FOUR ARCHAEOLOGICAL
ENGAGEMENTS WITH PLACE
MEDIATING BODILY EXPERIENCE
THROUGH PERIPATETIC VIDEO
CHRISTOPHER L. WITMORE
Through the exploration of a hybrid space between artist and archaeological production, this article discusses
the implications of peripatetic video, a form of located media, as a means of moving beyond the limits of conventional representation. While critical of archaeological dealings with issues of bodily experience and place, the
article suggests an alternative is to be found in the work of media artist Janet Cardiff. Building on Cardiff’s art,
media are treated as modes of engagement for dealing with the articulation of bodily experience and place. This
article works towards a notion of mediation through which qualities of the material world, normally left behind by
traditional forms of documentation, are brought forth. To this end, it details the effectiveness of peripatetic video
in dealing with material presence and bodily experience at four sites of cultural and archaeological significance
in Crete, Greece. [Key words: bodily experience; mediation; modes of engagement; peripatetic video; place]
INTRODUCTION
In the mid–20th century, E. H. Gombrich in his
essay “Art and Scholarship,” set an agenda for scholars
by characterizing what he envisioned to be a profitable
relationship between the fields of artistic production and
the work of the academy. For Gombrich, what counts
in the world of art “is the search, the constant probing,
the taking of risks in experimentation” (1963:118). He
believes that “in this respect scholarship can always
profit from the spirit of art to venture into the unknown
rather than to apply and repeat what has already been
done” (1963:118). Following his argument, scholarship could in turn contribute to art through the application of its critical sensibilities. It could expose
the roots of artistic endeavor and enrich its network of
meanings to the mutual benefit of art and scholarship:
“In clarifying the memory of the past, [scholarship]
can pin down and render innocuous those catchwords which buzz around the artist’s ears” (Gombrich 1963:118). Despite the changing character and
configuration of scholarly production in anthropology and archaeology, these sentiments continue to be
relevant after 50 years. Still, Gombrich maintained
a distinction between art and scholarship. He saw
these as two disparate fields separated by familiar and
hardened boundaries.
Taking direction from Gombrich, this article has
arisen out of an exploration of a hybrid space between
art and scholarship in the context of archaeology.1
With this hybrid space I believe comes a change in the
nature of the relationship between art and scholarship.
In place of a contrast between two discrete entities, I
deal with the blurring of boundaries and the articulation of connections. Further, I want to emphasize that
through this hybrid space, sensibilities from art and
archaeology have the potential to inform each other in
ways that not only broaden our range of expression but
also push our practical and theoretical practice in new
and exciting directions.2
In what follows I explore the issue of mediating,
more than merely representing, two fundamental nodes
of archaeological thinking—experience and place
(Shanks 1992:1; Pearson and Shanks 2001:121). Contrary to conventional modes of scholarly documentation
and inscription, which rely on a model of linguistic
representation, I offer a concept of mediation.3 While
representation in archaeological production often gets
caught up in closed narratives because of its affinity
with language as the basis of documentation, mediation
Visual Anthropology Review, Volume 20, Issue 2, pages 57-71, ISSN 1053-7147, online ISSN 1548-7458. ©2005 by the
American Anthropological Association, all rights reserved. Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions,
University of California Press; Journals Division; 2000 Center Street, Suite 303; Berkeley, CA 94704-1223.
08_Witmore.indd 57
57
8/12/05 5:47:39 PM
encompasses modes that bring forth qualities of the
material world that would otherwise be left behind in
conventional forms of inscription. For archaeologists
mediation, then, should be fundamental to our dealings
with the material presence of the past. This assertion
brings us to the question of whether we can adequately
mediate bodily experience.4 In addressing this question, I begin by briefly touching on some ways in which
archaeologists have dealt with issues of experience and
place. I then move on to a discussion of how media—in
this case a small digital video camera—can be used to
enrich, complicate, and indeed confound our engagements with place and, more specifically, the material
presence of the past. I reference as an example of good
practice the work of Canadian media artist Janet Cardiff
and explore the implications of what I call peripatetic
video—a form of located, site-specific and interactive
media—in the context of four case experiments from
Crete, Greece.
In a more critical vein, this article is a step in an
ongoing reconsideration of our often complacent use of
media technologies as tools, as a means to a particular end.
With peripatetic video, I offer one example of how we
may begin to conceive of media as modes of engagement.
By this I mean that we no longer treat media as they are
normally understood passively. Rather, we treat media as
dynamic entities through according them an active role
in our practice. Taken as modes of engagement, media
become tools through which we act, think, and theorize.
As modes of engagement media are active materials
which have a stake in the production of knowledge in
archaeology (Olsen 2003:88; Witmore 2004).
MEDIATING THE EXPERIENCE OF PLACE
As this article addresses the question of how one
“mediates” (to be distinguished from “represents”) the
experience of place, I will first take a step back and
briefly consider the concept of “place” in relation to
archaeology. For my purposes place is situated in the
interstices between the collage of material articulations
that encompasses our everyday lives and ourselves.
Place is produced through a particular set of bodily
relationships with the material world, through the immediacy of experience and association, through dwelling, inhabitation, and traveling (Casey 1993:203 and
1997:116–120; Tuan 1977:6)5. Indeed, archaeological
production engenders a sense of place (Pearson and
Shanks 2001:138–140). Furthermore, place is one of
the constituting interests of archaeology. It was at heart
of the earlier topographical and chorographical traditions out of which archaeology arose (Schnapp 1996;
Shanks 1996:165). In the case of Greece, this tradition
was characterized by Romantic travelers such as Comte
Marie-Gabriel-Florent-Auguste de Choiseul-Gouffier
and Colonel William Martin Leake, both of whom
were renown for possessing an almost encyclopedic
knowledge of the ruins and antiquities that dotted the
countryside (Constantine 1984; Shanks 1996:69–73;
Witmore 2004). The Classical associations of particular
locales espoused by such travelers serve as grounds for
archaeological meanings that cluster around places in
the landscapes of contemporary Greece.
