ANTH 3420 Urban Archaeology OER

Public Group active 2 years, 8 months ago

Week 5: CRM, Historic Preservation and Advocacy

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #78764

    This week’s readings discusses more of the technological aspects of studying the built environment based off US Cultural Resource Management (CRM) practice which is routed in US policy and law. While Kuranda’s piece details how US professionals study the built environment primarily based on the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Criteria, Allen’s piece is more critical on how we view heritage and what is and should be preserved. Compare the two pieces and explore your own thoughts on what and how heritage via the built environment should and can be preserved and why.

    #79028
    Jaeden Granger
    Participant

    Michael R. Allen’s Bending the Future discusses the event in Ferguson and how the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) could do better to preserve the history of the incident like Ferguson. Kathryn M. Kuranda’s chapter in A Companion to Cultural Resource Management discusses the cultural resource management and their procedure in studying the history of architecture to determine effective and proper preservation tactics. It also mentions the Cultural Resource Management and the difficulty of preserving built environments when it comes to U.S. policy and law

    Both documents focus on the preservation of historical events, and both reference the NHPA, which is a federal act made for preserving historic preservations in the U.S. The documents main focus is built environments, or man-made buildings and land usage. Preserving such events can be integrated into different field branches like cultural, political history, geography. The modern age has given archaeologists various ways on preserving historical events. With Ferguson as an example, the incident was video-taped by civilians in the area, thus being preserved.

    Both of the documents conclude that history are important components “to society. Thus, aspects of history that a society finds valuable inevitably are reflected in its built environment. This simple premise underlies much practice in contemporary cultural resource management. It provides a theoretical foundation for the field and also explains many of its challenges.” (Kuranda, Kathryn M. 14) Preserving history is important because knowing of events in the past could be repeated in the future. Therefore, knowing about events which occurred in the past, especially mistakes that happened in the past, we can try our best to not repeat those mistakes in the present and the future.

    #79033
    nolcie pierre
    Participant

     

    Kathryn M. Kuranda highlights the thoughtful and responsible professional practice in cultural resource management (CRM) in her chapter “Studying and Evaluating the Built Environment”. “Cultural resource management operates under international cultural heritage conventions, government policies, laws, ordinances, regulations, procedures, standards, and technical guidelines designed to support the identification, evaluation, and treatment of properties of historical and cultural importance”. Before a site can get acknowledged as a historical landmark it must adhere to certain standards placed by the CRM. Kuranda does admit that Historical perspective is an issue when assessing properties of contemporary construction (like the QuikTrip in Ferguson, Missouri) but still makes it clear that the systems and reports set in place are there to asses both the historical and contemporary aspects that lie in property and “Built Environment”. Kathryn Kuranda claims that CRM is there to encourage responsible and thorough investigations on potential preservation sights but in Michael Allen’s article, “Bending the Future” he questions how these assessments can limit the definition of a historical landmark, and also ignore public advocacy for a site in question.

     

    The article “Bending the Future” by Michael Allen encourages more discussions on the methods of preservation in an urban landscape. What happened to Michael Brown and the slew of protests that occurred after is indicative of a major turning point in our American History. This article acknowledges a change in Ferguson Missouri in 2014, something that sought out grief and opened the doors for a nationwide discussion about police brutality and black lives and their functionality in America. Allen writes “Few St. Louisianans, whatever their beliefs, would say that what happened in Ferguson in 2014 is not important, but the national park service reviewer might well find the QuikTrip rubble ineligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places”. The Michael Brown / QuikTrip shooting broke news nationally and did in fact “make history” so why would something so impactful be left without commemoration?

