Joanna R. Sofaer. The Body as Material Culture: A Theoretical Osteoarchaeology.

Joanna R. Sofaer. The Body as Material Culture: A Theoretical Osteoarchaeology. JOANNA R. SOFAER. The Body as Material Culture: A TheoreticalOsteoarchaeology. xviii+ 190 pages, 11 illustrations, 3 tables. 2006.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press (known colloquially as CUP) is a publisher given a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1534, and one of the two privileged presses (the other being Oxford University Press). ; 0-521-81822-2 hardback 40 [poundssterling] & $70; 0-521-52146-7 paperback 15.99 [pounds sterling]& $27.99. The relationship between interpretive archaeology, osteoarchaeologyand their theoretical and methodological understandings of the body hasbecome increasingly tense in recent years. Much of the current'post-processualist' archaeological theory Archaeological theory covers the debates over the practice of archaeology and the interpretation of archaeological results. There is no single theory of archaeology, and even definitions are disputed. has distanceditself from the physical aspects of the human skeleton The human skeleton consists of both fused and individual bones supported and supplemented by ligaments, tendons, muscles and cartilage. Fused bones include those of the pelvis and the cranium. Osteocytes are present in the bone matrix. which hasincreasingly become the exclusive remit of biophysical sciences. JoannaSofaer has addressed the issues at stake, using as cases in point, sex,gender and age, in a book which is critically grounded in the physicalmateriality of human bones and which thoughtfully appraises the theoryof the body. She has tried to do something quite different from othertexts on either osteoarchaeology or the theory of dead bodies, and shehas succeeded. What is presented is a way of bridging the methodologicaldivide by viewing the skeleton as both a material arid a culturalobject. Using the concept of plasticity to en, phasise bone as a product ofhuman action, interaction with cultural objects and environmentalimpact, Sofaer discusses the way skeletal material in the mortuarycontext acts as a mediator between mind/culture and body/nature.Highlighting the biological and non-biological material of the skeletonas part of a continuing process within the lifecycle of an individualmeans that the body becomes methodologically accessible. If human boneis understood as a cultural object, the ontological categorisation of'live' or 'dead' is removed; this has previouslybeen a stumbling block for archaeologists theorising on the one handabout living, social, animate beings, and on the other about dead,individual, inanimate remains. By shifting 'the body' into therealm of material culture, Sofaer proposes to combine the study of thediversity and biological fluidity of human skeletons with that of theirintersubjectivity Intersubjectivity is something which is shared by two or more subjectivites.The term is used in three ways. Firstly, in its weakest sense it is used to refer to agreement. and materiality. The methodological implications of using the body as a form ofmaterial culture are explored by focusing on two major skeletal pointsof reference, sex and age. Necessarily, Sofaer discusses the perceivedrelationship between sex and gender in Western archaeological traditionsand current debate. By arguing for a distinct separation between thebiological category of sex and the social category of gender, Sofaerdoes not suggest a biologically determinist approach but rather onewhich envisages the potential integration of the material skeleton intothe study of gender. This approach in fact removes the problem of sexbeing interpretively conflated with gender; the disarticulation disarticulation/dis��ar��tic��u��la��tion/ (dis?ahr-tik?u-la��shun) exarticulation; amputation or separation at a joint. dis��ar��tic��u��la��tionn. ofgender (as culture) and sex (as nature) is made 'redundant throughtheir unification in the human body' (p. 116). This way ofaddressing both sex and gender grounds their investigation within atangible framework, avoiding the problems which abstract conceptualconstructs have posed for linking theory and practice. Age is considered in a similar way: the use of the developmentalprocess in the course of a life is proposed as a focus forinvestigation, as opposed to specific ontological age status. Byrecognising that social practices and actions can result in physicalexpressions, Sofaer highlights the material formation of the body overtime through interaction with material objects. Her study of theskeletal changes evident in remains at the sixteenth to nineteenthcentury site of Ensay in the Outer Hebrides is given in example. Tasksundertaken by the Ensay population reflect a strongly gendered divisionof labour; women in particular, from childhood to old age, showprogressive degeneration and remodelling at various points on theskeleton (p. 140). The division of age into categories of'childhood' and 'adulthood' are seen as relevantmethodologically, particularly when assessing sex. However, the specificage at death of an individual is viewed as less significant. Sofaer thenmoves on to consider sociological and health research, as well asstudies of cyberbodies and cyberpunk A futuristic, online delinquent: breaking into computer systems; surviving by high-tech wits. The term comes from science fiction novels such as "Neuromancer" and "Shockwave Rider. . Drawing on this research, sheproposes the concept of the hybrid as a theoretical framework. Thisoffers considerable possibilities for mortuary archaeology, since itdeals with the material remains of humans and the artefacts buried withthem. For those archaeologists who 'switch off' at the thoughtof theories of the body, sex, gender and age, this book is an essentialread. It is a valuable excursion into how archaeology has conceived andis conceptualising the body as both a biological and a culturalresource. Sofaer draws together the fields of osteoarchaeologicalpractice, which has 'on the who& failed to engage with recentdevelopments in theoretical archaeology' (p. 24) and theinterpretive, constructionist con��struc��tion��ist?n.A person who construes a legal text or document in a specified way: a strict constructionist. theories which mostly disengage dis��en��gage?v. dis��en��gaged, dis��en��gag��ing, dis��en��gag��esv.tr.1. To release from something that holds fast, connects, or entangles. See Synonyms at extricate.2. with thebiological materiality of the skeleton. As an osteoarchaeologistherself, Sofaer has a foot in both camps and manages to convey thetheoretical association between bodies and objects in a direct, engagingand thought-provoking way. WENDELIN ROMER Department of Archaeology, University of York This article is about the British university. For the Canadian university, see York University. The University of York is a campus university in York, England. , UK