Dialogues in Cuban Archaeology

Introduction / 19
pensive, not a unique problem within the developing world but perhaps more
absurd given the short 90-mile distance between the island and the U.S.
coastline. The cost of professional memberships in organizations such as the
Society for American Archaeology, even at discounted rates (currently $50),
represents an astronomical sum to Cuban archaeologists with little access to
U.S. currency.
However, what is most important to point out is that the impression that
Cuba remains in total isolation is in many ways a fallacy; it is a myth created
by a lack of communication speci¤cally between U.S. and Cuban archaeologists.
For decades, Cuban archaeologists have been interacting with their
counterparts from many other countries, such as the former Soviet Union,
Mexico, Dominican Republic, Venezuela, and, more recently, England and
Spain. They have also done their best to overcome the blockade of U.S.
scholarship. As an anecdote, it was intriguing for me to see that some of our
visiting Cuban colleagues wanted to be introduced to several well-known archaeologists
such as Lewis Binford and Colin Renfrew during the annual
meeting in Denver. They had read and used many of their publications but
had never had the chance to meet them in person.
But perhaps the clearest counterargument to the myth of isolation is the
role of the Smithsonian Institution and Betty Meggers in Cuban archaeology.
This institution, represented by Meggers, has played a signi¤cant role in ¤-
nancial and moral support for Cuban scholars today and in in®uencing their
theoretical and methodological approaches (e.g., see Berman et al., Chapter 3;
Ulloa Hung, Chapter 6). Meggers has also contributed articles to Cuban publications
and exchanged correspondence, publications, and information with
Cuban colleagues. The Smithsonian has ¤nancially supported certain aspects
of archaeological research in Cuba by funding radiocarbon dates or other
types of analysis. In this sense, a dialogue between U.S. and Cuban archaeologists
has been present for decades in the person of Betty Meggers.
Turning to the other side, misconceptions are also present in the views
that many Cuban archaeologists have of American archaeology. Perhaps the
main misconception, which in my experience is common throughout Latin
America, is that American archaeology is still characterized by the New Archaeology,
with its emphasis on high-tech methodologies and simplistic ecological
perspectives. Although I cannot deny that there are some American
archaeologists who still follow this path, I do not think this is an accurate
depiction of American archaeology today. It is now more theoretically and
methodologically diverse than ever, thanks in part to communication with