     

    Allen also mentioned that the QuikTrip would be transformed into a new community center designed to help heal Ferguson’s inequities. “The visible wound of the QuikTrip, a tangled and unsightly work of popular architecture, found little support as a popular preservation project. Instead, the site will live on as symbolized through a new work of architecture- albeit one that will avoid direct reference to the ‘people’s park’ ” Although the article doesn’t completely go into depth about the bureaucratic red tape (something the CRM would be involved in) surrounding the Quik Trip, it works in the way of a ‘think piece’ where readers must question why there is an ‘appropriate age’ on historical preservation sites. This reminds me of the previous article we read about the Soldiers and Sailors statue in Indianapolis, Indiana. It seems like preservationists think horrific events, or events in general, pertaining to black culture, should not be given too much attention due to the egregious history that lies behind it. Preservationists would rather forget about what happened and place symbolic value to something that is detached from the actual event, than addressing it head-on like most of America has as the events unfolded in front of them. Similar to the idea of a new Emancipated Slave statue in Indiana, making the QuikTrip a historical preservation site shows respect to what was (and still is) an important piece of American history and lets that event be recognized on its own, and not shadowed under the guise of “healing inequalities”.

    #79035
    Blessing Tate
    Participant

    The first article to be analyzed is by Thomas King, known as “A comparison to cultural resource management.” It begins with the analysis of cultural resource management. This is the consideration of the protection and management of the multitudes of scarce elements of cultural heritage in a modern world (King) with the expansion of populations and altering needs. If one is a curator in a museum, then the museum artifacts are the cultural resources, whereas the cultural resource management falls under managing and preserving these artifacts (King). It is vital to study and evaluate the built environment where structures and buildings as resources are identified and assessed by historians. These varieties of resources and methods involved are then defined in terms of their management.
    The other article to be analyzed is a section from the book known as “Behind the future” by Max Page and Marla Miller. It examines the events that occurred in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri (Allen). Michael Brown was gunned down by a policeman who suspected him of being involved in a robbery attempt. Some demonstrations led to the destruction of property, including one QuikTrip store in the area. Issues arose when the preservation of the burnt store as part of history that analyzes the racism culture was not agreed on by several parties. Some wanted it preserved, whereas others saw this as not warranting preservation (Allen).
    Both articles explain the cultural resource management as they examine the consideration of the protection and management of the multitudes of scarce elements of cultural heritage in a modern world with the expansion of populations and altering needs. The difference of the articles is that the book section on Michael Brown examines a case study on CRM but does not examine CRM in general and the aspects involved, whereas the other article analyzes the above mentioned.

    #79039
    Andrew Poccia
    Participant

    Both Kathryn Kuranda’s chapter in A Companion to Cultural Resource Management and Michael Allen’s “What Historic Preservation Can Learn From Ferguson” focus on the goals and intentions behind Cultural Resource Management and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. Kuranda presents us with the a more concrete and fact based understanding of exactly what Cultural Resource Management is and the numerous aspects of the human built environment. Michael Allen shares his thoughts on the incident that took place in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014 regarding the shooting of Michael Brown and its impact on the area. Allen uses this incident to give a better understanding of what he believes the system of Cultural Resource Management should or should not be used for today.

    Kuranda writes about Cultural Resource Management as a whole, breaking down the aspects of it as well as the built environment. This gives readers a general understanding of CRM and its intended purpose. I feel that reading Kuranda’s excerpt served well in clarifying why Cultural Resource Management plays an important role in preserving history and why certain aspects of the built environment should be protected. This reading also helps in applying this information to modern day examples like Ferguson, Missouri.

    Michael Allen’s piece focuses on a relevant modern day example of the use of Cultural Resource Management. His more critical views on the subject serve as something that is important to acknowledge today. When it comes to the preservation of sites like those in Ferguson it is important to hear what people have to say about it. Some may be in favor of historical preservation while others may not with reasons varying as we read in the article. Overall, when it comes to peoples lives being impacted directly in areas such as Ferguson their thoughts and feelings should be considered.

    #79040

    Reflections #5

    This week’s readings discusses more of the technological aspects of studying the built environment based off US Cultural Resource Management (CRM) practice which is routed in US policy and law. While Kuranda’s piece details how US professionals study the built environment primarily based on the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Criteria, Allen’s piece is more critical on how we view heritage and what is and should be preserved. Compare the two pieces and explore your own thoughts on what and how heritage via the built environment should and can be preserved and why.