Place continues to be at the heart of many area
studies in archaeology. Examples from the Mediterranean include regional survey projects such as Graeme
Barker’s (1995) study of the Biferno Valley in Italy,
John F. Cherry, Jack L. Davis and Eleni Mantzourani’s
(1991) project on the Greek island of Kea and Michael
H. Jameson, Curtus N. Runnels, and Tjeerd van Andel’s
(1994) work in the Southern Argolid of Greece. Such
projects mark the use of, and relationship between,
contemporary and ancient sites, features, and other
material traces across specific landscapes and through
time. Even more recently archaeologists have begun to
engage more critically with the experience of archaeological interventions into place. Much of this work has
occurred in the context of archaeological “fieldwork” and
Christopher Witmore is a Ph.D. Candidate in classical archaeology with the Department of Classics and the
Archaeology Center, Stanford University and senior member of the Metamedia Lab at Stanford University. His
research interests cluster around archaeological thinking, epistemology, materiality and landscape, media theory,
critical aspects of new media, and Mediterranean archaeology. His PhD dissertation, Multiple Field Approaches
in the Mediterranean. Revisiting the Argolid Exploration Project, challenges recent attempts to put theory into
practice by the interpretive school of fieldwork in archaeology. It works toward a symmetrical archaeology
where meaning is reconfigured within imbroglios of humans, materials and media through the integration of new
(i.e. digital) technologies as modes of articulation and engagement with landscape and materiality.
58
08_Witmore.indd 58
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:47:39 PM
“practice” where disciplinary production is conceived
as a type of located bodily praxis (Hodder 2000; Lucas
2001b:198–199; Shanks 1992). Given the centrality of
place in archaeology I consider the question of how it
is documented to be of fundamental importance.
This brings us to the question of experience.
Sensory, bodily experience is “at the beginning of our
understanding” of place (Pearson and Shanks 2001:135;
also Campbell and Ulin Witmore (2004)). For now I
briefly consider the recent archaeological interest in
perceptive phenomenology as one example of how
the experience of place is dealt with in archaeological
thought. Phenomenologies of place begin, as Maurice
Merleau-Ponty argued, with the human body as the
fundamental nexus of mediation between thought and
the world (Merleau-Ponty 1962; Tilley 1994:13–14).
The relationship between humans and any physical surrounding is seen as experiential (Barrett 1994) with the
engagement between person and place characterized as
a bodily one. Through movement, activity and interaction, and lived experience, places come to be constituted
cognitively, and in the process they become meaningful.
Indeed, we know them to be “saturated with meaning”
(Pearson and Shanks 2001:156). For archaeologists,
such as Julian Thomas and Christopher Tilley, the appeal of phenomenology lies in this emphasis upon the
corporeality of lived experience centered on the human
subject. Thomas in particular has emphasized that in the
philosophy of Martin Heidegger lies the path to moving
beyond the Cartesian framing of the world which has
inhibited the archaeological endeavor of coming to terms
with materiality (1996a and 1996b:11). For Thomas,
Heidegger’s phenomenology emphasizes the relationship of the subject and object worlds as one where the
subjective is the form that the objective world takes.
Phenomenological approaches in archaeology have
focused on how tangible places, such as monuments,
physical locales, including rock outcrops or streams, or
quotidian features, like pathways, are both constituted
and constitutive of human activity in the past.
With phenomenological treatments of the material
world (beyond the issue of whether they work at all)
there remains the question: how can human experience
be articulated? Can this articulation be accomplished in
such a way as to engage an individual on a “bodily” level?
Part of the simultaneous fascination and frustration with
place and human experience lies in the issue of representation with conventional forms of documentation and
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 59
Vo l u m e 2 0
inscription. Concomitantly, given the “destructive”, or,
as Gavin Lucas terms it, the “transformative” nature
of the archaeological process (2001a; 2001b: 202), the
issue of mediating “place”, and perhaps more appropriately in this case, the archaeological mobilization of
the material world, is necessarily of central importance
within the discipline. Still, despite their emphasis on
lived experience, archaeologists have, I suggest, failed
to deal with the full realm of human sensation.
Bodily experience can only be articulated through
movement and participation, one’s sensory facilities,
and living bodies.6 Bodily experience involves realizing the full corporeality of human practice. To this
end, one cannot express it through text or through
visual media alone, and one cannot adequately address
it without implicating the body as a whole. This raises
a conundrum: can we satisfactorily mediate bodily
experience? If we take archaeology to be a “materializing practice” that is aware of its transformative and
constructive capacity and which is constituted through
forms of bodily engagement such as excavation and
survey then this question must be addressed by the
archaeological practitioner.
Before considering the issue of mediating bodily
experience, I will say a little more about the concept of
“mediation”. Mediation can be understood in a double
sense. It can have a broad meaning encompassing all
forms of representation, that is, all forms of translation
from the material world to the discursive whether textual, visual, or aural. I suggest that mediation should be
understood in a more focused sense, as doing something
fundamentally different from the semiotically-limited
notion of representation in conventional scholarly
forms of documentation and inscription. With each
step in the archaeological process, from excavating a
trench profile, drawing building phase sections, taking
photographs, sampling, measuring, narrating, we lose
“locality, particularity, materiality, multiplicity, and
continuity”—aspects of the material world—yet we
gain “compatibility, standardization, text, calculation,
circulation, and relative universality”—qualities of
documentation (Latour 1999:47). Mediation occurs
across this series of transformations between material
presence and media. Understood in its more focused
sense, “mediation” allows one to contemplate ways of
transforming aspects of the material past while at the
same time bringing forth something of the locality, multiplicity, and materiality left behind with conventional
Number 2
Fall
2004
59
8/12/05 5:47:40 PM
Figure 1. The series of transformations and translations between the material past and our modes of
documentation involve the simultaneous reduction of qualities of the material world and amplification of qualities
of discursive media (Latour 1999:71:fig.2.22). Mediation occurs across this chain of transformation.
processes of documentation and inscription (Figure 1).
