21st March 2011, 02:10 PM
Sadly, I believe you are quite accurate in that assumption, InvisibleMan!
That aside, I think we have to look beyond the specific definition of what we do and link archaeology (commercial and 'amateur' alike) up to the broader heritage community. As commercial archaeologists, we seem to have a general tendency to become myopically focused on our own little world including function and purpose and not realise both the potential service we could provide beyond the boundaries of our commercial paradigm and the isolation we engender as a result, contrary to the interests of our 'cause'. We're needless doing ourselves out of our own argument and its bloody infuriating (not to mention a little arrogant).
We need to look at what we do, consider what we could do and get on with doing it. With regard to the 38 Degrees woodland campaign, all those arguments in favour of woodland apply almost equally to 'heritage' (not necessarily archaeology, which is why it is essential to intrinsically entwine one into the other and boost the community appeal).
If archaeology can be used in all the ways we have come up with, why are we not (largely) using it in all those ways and what's stopping us starting now?
That aside, I think we have to look beyond the specific definition of what we do and link archaeology (commercial and 'amateur' alike) up to the broader heritage community. As commercial archaeologists, we seem to have a general tendency to become myopically focused on our own little world including function and purpose and not realise both the potential service we could provide beyond the boundaries of our commercial paradigm and the isolation we engender as a result, contrary to the interests of our 'cause'. We're needless doing ourselves out of our own argument and its bloody infuriating (not to mention a little arrogant).
We need to look at what we do, consider what we could do and get on with doing it. With regard to the 38 Degrees woodland campaign, all those arguments in favour of woodland apply almost equally to 'heritage' (not necessarily archaeology, which is why it is essential to intrinsically entwine one into the other and boost the community appeal).
If archaeology can be used in all the ways we have come up with, why are we not (largely) using it in all those ways and what's stopping us starting now?