    The Kuranda article basically describes how archaeologists go about doing cultural resource management (CRM), which is the conservation of sites and artifacts that are considered to have historical and/or cultural significance. Archaeologists and US law have focused on the built environment for preservation. The built environment, according to Kuranda, is “all space purposefully shaped and manipulated by human activity…the result of conscious design decisions both functional and esthetic. ” (Kuranda, 15) The criteria for selecting the important details of a built environment to be conserved, while they vary widely, fall basically into two categories: criteria for significance and measurements of authenticity. The criteria for significance focus on historical associations. An example would be that a particular person, say, Abraham Lincoln, lived at a certain place for a period of time or an important document, like the Declaration of Independence, was signed in a particular building. Measures of authenticity look at the built environment to see how it reflects the time period, culture, use, materials of what is intended to be conserved. A survey of the environment under review for conservation is always done to assist in resource management. Surveys review the archival information about the site, site size and the exterior of the built environment, and the legislative framework in the area, etc. Kuranda notes the three main reasons for conducting area surveys are compliance, governmental planning, resources stewardship.

    Kuranda notes that culture is dynamic and the values people have now may not be the same as they had in the past. What we wish to preserve, the type and scope of it, also changes and possibly expands or retracts over time. She also notes that CRM is not perfect and can be limited by governmental considerations, such as budget, accessibility and public policy.

    The changing dynamic of CRM leads well into the second article by Michael Allen, which focusses on Ferguson, Missouri, where Michael Brown, a young African American man, was shot dead by a Ferguson police officer. One interesting aspect that the Allen article brings up is how many of the Ferguson sites are a mixture of the intangible and ephemeral. An example is the Canfield Drive memorial, where the shooting took place, which is a collection of stuffed animals and mementoes which are constantly being replaced. The memorial itself wouldn’t last very long on its own, due to its composition, but because people keep on replacing bits and pieces of it with new stuffed animals as old ones wear away, it has been given a sort of permanence as well as making the emotions behind the memorial tangible. Another example is the rubble of the QuikTrip store, which was burned down in the rioting following Brown’s death due to an erroneous report that Brown’s shoplifting in the store had led to his death. The rubble, as a commemoration of Michael Brown’s death, did not get much support from the Urban League for preservation and the site was turned into a community center which was designed to discuss and heal the various inequalities affecting the African American community in Ferguson. The plaque on the community center doesn’t bring the actual event across to the public. Allen sees the limits imposed by National Historical Preservation Act as detrimental to preserving unusual sites such as those found in Ferguson. He believes we need to open up the criteria and mindset which limits our ability to preserve these sites. He mentions how we need to work with the related communities to preserve the sites in a way that they want them preserved.

    The first article is an overview of how CRM was done in the past and is currently done in the present. The second article is basically a challenge to how CRM is currently done because, while the Ferguson sites have a high cultural significance, they don’t easily fit the requirement for a built environment that would be conserved by current CRM practices. The second article asks questions about the future of CRM but doesn’t really give much in the way of possible solutions.

    I feel that while CRM is necessary as a process to preserve evidence of significant historical events, it is also too limited in what can be designated for preservation.  I would work with the affected community to preserve it as they would like it to be preserved. In cases where the community, for whatever reason doesn’t want to preserve it physically, I would suggest a thorough data collection as well as photo documentation.  An example would be the giant pile of shoes found at a concentration camp after World War II.  It was preserved in part at the Holocaust Memorial Museum as a poignant reminder of what happened there and those who died.  Something similar could be done with various mementos as well as pieces of rubble from the destroyed QuikTrip store. I feel that to properly capture the historical significance of events like Ferguson, CRM protocols will have will have to be updated to include not only the physical aspects but the intangible ones as well.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #79042
    Matthew Wojcik
    Participant

    If I had to choice two words to summarise up these articles nicely, it would be “remembrance” and “transparency.” The reason why I use the word “remembrance” is due to the issue of giving voice to those who were historically oppressed  in any society. As mentioned before in class, a large role of anthropolgy is giving voice to those who aren’t around anymore. Talking about current issues is important, as well. This isn’t just part of  anthropology, however. It can be applied to multiple sectors in academia. The reasoning behind the word “transparency” is that it reflects effort in anthropological world to reduce bias.

    Humans, in our very nature, are heavily biased on things. I remember in one of my other classes, we talked about a study in which participants had their brains scanned while listening to a discussion. Whenever topics were brought up that went against the individual’s way of looking at things, the parts of the brain that cause aggression were activated. This shows that we are biologically ingrained to be illogical. We often let emotion guide us, driving us down a path of self destruction. Especially in the scientific world, bias has to be kept to a minimum. Now, if one wants to reduce bias, one can make very general statements. Stating facts in the form of bullet points is an example of this. However, when writing an article, more words leads to greater probability of bias to pop-up. It can even be subconscious, since our minds are wired to protect ideals that are near and dear to our hearts (or brains, in this case). “What Historic Preservation Can Learn from Ferguson,” by Michael Allen, learns more towards the “remembrance” side of things. Michael’s article focuses on how a place of great strife for a community can be turned into a memorial. The article, “Studying the Built Environment,” by Kathryn Kuranda, leads to my “transparency” argument. She aims to inform others on the importance of implementing a  scientific method to CRM.

     

     

    #79044
    Kellen Gold
    Participant

    The readings for this week discussed the processes of designating a space as worthy of preservation, and how some spaces have contested histories – causing them to receive less reverence and attention. Allen’s chapter talked about how the murder of Michael Brown in Ferguson is being memorialized and the effects it has on both local and broader communities. Comparing the two pieces made me realize that protest movements shape the built environment in irrevocable ways. In the 1960s, when Columbia University was a hotbed for militant anti-war activity, students were able to congregate in the student center and organize. After the 60s, a new student center was constructed in such a way that large, public gatherings would be impossible to hold. Instead of having distinct floors, the entire building is a glass box surrounding wide ramps that traverse through the space. This prevents clandestine activities from occurring, as there is no place to comfortably and secretly gather. Another example is Zucotti Park near Wall Street. The Occupy movement has no explicit acknowledgements in the park, but there are now many signs warning against camping. The space has also been redesigned so that numerous benches divide the area, creating barriers to movement and speech.

    Kuranda’s chapter was an easy read, and I am looking forward to using those techniques in our project on the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood.

    #79052
    Jared West
    Participant

    The first reading entitled Bending The Future talks about what historic preservation can learn from Ferguson. The central idea of this piece talks about what can be considered a historical site and how in the case of Ferguson that could be troublesome. In 2014, Michael Brown was shot outside of a convenience store which would spark a riot. The author of this piece talks about how it is difficult to determine whether or not that spot that he was shot should be considered a “historic place” because there is no physical marker or “emblem” as they point out. Before occurring the owner of the store speculated that Brown had been shoplifting and called the police, to which the aforementioned events unfolded. During this riot this store was looted as well as burned to the ground. The author makes comments about whether the store should be considered a landmark as well. After the shooting a plaque was hung on a tree, however it was vandalized. The author finishes up the piece by saying that we need to move away from this black and white picture of what can and can’t be considered a historic landmark. He gives us three pieces of advice, 1) “we need to embrace thinking beyond the bureaucratic limits of the national historic preservation act”, 2) “we need to abandon the historicizing motivations that seek easy emblems for eras, styles, and building types”, and 3) “we need to listen to and support communities that ask questions about the future of sites, not walk away when the communities chose preservation plans that do not fit our model.”

     

    The second, albeit boring, reading entitled Studying and Evaluating the Built Environment, talks about “the process of studying and assessing the built environment from the perspective of a practicing architecture historian with nearly 30 years of experience.” Aside from telling the reader what the purpose of the Cultural Resource Management (CRM) does (which is ask “what is important and to whom”) the article for 2 pages is talk about what a building is. It then goes on to talk about who investigates the claims of whether something deserves to be preserved as well as the laws that are necessary for the CRM. Finishing up the piece are the steps it goes into.

    Both pieces discuss how something is preserved and whether or not it has the significance it has or has had on culture.

    #79053

    Nice points everyone. Just be sure you are referring to the correct article/chapter title and author in your posts and not to the larger book and editors.

     

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.