Mediation is a mode of engagement, which takes us
beyond narrative, for scholarly narrative obfuscates the
multiplicity of material presence. In this more focused
sense, mediation is a means of translating things that
we talk about but cannot adequately sum up. I argue,
following Michael Shanks (1997), that it is a way of
rescuing the ineffable.7 Moreover, mediation is a process that allows us to attain richer and fuller translations
of bodily experience and materiality that are located,
multi-textured, reflexive, sensory, and polysemous.8
In order for archaeologists to pursue such a notion
of mediation, practitioners must become more familiar
and creative with other forms of “documentation.” Artistic practices may provide a means of dealing with this
issue; after all, Gombrich pointed us in that direction
almost half-a-century ago. We can and should approach
the art world to derive the critical and imaginative force
necessary to invigorate our modes of engagement and
practices of mediation.
THE MEDIA ART OF JANET CARDIFF
Beginning with these propositions I have been attracted by some of the site-specific work of Canadian
media artist Janet Cardiff. Cardiff is perhaps best known
for her multi-media installations and audio walks. Much
of her work explores the realms of sensuality and the
60
08_Witmore.indd 60
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
uncanny through modes that highlight the corporealities of the walking body in step with the electronic and
virtual.9 For example, in 1996 Cardiff created an audio
walk for the Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, Humlebaek, Denmark. The participant is given a Walkman
and with, “Hello, do you hear me? I want you to walk
with me through the garden,” Cardiff’s Louisiana Walk
# 14 begins (Christov-Bakargeiv 2002:68). This sitespecific work takes place in the adjoining gardens of the
museum. One walks and listens to the following:
Some of the trees look like they have eyes, like this
big one to the right. There is a headless woman in
a bush up there. Do you smell that? Wet, decayed
wood, like after a fire. Some trees have fallen down.
One’s over the path. Step over it. Here’s a little path
to the left. There is a sign, covered a bit in dirt. What
does it say? “George Trakkis, Self Passage.” Let’s
go down the stairs. [Christov-Bakargeiv 2002:69]
While Cardiff instructs the participant on where to
walk, she also works in collages of music, film audio
sequences, birds chirping, a man whispering into the
walker’s left ear, even a lecture as it is taking place.
At times, her footsteps accompany the walker along
the path.
Cardiff is always present in the non-place of the
digital realm. As one walks through the garden the
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:47:42 PM
aural properties of place surface—the sound of water
lapping against the shore, crushing leaves beneath the
feet, footsteps upon wood, stone, metal or bare ground.
The participants’ awareness of the corporeality of their
bodies is heightened through the activity of maintaining
pace with the artist. Cardiff further explores sensory
evocation by creating moments of intimacy with the
participant through narratives of her dreams and desires.
A hallmark of Cardiff’s art is the way in which she layers
digital media over active bodily experience.
As outgrowths of her earlier audio walks, Cardiff
has to date created two “video walks”: In Real Time,
1999 and The Telephone Call, 2001. These video walks
are intended to complicate and “confound” sensory
perception and, in a sense, trick the participant into
believing that they are also part of Cardiff’s lived
experience within the spaces of a museum or library.
Cardiff asks participants to synchronize their movements through the same locale with her prerecorded
journey by maintaining their pace and carrying a small
digital video camera as if they were filming the same
sequence. This creates the illusion of “live” recording.
The video walk is played back visually on the camera’s
LCD video screen and aurally through the headphones.
The effect is one of media overlay whereby the digital
media are superimposed upon the corporeal background.
Throughout the walk the body of the participant (the
listener-viewer) and the artist occupy the same space
and perform the same movements.
It is in the disjuncture between the two experiences
that Cardiff experiments with the uncanny, and moments
of disorientation reach full relief. Crucial to such effects
are the rich collations of sound media, which Cardiff
adds to the visual component of the video walk. “Sound
is the primary focus of Cardiff’s practice, although she
also shapes visual experience and perceptual realms to
create complex works that explore narrative, desire,
intimacy, love, loss, memory and the mechanisms of
the brain” (Christov-Bakargeiv 2002:14). Aurally the
participants are largely closed off from their immediate surroundings—sound is controlled. Cardiff is able
to suggest 3–D space acoustically by using a method
known as binaural recording. This is “achieved by placing two omni-directional microphones in the position
of the ears on a dummy head, and recording in stereo
while moving the head through space. Played back on
a headset, the sounds seem to come from the actual
surrounding” (Christov-Bakargeiv 2002:22). Like other
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 61
Vo l u m e 2 0
forms of media technology, such as television and film,
space and time are collapsed into aural and visual simultaneity. Moreover, outside the intended cinematic
context of these technologies the folding of the past
into present occurs in the same locale.
PERIPATETIC VIDEO
Not all video walks are intended to work as those
of Cardiff’s. In place of video walk I use peripatetic
video to refer to the work Cardiff has produced. The
“peripatetic” emphasizes the activity of walking prior
to the form of media, the “video” as in video walk.
Peripatetic video as a form of locale-based mediation
involves the active overlay of different (contextually,
temporally, etc.) modes of engagement. One, digitally
mediated via the visual and aural fields, another translated through lived experience. The combination of the
onscreen visual element of the LCD screen of a digital
video camera and the closed off aural environment
created with a high quality set of headphones produces
a situation in which material background and digital
foreground converge and any distinction between the
two experiences (the mediated and the lived) is blurred
(Figure 2). Textures, smells, and other wider sensory
evocations are encountered by the participant. The full
realm of bodily sensation is implicated. Indeed, much
potential lies in emphasizing any disparity between these
Figure 2. Participant with video camera
and high quality headphones.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Number 2
Fall
2004
61
8/12/05 5:47:46 PM
layered experiences. Above all, the idea is to appeal
to the senses on a bodily level, to evoke the ineffable
qualities of place.
Sound is the most decisive aspect of peripatetic
video. On the one hand, in the distancing and “objectivizing” sense of seeing, as Wolfgang Welsch has argued,
“we are affected least of all corporally... Hearing, on
the other hand, does not keep the world at a distance,
but admits it. ‘Tone penetrates without distance’”
(1997:158). For Welsch, “vision sets things at a distance
and holds them fixed in their place” (1997:158) whereas
hearing brings the material world into greater proximity (Heidegger 1971:26; Ingold 2000:244–250). If we
wish to close ourselves off visually we use our eyelids,
whereas our lack of “earlids” leaves us acoustically
vulnerable.10 This acoustic vulnerability can be played
upon with peripatetic video. This is an especially vital
aspect in mediating the corporeality of place.
