Human Ecology

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 311–313 | Cite as

Greg Mitman, Marco Armiero, Robert S. Emmett, Editors. Future Remains: a Cabinet of Curiosities for the Anthropocene

Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 2018, (ISBN 9780226508795) Price $30 (Paperback). Xiv + 225 Pages, 16 Colour Plates
  • Chelsey Geralda ArmstrongEmail author

Like it or not, the Anthropocene is here. Despite debates about its emergence and whether or not it can be observed in discrete geomorphic or stratigraphic events, the rise of the Anthropocene as an implicit object of inquiry has marked a new age in art, science, humanism, and history. The renaming of the current geologic epoch as the age of humans is a story about space and time. Yet it is often presented as a story in which humans are the protagonist and other lives, processes, and objects act as mere background sceneries or props. In this collection of essays edited by Gregg Mitman, Marco Armiero, and Robert S. Emmett, objects take centre stage and are enlivened with clever metaphor and meaning to narrate the tale of the Anthropocene. Each object presented in this volume is intricately interconnected to place, space, and time, and to the larger planetary scale within which scholars are increasingly starting to explore.

The voices in this contribution include those of...



  1. Anderson, E. N. (2016). Caring for place: Ecology, ideology, and emotion in traditional landscape management. In Left coast press, CA, Walnut Cree.Google Scholar
  2. Ascher, R. (1961). Analogy in archaeological interpretation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 17: 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atalay, S. (2012). Community-based archaeology: Research with, by, and for indigenous and local communities, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, S., Clarke, A., and Frederick, U. (eds.) (2015). Object stories, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Ellen, R. (2017). Rethinking the relationship between studies of ethnobiological knowledge and the evolution of human cultural cognition. In Human origins: Contributions from social anthropology. C. Power, M. Finnegan and H. Callan, eds, pgs 59–83. Berghahn Books Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Garnett, S. T., Burgess, N. D., Fa, J. E., Fernández-Llamazares, Á., Molnár, Z., Robinson, C. J., Watson, J. E., Zander, K. K., Austin, B., Brondizio, E. S., and Collier, N. F. (2018). A spatial overview of the global importance of indigenous lands for conservation. Nature Sustainability 1(7): 369–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hawkes, C. (1954). Archeological theory and method: Some suggestions from the Old World. American Anthropologist 56: 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Malm, A., and Hornborg, A. (2014). The geology of mankind? A critique of the Anthropocene narrative. The Anthropocene Review 1(1): 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nazarea, V. D. (1999). Ethnoecology: Situated knowledge/located lives. In University of Arizona Press, AZ, Tucson.Google Scholar
  10. Ogden, L. A., Hall, B., and Tanita, K. (2013). Animals, plants, people, and things: A review of multispecies ethnography. Environment and Society 4(1): 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schiffer, M. B. (1987). Formation processes of the archaeological record. In University of new Mexico Press, NM, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  12. Spector, J. (1993). What this awl means: Feminist archaeology at a Dakota Village. In Minnesota Historical Society press, MN, St Paul.Google Scholar
  13. Toledo, V. M. (1992). What is ethnoecology? Origins, scope and implications of a rising discipline. Etnoecológica 1(1): 5–21.Google Scholar
  14. Wylie, A. (1985). The reaction against analogy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 63–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Museum of Natural HistorySmithsonian InstitutionWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations