What Do Objects Want?

To frame a model of style valid for archaeology in the general case it is necessary to begin by stripping away all the specialized connotations the word has assumed until there only remain the fundamental tenets without which the essence of the matter would itself dissolve and escape. It is never easy to feel that one has reached the bottom of things. Nevertheless, the pursuit of this exercise over a considerable period of time has gradually led me to three conclusions which I regard as the basic tenets upon which a general model can be constructed. The first is that all theories of style ultimately rest upon two primitive givens: that, whatever else it may entail, style (a) concerns a highly specific and characteristic manner of doing something, and (b) that this manner is always peculiar to a specific time and place. The second conclusion is that, when projected into the realm of archaeology, style in this general sense is the perfect complement of function regarded in an equally general sense. Show more

This article suggests that accepted interpretations of variability in nonlithic material culture are insufficient. Recent ethnographic fieldwork in Kenya and Zambia and anthropological studies of societies in Sudan and Nigeria demonstrate that culture may be used by groups to communicate within-group corporateness in reference to outsiders. The greater the competition between groups for resources, the greater the likelihood that material culture will play a part in the maintenance of internal cohesion. Distinctive types of distributions and associations of artifacts occur as strains develop between spatially or hierarchically defined groups. The relevance of this view to archaeology is shown by two examples. Finally, it is suggested that this type of approach will allow a better understanding of the underlying causes of social and cultural change. Show more