Of course, when we hear sounds we are actually
hearing things (Heidegger 1971:26). Even so, sound
is a neglected property of the material world—a vast
oversight for a discipline focused upon materiality.11
The “aural primacy” of peripatetic video constitutes a
critical and necessary auditive check upon the visual
dominance behind not only the great majority of archaeological media in particular, but also most technoscientific media in general (Welsch 1997:150–167).
It is the closed aural environment of a high-quality
pair of stereo headphones that is the key element of
sensory immersion within the mediated experience.
More specifically the aural field of a human being encompasses areas outside that of the visual. If we were
to hear footsteps approaching from somewhere over
our right shoulder, or hear a person calling from the
same direction, ordinarily we might turn to bring the
source of those sounds within our visual field. Binaural
recording mediates the 3-dimensionality of a person’s
aural field. Given the appropriate staging one can be
tricked into believing someone is behind them and thus,
an important property of corporeal experience is mediated.12 It is precisely here, where we must remember
that the corporeality of place extends from the crunch
of dried foliage under one’s feet, to the wind rustling
the leaves in the nearby carob, or the shrill cry of the
cicadas on the olive branch above. These make up the
ceaseless and unrelenting background noises of any
locale. These sounds are philosopher Michel Serres’
belles noiseuses. The multiplicity of background noise
62
08_Witmore.indd 62
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
is fundamental to our experience of place and, for
Serres, it “may well be the ground of our [very] being”
(Serres 1994:13). These noises, resistant to inscription,
are mediated through binaural recording and revisited
by the participant in peripatetic video.
The visual component of peripatetic video is a
secondary but, nevertheless, important facet of both
tricking and guiding the participant. Normally an individual uses a video camera in a standard manner to
record an activity, event, place, experience, etc. The
novelty of playing back a tape on the video camera
(Figure 3) and reiterating the movements involved in
recording that original sequence in the same locale adds
to the confusion. Peripatetic video takes advantage of
the illusion of live recording. Of course, the activity of
producing a medium for playback in a video camera as
opposed to a television, computer or large screen may
be novel for only a limited time. This potential loss of
novelty has important implications.
Figure 3. Close-up of the video camera with LCD
screen used to record and deliver peripatetic video.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Since peripatetic video infuses aural and visual
mediation into the corporeal activities of movement
and interaction, I wish to discuss the implications of
confusing digital appearances of the electronic world
with lived experience, that is “being” in the material
world. In other words, where will this blurring of the
boundaries between mediation and reality take us? This
is a rather complicated matter. In one sense the blurring
of boundaries is one of the effects of our long-term
interaction with electronic media (Welsch 1997). In as
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:47:50 PM
much as “the real is being measured more and more
against ideal media conceptions” (Welsch 1997:181),
reality and electronic media simulations coalesce in
everyday experience. Ideal bodies presented in popular media are copied through bodybuilding or plastic
surgery (Haraway 1991). How many American teenage lifestyles are predicated upon those of Brittany
Spears or Justin Timberlake? Of course, no one would
confuse the disparity between the digital and the real
in the short-term. One can simply change the channel or turn off the television completely. The same is
true with peripatetic video, as it is predicated on the
participant’s willingness to go along with the demands
of the mediated experience. This indulgence on the part
of the participant facilitates the possibility of blurring
the boundaries. One has to “want” to be tricked. Yet
this potential is what separates peripatetic video from
electronic media such as television—peripatetic video
demands active bodily participation not passivity.13
Therefore, peripatetic video facilitates the potentiality
for the reiteration of past experience through the sitespecific mediation of its re-presence.
Somewhat ironically, it is through this blurring
that I believe we can begin to realize the richness and
complexity of the material world. Digital experience
provokes a return to, and deeper appreciation of, lived
experience (Welsch 1997:196). As we know, digital experience cannot replace the lived experience of walking
along a promenade of cafes next to a Venetian harbor in
Crete and feeling the cool sea breeze upon your face or
inhaling the fresh catch on ice in the display case, but
it can be utilized as a supplement to that experience.14
Since peripatetic video is a means of folding our mediations into lived experience, the digital and the bodily
engagement on the ground can play off one another.
In this way, the frictions and disparities between these
experiential modes can potentially spawn connections
that would have otherwise not arisen. For not only is it
in this confusion that subtle idiosyncrasies of locality,
multiplicity, and materiality are thrown into relief, they
are also mediated (Figure 4).
THE CASE EXPERIMENTS
Through experimentation with peripatetic video in
the context of four sites of cultural and archaeological
significance in Crete I have come to believe that this
form of active media overlay constitutes a more fulfill-
Figure 4. Located media such as peripatetic video, in contrast to more conventional modes
of archaeological documentation including text, map, plan, diagram, illustration, etc.,
mediate aspects of a particular engagement with the corporeal setting of the “original” experience.
This active media overlay on the place of focus involves both exchange and
disjuncture between the mode of engagement and the material context focused upon.
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 63
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall
2004
63
8/12/05 5:47:52 PM
ing means of interposing the lived experience of the
archaeologist with that of the participant. Sequences for
peripatetic videos of 10–20 minutes in duration were
filmed at each of the four sites within a three-week
period from July 15 through August 6, 2001. Here I
briefly discuss key themes of the peripatetic videos
(routes, sounds and scripts) and the four sites they
mediate and overlay. I am going to freely juxtapose
descriptions of locale and video in each site summary.
Of course, in this article I am doomed to fail to relate
adequately what I am able to convey through the
located medium of peripatetic video. Nonetheless,
it is worth the effort if only to highlight the disparity
between conventional forms of documentation and
peripatetic video and, therefore, the utility of peripatetic video.
The routes I chose at these places were predefined
in that they incorporate certain emblematic features
of the particular place. Nevertheless, in breaking with
the standard, I also tried to incorporate the all too often neglected textures associated with the place along
these routes. These include, for example, the abject—
surface garbage on a Peak Sanctuary or the smell of
a dead and decomposing goat carcass at the bottom
of a ravine at Eleutherna. They may also incorporate
the melancholic—in one version of a peripatetic
video from the Old Town of Rethymnon I include a
funeral service.
Sound is critical as I have already emphasized.
The sounds incorporated in the peripatetic videos are
derived from various sources. They may be traces of
site-specific activity, such as archaeological excavation.
They also include my own voice and those of others
layered with cicadas or goats bleating, in addition to
sounds evocative of past events, such as the clank of
armor in battle or the roar of WWII machine guns in
the distance. At times the video sequences are layered
with footsteps and music.
The scripts that I have worked into these walks
at the moment follow a similar formula to those of
Cardiff. Along with instructions, there are contextual descriptions including, where possible, notebook
entries from excavation reports. Incorporated are discussions of scholarship or some other text written about
that specific place, descriptions of particular feelings,
discussions of memories triggered by a specific connection, dialogues between me and others or myself
and the participant.
64
08_Witmore.indd 64
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Site One
A Greek Orthodox chapel of Ayion Pnevmon is situated atop the Bronze Age “Minoan” peak sanctuary of
Vrysinas.15 It is constructed of cement and local stone,
a blue-gray limestone. It is whitewashed. At 585 meters
above sea level the white chapel is visible from dozens of
kilometers away. Beneath Ayion Pnevmon a later terrace,
perhaps associated with the construction of the chapel, has
obscured what is left of any potential architectural fabric
linked with the Bronze Age sanctuary. These remains
have also been partially transformed by the cutting of two
cisterns into bedrock north of the chapel. A date, “1909”,
Figure 6. Outcrops of stone protrude into the path
at the rear of the small chapel of Ayion Pnevmon.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Figure 5. Rusted enclosure gate at Vrysinas.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:47:54 PM
Ancient Eleutherna is especially renown for its
Archaic, Hellenistic and Late Roman periods. Today it
is a landscape of moss covered stone, patina and ruin.
Ancient olive groves stand among parallel stone terraces,
step after step, up the sides of slender ridgelines amid
deep valley bottoms of karst. Here and there, sections
of much older walls either break, or are reused in, the
terrace lines revealing a much deeper temporal presence.
A worn trekking path, the E 4, weaves its way among
rustic stonewalls, excavation and ruin. Local tourist
agencies play to travelers’ romantic sensibilities in what
can be characterized as an idyllic Cretan landscape—
a Theocritean arcadia. Since 1985 archaeological
excavations at Eleutherna have been implemented
under the auspices of the University of Crete at
Rethymnon in several areas of the city—Katsivelos,
Pyrgi and Nissi hills and Orthi Petra (Themelis
1992). One may witness these taking place during the
summer months.
A Hellenistic tower sits at the apex of Pyrgi
ridge (Figure 7). On the left a path of smooth timeworn cobblestone descends to the north. He must
keep pace across this cumbersome surface. He must
divert his attention from the LCD screen to mind his
step. This pathway ends in a junction. To the left a
trail leads at a downward angle along a terrace to the
rock-cut cisterns. The twisted trunk of an olive and
boulder frame a worn dirt path to the right (Figure 8).
Figure 7. The walk proceeds along the cobble surface
up and to the left. Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Figure 8. A portion of the pathway framed by a stone
terrace and a carob tree. Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 65
Site Two
is etched in the concrete atop the easternmost cistern.
Traces of the stone walling of the sanctuary nevertheless
extrude from the surface in places. Archaeologists have
identified the site as a “sanctuary” on the basis of artifacts
found on the peak including ceramic figurines (human
and animal) and other broken ceramic vessels (typically
cups, large shallow dishes and libation vessels—see Jones
1999). From the earliest investigations, the concept of the
“peak sanctuary” has held a unique (perhaps romantic)
attraction for archaeologists (Peatfield 1990; Rutkowski
1986 and 1988). Their materialities and localities have
been assessed within the optic of the ritual and religious,
hence the term “sanctuary”.
From a lower terrace a worn path leads uphill to a
metal gate (Figure 5). Breathing gets heavier; the pace
slackens a little as one approaches to lift the latch. An
enclosure of stone and rusty wire mesh surrounds the area
of the chapel and sanctuary. Wayward flocks of sheep
and goats are kept out. It is a foggy morning. The wind
is cool and moist. During some times of year the smell of
thyme permeates the air. The pungent smell of goat dung
is ever present. A wall of hoary mist forms a background
to the immediate area of the enclosure. Bells clang on the
necks of bleating goats unseen in the distance. A voice
urges the walker to circumvent the chapel in a clockwise
direction. Broken bits of ceramic, stone and contemporary
rubbish litter the area. Footsteps change in tone across
concrete, gravel and bedrock. There is someone waiting
inside the chapel (Figure 6). The peripatetic video builds
up to a chance encounter in this remote locale.
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall
2004
65
8/12/05 5:47:56 PM
“Make a choice. Fast-forward the tape to this point
again if you choose to go right.” Together the walker
and I reach a comfortable pace as we proceed along
the path. Voices are heard from somewhere down
the hill to the left—archaeologists excavating at
Orthi Petra. The trail winds on between outcrop
and drop-off. It is overcast. The breeze is light and
playful. He continues walking. The terrace flattens
out. The ridgeline recedes. In the midst of an ancient olive grove appear exposed walls of stone—
cemented rubble and ashlar. “Walk on to the break in
the wire fence.”
At the center of a large courtyard stands a double
vaulted church constructed in the Mannerist style
(Figure 9). It is enclosed on all sides by the cells, storerooms and cloisters of the monastery. The outermost
walls of this enclosure are over a meter thick. It is a
fortress. At times it served as a refuge. Arkadi was the
site of “heroic” resistance against Turkish oppression
during the revolution of 1866–1869. The monastery
has been appropriated as a potent symbol of the
Greek nation-state. An image of the façade of the
church featured prominently on the 200-drachma note
of the former currency of the Greek state. Cultural
politics, religion, nationalism and heritage clash head
on in the space of the monastery, which along with the
Old Town of Rethymnon, is one of central Crete’s most
popular tourist attractions.
