10th September 2009, 12:07 PM
I should explain.. (see this : Archaeology is a Brand! The Meaning of Archaeology in Contemporary Popular Culture))
Archaeology is firmly 'branded' as ... fill in what here_______________
So what is it you do, why do you do it...? To say to a developer, you do it because they (the planning department) told you is never going to work? You are partially right that the curatorial staff and IfA should be making it clear what commercial archaeology is... where is this general 'brand' its all a bit fluffy.
If you have one in ten ringing up in bafflement... why is it? and as you say:
Is it time to have an amicable divorce between archaeology (research/academic/local group) and archaeology (commercial/development/consultant) where they still meet at the weekends and see the kids.
As I was trying to provocatively say in the Crisis thread... there is no clear distinction in these elements, and so, I would be baffled myself if one minute a bunch of archaeologists turn up, ask to dig in my field for nothing, and even pay for camping and then two weeks later another group could turn up and charge me commercial rates for evaluating another part of my field where I was putting a shed... hmmm... I can't see the difference except that one group paid and the other sent an invoice. They had the same tools.. same recording methods, same vague idea about the past being quite interesting and important... so why the difference. It is (imho) unclear... there is no distinctive attitude to commercial firms, other than the herris fencing and hi viz jacket pulled up over freezing and wet head.
Indeed one of the commentators comments was that the Headland website gave the impression of an academic site not a professional commercial company. No wonder the client is confused.
Archaeology is firmly 'branded' as ... fill in what here_______________
So what is it you do, why do you do it...? To say to a developer, you do it because they (the planning department) told you is never going to work? You are partially right that the curatorial staff and IfA should be making it clear what commercial archaeology is... where is this general 'brand' its all a bit fluffy.
If you have one in ten ringing up in bafflement... why is it? and as you say:
RedEarth Wrote:I'm not even sure what to say in some casesSO a clear idea of what this industry is... and is not.
Is it time to have an amicable divorce between archaeology (research/academic/local group) and archaeology (commercial/development/consultant) where they still meet at the weekends and see the kids.
As I was trying to provocatively say in the Crisis thread... there is no clear distinction in these elements, and so, I would be baffled myself if one minute a bunch of archaeologists turn up, ask to dig in my field for nothing, and even pay for camping and then two weeks later another group could turn up and charge me commercial rates for evaluating another part of my field where I was putting a shed... hmmm... I can't see the difference except that one group paid and the other sent an invoice. They had the same tools.. same recording methods, same vague idea about the past being quite interesting and important... so why the difference. It is (imho) unclear... there is no distinctive attitude to commercial firms, other than the herris fencing and hi viz jacket pulled up over freezing and wet head.
Indeed one of the commentators comments was that the Headland website gave the impression of an academic site not a professional commercial company. No wonder the client is confused.
For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he
Thomas Rainborough 1647
Thomas Rainborough 1647