Between destruction and protection: the case of the Australian rock art sites

Authors

  • José Antonio González Zarandona University of Melbourne

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_zarch/zarch.2021165087

Keywords:

rock art, Australia, destruction, heritage, iconoclasm

Abstract

Can heritage be practiced and thought outside the binary of exaltation vs. denigration? To answer this question posed by the editors, this paper will analyse the destruction and protection of Indigenous heritage sites in Australia, where the destruction of significant cultural heritage sites, mainly Indigenous heritage sites, is the result of biased and outdated practice of cultural heritage that divides Indigenous heritage (prior 1788) from Australian heritage (after 1788). This rift has caused an immense damage to Indigenous heritage around the country as it shows how in Australia heritage is practiced and thought outside the dualism of celebration versus destruction. In this paper, I will show how the destruction of Indigenous rock art sites has been a constant in the 20th and 21st century and how this destruction has been framed in media as a result of vandalism. By arguing that this framing is perpetuating the dualism of celebration versus destruction, I suggest that we can move out of this binary by considering the concept of iconoclasm to go beyond this dualism.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

José Antonio González Zarandona, University of Melbourne

Associate Researcher, in the History Division, at the Center of Investigation and Teaching Economics (Mexico), an Associate Fellow, at the School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, in The University of Melbourne (Australia), and a Consulting Scholar, at the Penn Cultural Heritage Center, in The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Antonio’s research focuses on the intersection of cultural heritage, rock art, iconoclasm and heritage destruction. Antonio has received prestigious fellowships from the British Academy, the Australian Academy of the Humanities and Columbia University. Antonio holds degrees in Communication Sciences, Arts Management, Heritage Studies, Archaeology and Art History.

References

Agnew, N., Deacon, J., Hall, N., Little, T., Sullivan, S., Taçon, P. 2015. Rock art: A cultural treasure at risk. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.

Australian Government - Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. https://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/places/national-heritage-list.

Belting, H. 2011. An anthropology of images: Picture, medium, body. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Brubaker, L., 2012. Inventing Byzantine iconoclasm. London: Bristol Classical Press.

Clay, R., 2012. Iconoclasm in revolutionary Paris: The transformation of signs. Oxford: Voltaire Found.

Davis, M. 2007. Writing heritage: The depiction of Indigenous heritage in European-Australian writings. Kew, Victoria: Australian Scholarly Publishing.

Edwards, R., ed. 1975. The preservation of Australia’s Aboriginal heritage. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

González Zarandona, J.A. 2020. Murujuga – Rock Art, heritage and landscape iconoclasm. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

González Zarandona, J.A. 2015. “Heritage as a cultural measure in a postcolonial setting”. En Making culture count. The politics of cultural measurement, eds. Lachlan MacDowall, Marnie Badham, Emma Blomkamp y Kim Dunphy. London: Palgrave McMillan, 173-190.

González Zarandona, J.A. 2015. “Towards a theory of landscape iconoclasm”, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 25: 461-475.

González Zarandona, J.A. 2011. “The destruction of heritage: Rock art in the Burrup Peninsula”, The International Journal of the Humanities 9: 325-342

Layton, R. 2012. “Rock art, identity, and indigeneity”. En A companion to rock art, eds. Jo McDonald y Peter Veth. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 439-454.

Layton, R. 1992. Australian rock art. A new synthesis. Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lowish, S. 2011. “Setting the scene: early writing on Australian Aboriginal art”, Journal of Art Historiography 4: 1-12.

Marshall, M., Taçon, P. 2014. “Past and present, traditional and scientific: the conservation and management of rock art sites in Australia”. En Open-air rock art conservation and management: state of the art and future perspectives, eds.Timothy Darvill y António Pedro Batarda Fernandes. London / New York: Routledge.

McNiven, I., Russell, A. 2011. Appropriated pasts. Indigenous peoples and the colonial culture of archaeology. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.

Mulvaney, J. 1970. Human factors in the deterioration and destruction of antiquities and their remedy. En Aboriginal antiquities in Australia. Their nature and preservation, ed. Frederick McCarthy. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

Noyes, J. 2013. The politics of iconoclasm. Religion, violence and the culture of image-breaking in Christianity and Islam. New York, I. B. Tauris.

Rambelli, F., Reinders, E. 2012. Buddhism and Iconoclasm in East Asia. A History. London: Bloomsbury.

Rico, T. 2016. Constructing destruction: Heritage narratives in the Tsunami City. London / New York: Routledge.

Taçon, P. 2014. “Australian rock art is threatened by a lack of conservation”, The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/australian-rock-art-is-threatened-by-a-lack-of-conservation-32900.

The Guardian, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/dec/13/gobsmacked-how-to-stop-a-disaster-like-juukan-gorge-happening-again

Tourism Research Australia, 2019. https://www.tra.gov.au.

Tuck E., Yang, W. 2012. “Decolonization is not a metaphor.” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 1: 10.

W. J. T., What Do Pictures Want? The lives and loves of images (Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 2005), 8-9.

Downloads

Published

2021-09-13

How to Cite

González Zarandona, J. A. (2021). Between destruction and protection: the case of the Australian rock art sites. ZARCH. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Architecture and Urbanism, (16), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_zarch/zarch.2021165087