It begins at the vaulted entrance gate. A man asks
for payment at the desk. A voice instructs: “walk toward
the staircase on the right”. The path follows along the
second floor cloister. A cat meows from beneath a chair
on the right. A monk’s memory of a calico that lived
twenty years is iterated. The cat is still under that wood
and wicker chair. A back staircase leads to a narrow
alleyway that opens onto the courtyard. The smell
of fresh flowers greets the walker at the courtyard’s
edge. “Beyond the church façade, to the left of the red
doors is an archway. Walk directly to it.” Pink stucco
stained yellow here, gray there—residues of countless
activities through the seasons. “Pass your hand across
it. Decay, patina and ruin are aspects of an archaeological aesthetics.” This surface awaits the walker on the
far side of the courtyard in the direction of Juktas, the
mountain birthplace of Zeus. The sun is relentless. A
desire is shared—the shade in the archway of the cloister (Figure 10). The walk continues to the gunpowder
room in the northeast corner. On November 9, 1866,
a horror unfolds in this room. Rather than suffer a
cruel and gruesome death at the hands of the
Turks, dozens of men, women and children blow
themselves up by setting the powder kegs alight
(Provatakis 1986).
Figure 9. Tourists pause in front
of the church of Arkadi.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Figure 10. The welcome shade
of the western cloister.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Site Three
66
08_Witmore.indd 66
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:47:58 PM
Figure 11. Named for the seventeenth century
benefactor who reconstructed it, the Rimondi
Fountain is a popular stop in the heat of summer.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Figure 12. Restaurant keepers
prepare for patrons by the
Old Venetian Harbor.
Photo: Christopher L. Witmore.
Site Four
The Old Town of Rethymnon is one of the best-preserved examples of Renaissance Venetian architecture to
be found outside Italy. A maze of alleys connects barrelvaulted houses converted into tourist shops, cafés and
restaurants. Wooden Turkish window boxes juxtaposed
with ornamental Venetian stone carvings and crumbling
plasterwork grace many façades. Some houses are recently renovated while some continue to decay. Fortress,
Loggia, churches, mosques and minarets, Rethymnon
has a number of spectacular monuments. This is one of
Crete’s most popular tourist destinations. The Old Town
of Rethymnon, slated as a national heritage monument
of the Greek state, is also home to hundreds of Cretan
residents. As Michael Herzfeld writes, “turning people’s
homes into a collective monument forces this socially
anomalous objectivism into the most intimate recesses
of their lives” (1991:10).
She begins in front of a fountain, the Rimondi
fountain. Water pours into a green algae-coated basin
from the central of three lion-like heads (Figure 11).
It is a soothing sound. A little girl looks on from the
left. She wants to know what she is doing. “Turn left
and walk through the archway into the alley” says a
voice. The route weaves towards the Venetian harbor
among cafés and tourist shops at different times of
the day. Some are full, some empty. A car horn blows
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 67
Vo l u m e 2 0
from the right. Care should be taken crossing the
street. The alleys bustle with tourists. One of them
wants to know the price of a beach wrap. At the
entrance of the harbor a waiter approaches, he wants to
entice her to sit down for a meal. She continues along
the edge of the harbor weaving among table and tourist, waiters, and returning fishermen (Figure 12). She
walks to the end of the harbor where a Turkish canon
covered in multiple layers of black paint is turned up
on end in the pavement. A fisherman casts his line in
front of her.
MEDIATED FUTURES
The point of this layered chorography is not only
to emphasize the ways in which an archaeologist might
negotiate and interpret a place but also to attempt to break
free of the orthodox inscriptions of place by emphasizing disparate textures of corporeality, by embracing
the belles noiseuses and working toward multiplicity,
through other modes of articulation and engagement.
Imagine the practical implications for Cultural Resource Management and the issue of archaeological
documentation. Consider filming along routes that will
eventually be used by visitors to a particular site, but
Number 2
Fall
2004
67
8/12/05 5:48:00 PM
while excavation is still taking place. This footage can
then be incorporated into peripatetic video for later
visitors to the site. Imagine the potential of peripatetic
video as a way of mediating the unique and singular
experience of excavation. The excavation of a particular
feature can be visually superimposed onto that very
same feature many years after the primary excavation
on site. Even virtual reconstructions can be incorporated
through live overlay, thereby alleviating the need for
tangible (re)constructions within the site. All of this
can be accomplished now using a video camera with a
suitable LCD screen.
Even so, such site-specific work has the drawback of
limited accessibility. Travel is a major issue. And despite
falling prices digital video cameras and the high quality
sound systems needed for binaural recording are still
prohibitively expensive and not easily available in many
areas. This unevenness of access to travel opportunities,
equipment and technology, creates a crux. Yet these are
still early days. Technology is rapidly developing in the
form of “wearables.” To be sure, prices will decrease,
and combinations of virtual and bodily experience will
become ever more common in the near future.
My argument is that in the context of archaeological practice and CRM the benefits of peripatetic video
outweigh the costs. For this form of mediation brings
us to new levels of intimacy between archaeologists and
their audience. Disparities between different individuals’
negotiations and interpretations of place are set in high
relief when they themselves surrender to the experience
of another. What is more, peripatetic video will enrich
our forms of disciplinary production while speaking to
issues that crosscut not only the categories of art and
archaeology, but epistemology, ontology, theory and
practice. This is not about looking to art for alternative
forms through which we can articulate archaeological
content. Distinctions, such as that between content and
form, merge. In other words, media and meaning are
intertwined. Recall McLuhan’s dictum, “the medium
is the message;” in other words, meaning is at all times
due to its entanglement in the media.
CONCLUSION
Gombrich did not question the issue of boundaries.
He never crossed the path towards a hybridized space
where both scholarship and art existed simultaneously,
free from the limitations of territorial circumscription.
