspar Jørgensen and Morten Pedersen (eds.), Industrial Heritage in Denmark: Landscapes, Environments and Historical Archaeology (Aarhus: Kultur Styrelsen and Aarhus University Press, 2015), 285 pp. ISBN 978 87 7124 108 2
Norwegian Archaeological Review
Cambridge Archaeological Journal
To begin with, I would like to express my gratitude to Susan, Reinhard, Lena, Anna and Stefan for... more To begin with, I would like to express my gratitude to Susan, Reinhard, Lena, Anna and Stefan for inviting me to participate in their workshop around the puzzling theme of Beiläufigkeit in archaeology. Having worked lately with assemblages of objects that, though very much in the spotlight of media, have hitherto fallen into the blind spot of archaeology, I immediately found it inviting to think in terms of Beiläufigkeit, the incidental and the by-passed. And, to no surprise—also given the concept's reluctance to give in fully to either translation or definition—the seminar and discussions in Berlin in April 2018 turned out extremely stimulating, leaving many glitches for further speculation.
International Journal of Heritage Studies
What might heritage in and of the Anthropocene look like? This article ponders this question by d... more What might heritage in and of the Anthropocene look like? This article ponders this question by drawing on archaeological encounters with assemblages of drift matter (seaborne debris) in Norway and Iceland. Here, drift matter manifests evidence of both the relentlessly amassing material heritage of the Anthropocene and deep legacies of local engagement with this fluctuating resource. The tensions evoked along these coastlines therefore invite explorations of some of the challenges met in the current climate, problematizing conceptions of heritage and waste, wanteds and unwanteds, salvation and loss. Surely, drift matter is today largely perceived as not belonging in these natural environs. However, are there other thing lessons to be learned from taking seriously this heritage? Avoiding an interpretation of these things as out of context and a focus merely on what has been lost, this article asks whether it is possible that the sense of ambiguity, flux and drift emitted by this material may not only challenge but also enable alternative possibilities of knowing thingsalternatives that may be of significance for a heritage in and of the Anthropocene.
Archaeological Dialogues
In her article ‘A taphonomy of a dark Anthropocene’, Alexandra Ion responds to and criticizes my ... more In her article ‘A taphonomy of a dark Anthropocene’, Alexandra Ion responds to and criticizes my discussion around the topic of archaeology and the Anthropocene recently published in this journal. She takes issue with most of my central arguments and especially with my leaning towards object-oriented ontology, speculative realism and the like, describing my perspective as one that is literally dark and depressing and which may lead nowhere but to a dead end. While I make it clear that I will neither answer for nor shield myself behind other peoples’ articulations of OOO, I will in what follows react to Ion's rather harsh critique and use the opportunity to sharpen my arguments further by focusing on three central themes: first, OOO and the archaeological object; second, darkness, dead ends and knowledge of things; and third, ethics, politics and responsibility.
Archaeological Dialogues
As we pass into an age of the Anthropocene, archaeologists, as scholars of other disciplines, are... more As we pass into an age of the Anthropocene, archaeologists, as scholars of other disciplines, are driven to consider how this physical and ideological climate change affects our craft, or how archaeology can contribute with knowledge and insight of significance in a shifting world. Basing its arguments on research conducted on marine debris and drift beaches in northern Norway and Iceland, the aim of this article is to imagine what kind of alternative ways of doing and thinking archaeology the current climate is calling for. With reference to this material, which conspicuously manifests both obstacles and promises for an ‘Anthropocene archaeology’, the article will question the worth of some perspectives traditionally considered essential to our discipline, while simultaneously building on confidence in a sincerely archaeological imagination.
