OAS

President's Message

May/June 2009
(as published in Arch Notes New Series 14(3))

In the winter of 2002, February and March to be precise, I built a 16 ft. Chestnut Prospector-type cedar strip canoe in my basement workshop. Yes, the classic story about the ship in the bottle. Getting it out did not, however, require creating a new doorway to the exterior at the end of the workshop (although I was prepared to do so), but it did entail moving a cupboard and removing the frame from the side door.

This past Monday, and for the second year running, I came to work in my canoe aided by an equally enthusiastic friend. I only live two and a half blocs from the shore of the Ottawa River, so it seemed natural that at least once a year, I take the river route to get to work at the Canadian Museum of Civilization which sits on the shore of the same river. Yes, there are rapids, a dam and a city which must be shot, bypassed or traversed. But still, the bragging rights from such an adventure seem worth it. As we travelled along this storied river, the sights, sounds and smells are remarkable in their other-worldly characteristics. They were those experienced by countless generations over thousands of years. At many points we could hardly hear the din of the nearby cities but instead were overwhelmed by the roar of rapids or the lusty songs of finches, warblers and jays. The sweet fragrances of honeysuckle, plum trees and lilacs competed with the heavy musty scents wafting out from the dense and moist forest along the river edge. We became one with the land. We turned back the hands of time.

As I write these few words, I occasionally look up outside my window and my eyes lit on that same Ottawa River, that watery artery to a heart of a continent. Sunday June 14th is Canadian Rivers Day. So much travel today is on highways or by aircraft and travellers are kept at a distance from the rivers and streams which used to be routes that everyone followed. Even in the wintertime, frozen lakes and rivers offered roadways and maps which could always be counted on. They were enduring features of the world.

Rivers and streams are links with the land’s past. They formed the essential definitions of maps, mental or paper. They change their face with the seasons. They feed the people who live on their shores. They provide power to nurture our lives. But today, our rivers and streams are often abused, neglected, dammed or diverted and sometimes even covered over. But the pulse of the watery landscape remains.

In national capital region, the Ottawa Riverkeeper, a community-based group intent on helping maintain the health of and an appreciation for the Ottawa River, is organizing a 20 km long trip from Victoria Island just below the Chaudičre Falls in the centre of Ottawa-Gatineau to Petrie Island in Orleans. It will be an event filled with colour and excitement with large “voyageurs” canoes as well as many, many other smaller craft. They are expecting over 300 paddlers.

That same day, a four-day conference will begin in Ottawa dedicated to Canada’s waterways: the Canadian River Heritage Conference. It is anticipated that sometime during this conference, an announcement might be made whereby the Ottawa River will be declared an official Canadian Heritage River. Just imagine that a river like the Ottawa, which was always at the heart of Canadian history, both ancient and modern, is only now being accorded such recognition. It took years of work on the part of many dedicated volunteers, but it is now nearing reality (read more about the Ottawa River at the following website http://ottawariver.org/index.html).

In early May, a visitor to the new Art Gallery of Ontario signed up for a tour of an archaeological excavation in the basement of the Grange, an early 19th century Georgian mansion in downtown Toronto, immediately adjacent to the AGO. They met a tour guide who related the discoveries of mysterious treasures (“spices encased in balls of wax, bones hidden in clay bricks, and most intriguingly, a bundle of letters sealed in wax and buried in the basement of this historic house”) that had been hidden by a maid of the house and discovered by the excavators. As they left the tour, they were even given a newsletter titled “Grange Excavation Notes 03/2009”. The excitement of these people was eventually brought to a grinding halt when they were informed that the excavation was “haptic conceptual art”. They genuinely thought they had just had the privilege of witnessing the careful study of a great early XIXth century mystery.

Obviously the “art” installation worked well. It was very credible, fooling lots of people, including a Queen’s University history Ph.D. student. By burying the true nature of the installation in the “Excavation Notes”, the likelihood is that many of the visitors left the Grange with false perceptions of what they had actually seen and what had really happened there. Moreover, there is no reason why their beliefs would have changed if they did not bother to carefully read the newsletter.