68
08_Witmore.indd 68
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
This space is created and maintained by flushing out and
emphasizing particular connections and helping them
to grow organically. This is a space of experimentation. Still, I would highlight that this hybrid space is
potentially dangerous without some level of reflexivity. Art and archaeology, and this should be extended
to science and philosophy, must maintain a healthy
degree of estrangement. In this alterity lies the potential for disruption and invigoration. Hence the hybrid
space between art and archaeology is the locus of a
productive tension that should be called upon with a
certain frugality.
This article is a ballast to my work with peripatetic video. This text and the peripatetic videos do
fundamentally different things. The article is part of
my own appreciation of the value of reflection in the
context of our own doings. Yet it is also clear that
inscriptions alone (combinations of text, plan, map,
diagram, illustration, etc.) will never encompass locality, materiality, multiplicity or experience (Olsen
2003; Webmoor 2005; Witmore 2004). Taken individually, various media translate the idiosyncrasies of the
material world in different ways. In the place of any
complete transparency of the material world we are
left with degrees of opacity. Given the singularity of
events in the material world—we cannot for example
re-excavate an archaeological site—it is critical that we
employ as many forms of documentation as possible.
A compromise may be attained through the notion of
mediation. Such convictions can be realized, as in this
case, simply by rethinking what one does with a video
camera. Through peripatetic video we embrace artful
forms of mediation that do service to the material and
bodily praxis that is archaeology.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This article was developed from two earlier papers
presented at the 2002 Meetings of the European Association of Archaeologists, Thessoloniki, Greece and
the 2002 Meetings of the American Anthropological
Association, New Orleans. I thank Douglas Bailey,
Ewa Domanska, Ian Hodder, Donald Lavigne, Børnar
Olsen, Michael Shanks and Timothy Webmoor for their
insightful comments and welcome criticism on various
versions of this article. Many of the ideas expressed in
this article have developed out of my collaboration with
Michael Shanks, Timothy Webmoor and Bjornar Olsen.
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:48:01 PM
I wish to express my deep gratitude to the three of them.
Lastly, I am indebted to Corby Kelly for introducing
me to the media art of Janet Cardiff. Any shortcomings
remain my own.
NOTES
For other work in this hybrid genre please see Coles
and Dion 1999; Pearson and Shanks 2001; or visit
http://metamedia.stanford.edu/~mshanks/threelandscapes, accessed July 8, 2005.
1
For more synergies between archaeology and art
see Hamilakis, et al. 2001; Renfrew 2003; Tilley,
et al. 2000.
2
Here the term inscription “refers to all the types of
transformations through which an entity becomes materialized into a sign, an archive, a document, a piece
of paper, a trace” (Latour 1999:306).
3
This question arises out of a personal frustration
with how archaeologists have dealt with place and the
bodily experience of it. My work, which falls under the
rubric of landscape studies in archaeology, has focused
upon the problem of mediating place. I am interested
in conceptual, experiential and methodological dealings with landscape as an ideological construct and
the corporealities of place. At the same time I wish
to express my hesitation and caution in exploring the
terms “experience” and “place”. Both “experience” and
“place” are deeply problematic and baggage laden. I
explore them specifically in the context of a particular
school of thought in archaeology and put them into
practice through peripatetic video. To enter a philosophical discussion of these terms would detract from
this endeavor.
4
This ambiguity may be frustrating for some, but
this is not the “place” for an extended discussion of
the term.
5
Initially, I wanted to focus on the issue of embodiment.
Yet the notion that something is “embodied” presupposes
some separation prior to lived experience. Embodiment is a term plagued by that crux of modernity, the
Cartesian mind-body dichotomy. This aspect of the
term proved to be excess baggage when utilized in
a context such as this where bodily experience is
conceived of outside of that duality (cf. Olsen 2003).
Indeed phenomenology is open to a similar critique in
6
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 69
Vo l u m e 2 0
its asymmetrical embrace of subjectivity (Latour 1993).
I discuss it here solely as a familiar example of how
archaeologists have dealt with issues of place over the
last decade.
Refer to Shanks 1997 for a discussion of photowork
and the ineffable.
7
For more experiments in the mediation of place refer
to: Webmoor 2003; Witmore and Adler 2004.
8
The “uncanny” aspects of Cardiff’s work surface in
her transformation of the utterly familiar so that the
viewer feels estranged and awkward. For example, the
quotidian act of walking along a pathway can appear
subversively different and disturbing through her use
of voice and intimate memory.
9
I do not wish to place vision and hearing into an
unnecessary binary opposition, rather I wish to emphasize the importance of sound rhetorically by situating it in relation to vision, that “cognitive sense par
excellence”.
10
Why, for example, do archaeologists not take into
account the acoustic properties of ceramics? Work is
being done, however, in the context of landscape. An
example is the auditory archaeology developed by
Steve Mills (2001) in the Teleorman River Valley of
southern Romania, where he identified auditory character areas, such as woodland, river bottoms, grasslands,
etc. The sounds generated in these areas were treated
as properties of the corporeal environments of people’s
everyday lives. Mills argued that sound was an integral component in generating social relationships in
the past.
11
Footsteps are good examples of the acoustic properties of the material world. Footsteps are the aural
articulation of both the footwear and the pavement a
person walks upon. Change the footwear or the pavement, and subtle differences in the aural field will occur.
Such aspects of the material world constitute fruitful
grounds for study.
12
Of course, television is not completely passive.
People make choices as to what they watch and when.
Changing the channel is a bodily activity.
13
14
On this point also refer to Bolter and Grusin 1999.
15 The
Cretan Bronze Age dates from roughly ca. 2900
B.C.E. to 1150 B.C.E.
Number 2
Fall
2004
69
8/12/05 5:48:02 PM
REFERENCES
Barker, Graeme
1995 A Mediterranean Valley: Archaeology as
Annales in the Biferno Valley. London: Leicester
University Press.
Hamilakis, Yannis, Mark Pluciennik, and Sarah
Tarlow
2001 Academic References, Artistic Presentation.
Assemblage 6. Electronic document. http://www.
shef.ac.uk/assem/issue6/art_web.html, accessed
June 30, 2004.
