17th October 2010, 12:44 PM
Sparky Wrote:Theoretical framework to our reports? Pants. Quite pants.The theory just deals with how you approach the interpretation. That's all. If the theoretical framework does not aid interpretation then it is useless and should not be used. Ultimately, whenever you interpret a site, you are applying theory to that interpretation, whether you articulate and acknowledge the theoretical basis of your interpretation or not. To some extent archaeologists cannot help it, because they have absorbed the theory throughout their degrees, through reading reports and books about archaeology and every day of their working lives through contact with other archaeologists. This much, at least, is obvious to me after more than twenty years in the field.
Quote:Whose archaeology is it? An exclusive club or turgid Hodderite tea-pot dwellers, or everyone who is alive or has, at one time, lived?I don't really see the connection between the practical application of theory, which is what I am advocating, and the concept of the archaeology as a possession of one or more different groups. Not all theories belong in the Hodderite camp and I certainly do not believe that a single theoretical framework can answer all our questions (see my earlier comments about a toolkit). Real life is far too messy for a single theory to cover everything and a multi-method approach probably works better in most cases anyway.
'Reality,' sa molesworth 2, 'is so unspeakably sordid it make me shudder.'