The tale of the canoe commute and the “archaeological art installation” share something in common that actually does have a serious side for those interested in archaeology and the presentation of the past to the public.

Both instances speak to the issue of fact versus fiction. The trip down the river from home to work was a wonderful illusion which allowed me to connect with a variety of aspects of the Ottawa River; its history, its natural characteristics, its modern condition, its flora, etc. Yet, I was also aware that it was a privilege to find myself able to enjoy this setting. In many respects, environmental laws, historical events and developments, geopolitics, etc. had all contributed to maintain the corridor through which I was passing. The near-constant reminder of what lay just beyond sight in some cases, served to remind me of the fragility of the world that surrounds us. It also helped me appreciate even more those efforts which had prevented the entire shoreline from being built up, for all the mighty rapids to have been dammed, for all the forests to have been cut away and replaced with manicured lawns.

Now, back to the AGO’s “archaeological installation”. The offended visitor chose to write to the director of the AGO with copies to the chairman of the Ontario Heritage Trust, the executive-director of the Ontario Museum Association, the executive-director of Heritage Toronto and yours truly, the president of the OAS. His very real discomfort revolved around issues of authenticity and trust. His recommendations were as follows:

1-Never expect visitors to decipher bad writing. Write clearly.
2-Never abuse the trust of your visitors
3-Never sell fiction as historical fact

The kinds of discoveries made by real archaeological projects are rarely as exciting as the veritable treasure that was purportedly being unearthed in the basement of the Grange. But archaeologists, especially those who interact with the public, are very often faced with precisely that perception. Indeed, this expectation is surely the one that spurs on pot-hunters who usually end up finding a few recognizable items and destroying so much invaluable and irreplaceable archaeological information.

If the irate AGO visitor is correct, sadly for the artist, Iris Haussler, a great many of the visitors to her installation will never actually come to appreciate her art if they failed to carefully read the “newsletter”. At some point, the illusion should be brought to an end in a controlled fashion. In this way, the artist receives due recognition for her work, the visiting public’s notion that archaeology is a true source of information about the past is preserved.

And finally, the AGO story drives home a very important point, namely that people are very curious to experience archaeology firsthand, to see the process unfolding in front of their eyes. They are willing to go out of their way to witness it and they are willing to pay to see it. And of course, they want to see the real thing and if it must be embellished, then they want to know that it is and what parts are interpretations and what parts are facts. The illusion is worth it, as long as everyone knows it’s not quite real or at least an approximation of past reality. The very same can be said for my annual canoe commute route.

Authenticity, honesty, trust; these are values that are not about to go out of style.

2009 Draft Standards and Guidelines

One last and very important note. OAS members are invited to review and comment on the 2009 Draft Standards and Guidelines which the Ministry of Culture released the first week of June (see the link below or go to the Ministry of Culture’s website). While this document is aimed at creating a broad set of expectations about the manner in which consulting archaeology takes place in the future, the board of directors feels that this document will greatly affect the nature of the archaeological record that will be created in Ontario and as such, is of concern to all who share an interest in Ontario’s archaeological past (http://www.culture.gov.on.ca/english/heritage/archaeology/arch_sng.htm).

There is a series of joint APA-OAS regional meetings scheduled over the course of the summer. Go to the OAS website for a date, place, time and contact near you and make your voice heard. The timing is crucial if we are to expect to have some influence on this important document. You also can send your written comments to Neal Ferris who is taking the lead in this area (advocacy@ontarioarchaeology.on.ca). He will be collating OAS feedback. We hope to submit our members’ views to the Ministry by the fall.

In the meantime, for those carrying out fieldwork this summer, find lots, learn lots. For those taking some holidays, be safe and have a pleasant time. I look forward to see you all in Waterloo next October (http://oas2009.uwaterloo.ca/).

Jean-Luc Pilon