25th September 2008, 11:50 AM
I agree... the research frameworks are one of the best things to have happened in archaeology (in the recent past). But they do seem to get overlooked. Perhaps some of them are a bit daunting (some stretch on for pages) and, for quite a few, often get bottom-shelved. To some, they are an end to a means... "we've done the trawl, we've produced the report... now let's forget about it and get on with the next funded topic".
But they are both informative and thought inspiring. I note that at the end of each era there is a "what needs to be done next"(for a better term)... the frameworks not only assess the current state-of-play in archaeology, but also identify research gaps. A plethora of research topics are there to be found... yet, how many actual Bachelors dissertations, Masters or PhD thesis's have started as a result of the gaps identified in the frameworks?
If academics (mainly) are writing this stuff and identifying the gaps, why aren't they pushing for the work to get done? Is it a lack of interest, lack of funding or, dare I say it, it's just that academics have become parochial. Sometimes, it appears (to me) that research is geared towards what each individual academic wants, rather than to general questions that should be answered. Does the majority of research funding go to an academics 'pet' project (more-often-than-not a sciency one), or to ones that are deemed 'sexy archaeology'? Some of the best PhD topics (and students) don't get any funding at all, whilst some of the worst do.
I see Stonehenge has been dug up again (stiffled yawn)... to answer what exactly? Anything new? Well, yes it appears now that Stonehenge was a precursor of Lourdes. Amazing! Well I never! When shall we see the fruits of this 'new' research (some magnum opus that will regurgitate the same old drivel but in a different form)? Sometime in the next few years. And while they post-ex, ponder and pontificate the meaning of Stonehenge life, unfortuntately other sites and research will have to go on the back-burner. Or maybe it can be shifted onto some gullible, yet enthusiastic, PhD newbie.
As bob states... "I suggest we use the downturn to carry out a systematic programme of backlog post-ex and sorting out what we have in the archives, and no university research digs till all the old jollies are all written up!"
Couldn't agree more!
Ooo, ooo, ooo... I wanna be like you-ooo-ooo
But they are both informative and thought inspiring. I note that at the end of each era there is a "what needs to be done next"(for a better term)... the frameworks not only assess the current state-of-play in archaeology, but also identify research gaps. A plethora of research topics are there to be found... yet, how many actual Bachelors dissertations, Masters or PhD thesis's have started as a result of the gaps identified in the frameworks?
If academics (mainly) are writing this stuff and identifying the gaps, why aren't they pushing for the work to get done? Is it a lack of interest, lack of funding or, dare I say it, it's just that academics have become parochial. Sometimes, it appears (to me) that research is geared towards what each individual academic wants, rather than to general questions that should be answered. Does the majority of research funding go to an academics 'pet' project (more-often-than-not a sciency one), or to ones that are deemed 'sexy archaeology'? Some of the best PhD topics (and students) don't get any funding at all, whilst some of the worst do.
I see Stonehenge has been dug up again (stiffled yawn)... to answer what exactly? Anything new? Well, yes it appears now that Stonehenge was a precursor of Lourdes. Amazing! Well I never! When shall we see the fruits of this 'new' research (some magnum opus that will regurgitate the same old drivel but in a different form)? Sometime in the next few years. And while they post-ex, ponder and pontificate the meaning of Stonehenge life, unfortuntately other sites and research will have to go on the back-burner. Or maybe it can be shifted onto some gullible, yet enthusiastic, PhD newbie.
As bob states... "I suggest we use the downturn to carry out a systematic programme of backlog post-ex and sorting out what we have in the archives, and no university research digs till all the old jollies are all written up!"
Couldn't agree more!
Ooo, ooo, ooo... I wanna be like you-ooo-ooo