Journal of Social Archaeology
At a possible transition towards a ‘flat’, post-human or new-materialist environment, many have s... more At a possible transition towards a ‘flat’, post-human or new-materialist environment, many have suggested that archaeological theory and theorizing is changing course; turning to metaphysics; leaning towards the sciences; or, even is declared dead. Resonating with these concerns, and drawing on our fieldwork on a northern driftwood beach, this article suggests the need to rethink fundamental notions of what theory is – its morphological being – and how it behaves and takes form. Like drift matter on an Arctic shore, theories are adrift. They are not natives of any particular territory, but nomads in a mixed world. While they are themselves of certain weight and figure, it matters what things they bump into, become entangled with, and moved by. Based on this, we argue that theories come unfinished and fragile. Much like things stranding on a beach they don’t simply ‘add up’ but can become detached, fragmented, turned and transfigured. Rather than seeing this drift as rendering them r...
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Photographs of abandoned homes, decaying towns and industrial ruins swarm the Internet. They also... more Photographs of abandoned homes, decaying towns and industrial ruins swarm the Internet. They also fill the glossy pages of art books and popular magazine issues, and are increasingly appropriating more prominent spaces in scholarly publication on modern decay and abandonment. While its popularity speaks to its attractiveness, this proliferating ruin imagery has also become the target of harsh criticism from both concerned scholars and people affected by ruination. To them much of this is little but "ruin porn": a superficial and one-eyed portrayal of urban decay that turns social and material misery into something seductive and aesthetically pleasing. This article takes a different position. Speaking from an archaeological perspective, and especially the archaeology of the contemporary past, it argues that the new engagement with ruin photography rather calls for a reconsideration and appreciation of the role of photography; not merely as a means of documentation but also as an interactive and attentive way to approach things themselves. By scrutinizing what the critics have claimed to be the fallacies of the image (its selectivity, timelessness, superficiality and tendency to aestheticize), and by emphasizing ruin photography as an engagement with things, the article aims to show that it is precisely the alleged shortcomings that make photography a valuable method in a new approach to things and ruins.
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Materialities, Aesthetics and the Archaeology of the Recent Past, 2012
Materialities, Aesthetics and the Archaeology of the Recent Past, 2012
Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 2014
International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 2012
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Archaeological Dialogues, 2023
What legitimizes archaeological work in an age of global climate change, socio-political crises a... more What legitimizes archaeological work in an age of global climate change, socio-political crises and economic recession? On what topics should archaeology focus its research questions, and what forms of archaeological engagement are not merely justifiable but able to make a difference in light of such challenges? Today, there is a tendency, we argue, that archaeological responses to current challenges are expected to align with a specific mode of conduct, political stance and genre, where, for example, a very particular notion of activism, responsibility and ethics is dominating. There is no denial that current challenges call for immediate instrumental reactions, but we contend that valuable reactions canor even mustvary, and that more fundamental and slow ontological and epistemological change should also be nested within these responses. In this article, we explore what it means to carewhat it means to be concernedin the Anthropocene through archaeological practice and aesthetic engagement. By highlighting the relations between ethics and aesthetics, we explore ways in which we get in touch with the objects of concern, placing undecidability and speculation as dispositions equally important to urgency and impact.
Arkæologisk Forum, 2021
The need for a joint Nordic platform for archaeological theory has recently been reflected upon o... more The need for a joint Nordic platform for archaeological theory has recently been reflected upon on the pages of this journal. Is there a need for a Nordic TAG? Are there issues that pertain to a particularly Nordic theoretical debate? And if so, why is it that this seemingly ideal venue tends towards hibernation every now and then? These questions will be discussed here, though not fully answered. Most importantly, however, with this short comment we are happy to inform you that the Nordic TAG will be returning this coming spring. Hosted jointly by the Department of Archaeology, Conservation and History and the Museum of Cultural History, both part of the University of Oslo, the aim is set for lively conversations and constructive arguments in late April 2022. We hope to see you there!
Nordicum-Mediterraneum
Book review of: Caspar Jørgensen and Morten Pedersen (eds.), Industrial Heritage in Denmark: Land... more Book review of: Caspar Jørgensen and Morten Pedersen (eds.), Industrial Heritage in Denmark: Landscapes, Environments and Historical Archaeology (Aarhus: Kultur Styrelsen and Aarhus University Press, 2015), 285 pp. ISBN 978 87 7124 108 2
Norwegian Archaeological Review
Cambridge Archaeological Journal
To begin with, I would like to express my gratitude to Susan, Reinhard, Lena, Anna and Stefan for... more To begin with, I would like to express my gratitude to Susan, Reinhard, Lena, Anna and Stefan for inviting me to participate in their workshop around the puzzling theme of Beiläufigkeit in archaeology. Having worked lately with assemblages of objects that, though very much in the spotlight of media, have hitherto fallen into the blind spot of archaeology, I immediately found it inviting to think in terms of Beiläufigkeit, the incidental and the by-passed. And, to no surprise—also given the concept's reluctance to give in fully to either translation or definition—the seminar and discussions in Berlin in April 2018 turned out extremely stimulating, leaving many glitches for further speculation.
International Journal of Heritage Studies
What might heritage in and of the Anthropocene look like? This article ponders this question by d... more What might heritage in and of the Anthropocene look like? This article ponders this question by drawing on archaeological encounters with assemblages of drift matter (seaborne debris) in Norway and Iceland. Here, drift matter manifests evidence of both the relentlessly amassing material heritage of the Anthropocene and deep legacies of local engagement with this fluctuating resource. The tensions evoked along these coastlines therefore invite explorations of some of the challenges met in the current climate, problematizing conceptions of heritage and waste, wanteds and unwanteds, salvation and loss. Surely, drift matter is today largely perceived as not belonging in these natural environs. However, are there other thing lessons to be learned from taking seriously this heritage? Avoiding an interpretation of these things as out of context and a focus merely on what has been lost, this article asks whether it is possible that the sense of ambiguity, flux and drift emitted by this material may not only challenge but also enable alternative possibilities of knowing thingsalternatives that may be of significance for a heritage in and of the Anthropocene.
Archaeological Dialogues
In her article ‘A taphonomy of a dark Anthropocene’, Alexandra Ion responds to and criticizes my ... more In her article ‘A taphonomy of a dark Anthropocene’, Alexandra Ion responds to and criticizes my discussion around the topic of archaeology and the Anthropocene recently published in this journal. She takes issue with most of my central arguments and especially with my leaning towards object-oriented ontology, speculative realism and the like, describing my perspective as one that is literally dark and depressing and which may lead nowhere but to a dead end. While I make it clear that I will neither answer for nor shield myself behind other peoples’ articulations of OOO, I will in what follows react to Ion's rather harsh critique and use the opportunity to sharpen my arguments further by focusing on three central themes: first, OOO and the archaeological object; second, darkness, dead ends and knowledge of things; and third, ethics, politics and responsibility.
Archaeological Dialogues
As we pass into an age of the Anthropocene, archaeologists, as scholars of other disciplines, are... more As we pass into an age of the Anthropocene, archaeologists, as scholars of other disciplines, are driven to consider how this physical and ideological climate change affects our craft, or how archaeology can contribute with knowledge and insight of significance in a shifting world. Basing its arguments on research conducted on marine debris and drift beaches in northern Norway and Iceland, the aim of this article is to imagine what kind of alternative ways of doing and thinking archaeology the current climate is calling for. With reference to this material, which conspicuously manifests both obstacles and promises for an ‘Anthropocene archaeology’, the article will question the worth of some perspectives traditionally considered essential to our discipline, while simultaneously building on confidence in a sincerely archaeological imagination.