Bolter, David J., and Richard Grusin
1999 Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press
Herzfeld, Michael
1991 A Place in History: Social and Monumental
Time in a Cretan Town. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Barrett, John C.
1994 Fragments from Antiquity: An Archaeology
of Social Life in Britain, 2900–1200 BC.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Campbell, Fiona, and Jonna Ulin
2004 Borderline Archaeology. Blalab. http://arkserv.
arch.gu.se/blalab/main.asp, accessed June 30.
Casey, Edward S.
1993 Getting Back into Place: Toward a Renewed
Understanding of the Place-World. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
1997 The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Cherry, John F., Jack L. Davis and Eleni Mantzourani
1991 Landscape Archaeology as Long-Term
History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic Islands
from Earliest Settlement until Modern Times.
Los Angeles: Monumenta Archaeologica 16.
Christov-Bakargiev, Carolyn
2002 Janet Cardiff: A Survey of Works Including Collaborations with George Bures Miller. New York:
P.S.1 MoMA.
Coles, Alex, and Mark Dion, eds.
1999 Mark Dion: Archaeology. London: Black
Dog Publishing.
Constantine, David
1984 Early Greek Travellers and the Hellenic Ideal.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gombrich, E. H.
1963 Art and Scholarship. In Meditations on a Hobby
Horse, and Other Essays on the Theory of Art.
Pp. 106–119. London: Phaidon.
Haraway, Donna J.
1991 Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention
of Nature. New York: Routledge.
70
08_Witmore.indd 70
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Heidegger, Martin
1971 Poetry, Language, Thought. A. Hofstadter, trans.
New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
Hodder, Ian, ed.
2000 Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: The
Example at Çatalhöyük. Cambridge: McDonald
Institute Monographs.
Ingold, Tim
2000 The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. London: Routledge.
Jameson, Michael H., Curtis N. Runnels, and Tjeerd
H. van Andel
1994 A Greek Countryside: The Southern Argolid from
Prehistory to the Present Day. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Jones, Donald W.
1999 Peak Sanctuaries and Sacred Caves in Minoan
Crete: Comparison of Artifacts. Jonsered: Paul
Åströms Förlag.
Latour, Bruno
1993 We Have Never Been Modern. Catherine Porter,
trans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
1999 Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science
Studies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lucas, Gavin
2001a Destruction and the Rhetoric of Excavation.
Norwegian Archaeology Review 34(1):35–46.
2001b Critical Approaches to Fieldwork: Contemporary and Historical Archaeological Practice.
London: Routledge.
Mearleau-Ponty, Maurice
1962 Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge
and Kegan Paul.
Mills, Steven
2001 The Significance of Sound in the Fifth
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:48:02 PM
Millennium cal. BC Southern Romania: Auditory Archaeology in the Teleorman River Valley.
Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Archaeology,
University of Wales, Cardiff.
Olsen, Bjørnar
2003 Material Culture after Text: Re-Membering Things.
Norwegian Archaeology Review 36(2):87–104.
Pearson, Mike, and Michael Shanks
2001 Theatre/Archaeology. London: Routledge.
Peatfield, Alan
1990. Minoan Peak Sanctuaries: History and Society.
Opuscula Atheniensa. 17:117–131.
Provatakis, Theocharis
1986. Arkadi Monastery: History, Art, Tradition.
Athens: Toubi’s.
Renfrew, Colin
2003 Figuring it Out: What Are We? Where Do We
Come From? The Parallel Visions of Artists and
Archaeologists. London: Thames and Hudson.
Rutkowski, Bogdan
1986 Cult Places of the Aegean. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
1988 Minoan Peak Sanctuaries: The Topography and
Architecture. Aegaeum 2:71–99.
Schnapp, Alain
1996 The Discovery of the Past. London: British
Museum Press.
Serres, Michel
1995 [1982] Genesis. Genevieve James and James
Nielson, trans. Ann Arbor, MI: University of
Michigan Press.
Shanks, Michael
1992 Experiencing the Past: On the Character of
Archaeology. London: Routledge.
1996 Classical Archaeology of Greece: Experiences of
the Discipline. New York: Routledge.
1997 Photography and Archaeology. In The Cultural
Life of Images: Visual Representation in Archaeology. Brian Molyneaux, ed. Pp. 73–107. London:
Routledge.
Thomas, Julian
1996a A Précis of Time, Culture and Identity. Archaeological Dialogues 3(1):6–47.
1996b Time, Culture and Identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Tilley, Christopher
1994 A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths,
and Monuments. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
Tilley, Christopher, Sue Hamilton and Barbara
Bender
2000. Art and the Re-Presentation of the Past. Journal of
the Royal Anthropological Institute 6(1):35–62.
Tuan, Yi-fu
1977 Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Webmoor, Timothy
2003 Teotihuacan, Mexico—Mediating Monumentality:
An Experiment. MetaMedia. http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/teotihuacan/, accessed June 30, 2004.
2005 Mediational Techniques and Conceptual Frameworks: A Model in Mapwork at Teotihuacan, Mexico. Journal of Social Archaeology 5(1):54–86.
Welsch, Wolfgang
1997 Undoing Aesthetics. London: Sage.
Witmore, Christopher2005
2004 On Multiple Fields. Between the Material
World and Media: Two Cases from the
Peloponnesus, Greece. Archaeological Dialogues
11(2):133–164.
Witmore, Christopher, and Joseph Adler
2004 New Media Transect: A Peripatetic Engagement
with the Past. MetaMedia. http://metamedia.
stanford.edu/argolid/, accessed June 30.
Themelis, Petros
1992. Eleutherna. In The Aerial Atlas of Ancient Crete.
J. Wilson Myers, Eleanor E. Myers and Gerald
Cadogan, eds. Pp. 91–95. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Visual Anthropology Review
08_Witmore.indd 71
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall
2004
71
8/12/05 5:48:03 PM
“We are reconciled, I think, to too much.”
Social hour gathering (49).
Photo: William C. Clarke.
Quote is from “The Lark” by Mary Oliver.
72
08_Witmore.indd 72
Vo l u m e 2 0
Number 2
Fall 2004
Visual Anthropology Review
8/12/05 5:48:05 PM