Journal of Social Archaeology
At a possible transition towards a ‘flat’, post-human or new-materialist environment, many have s... more At a possible transition towards a ‘flat’, post-human or new-materialist environment, many have suggested that archaeological theory and theorizing is changing course; turning to metaphysics; leaning towards the sciences; or, even is declared dead. Resonating with these concerns, and drawing on our fieldwork on a northern driftwood beach, this article suggests the need to rethink fundamental notions of what theory is – its morphological being – and how it behaves and takes form. Like drift matter on an Arctic shore, theories are adrift. They are not natives of any particular territory, but nomads in a mixed world. While they are themselves of certain weight and figure, it matters what things they bump into, become entangled with, and moved by. Based on this, we argue that theories come unfinished and fragile. Much like things stranding on a beach they don’t simply ‘add up’ but can become detached, fragmented, turned and transfigured. Rather than seeing this drift as rendering them r...
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Photographs of abandoned homes, decaying towns and industrial ruins swarm the Internet. They also... more Photographs of abandoned homes, decaying towns and industrial ruins swarm the Internet. They also fill the glossy pages of art books and popular magazine issues, and are increasingly appropriating more prominent spaces in scholarly publication on modern decay and abandonment. While its popularity speaks to its attractiveness, this proliferating ruin imagery has also become the target of harsh criticism from both concerned scholars and people affected by ruination. To them much of this is little but "ruin porn": a superficial and one-eyed portrayal of urban decay that turns social and material misery into something seductive and aesthetically pleasing. This article takes a different position. Speaking from an archaeological perspective, and especially the archaeology of the contemporary past, it argues that the new engagement with ruin photography rather calls for a reconsideration and appreciation of the role of photography; not merely as a means of documentation but also as an interactive and attentive way to approach things themselves. By scrutinizing what the critics have claimed to be the fallacies of the image (its selectivity, timelessness, superficiality and tendency to aestheticize), and by emphasizing ruin photography as an engagement with things, the article aims to show that it is precisely the alleged shortcomings that make photography a valuable method in a new approach to things and ruins.
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Materialities, Aesthetics and the Archaeology of the Recent Past, 2012
Materialities, Aesthetics and the Archaeology of the Recent Past, 2012
Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, 2014
International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 2012
Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, 2014
Edited by Bjørnar J. Olsen, Mats Burström, Caitlin DeSilvey and Þóra Pétursdóttir , 2021
After Discourse is an interdisciplinary response to the recent trend away from linguistic and tex... more After Discourse is an interdisciplinary response to the recent trend away from linguistic and textual approaches and towards things and their affects.
The new millennium brought about serious changes to the intellectual landscape. Favoured approaches associated with the linguistic and the textual turn lost some of their currency, and were followed by a new curiosity and concern for things and their natures. Gathering contributions from archaeology, heritage studies, history, geography, literature and philosophy, After Discourse offers a range of reflections on what things are, how we become affected by them, and the ethical concerns they give rise to. Through a varied constellation of case studies, it explores ways of dealing with matters which fall outside, become othered from, or simply cannot be grasped through perspectives derived solely from language and discourse.
After Discourse provides challenging new perspectives for scholars and students interested in other-than-textual encounters between people and the objects with which we share the world.
The thesis is both part of and a critical response to the turn to things or the “new materialisms... more The thesis is both part of and a critical response to the turn to things or the “new materialisms” developing within the humanities and social sciences during the last two decades. Based on the archaeological exploration of two recently abandoned herring stations in Iceland’s Northwest and their rich assemblages of decaying matter, the thesis seeks to scrutinize the fate of archaeological things within this new theoretical landscape. How do these soiled, broken, useless, abandoned or discarded things respond to the predominantly positive and humanly defined imperatives (e.g. agency, mobility, personality) mobilized in the current reconstitution of things/non-humans? The thesis reflects on this and how a turn to archaeological things – or an archaeological insight – can contribute with a different and broader understanding of things, their characteristics, capacities and non-human agency. This is accomplished through the exploration of three themes; the aesthetics of waste and heritage, the materiality of memory and the significance of things, which further contribute to nuance the current efforts of turning to things by throwing light on the conditions, constraints and potentials of such a turn.