11th November 2011, 06:31 PM
BAJR Wrote:To quote myself, which is quite weird!
Love it!
As I was saying to myself this very morning, if you disregard the harrumph and bluster (his not yours), two polar opposite political positions identify the same root problem in archaeology: a commercial sector divorced from the well springs of its supporting constituency. Similarly, you are also both arguing for the boundaries around who practices archaeology to be relaxed, and for our work to be more inclusive.
It?s fair to say you want more participation than he, but to my mind the logic is the same.
It?s a bottom up, archaeology for the people by the people, with at best (your view) professional archaeologists facilitating that engagement, and at worst (his view) professional archaeologists exiting altogether. Both positions are anathema to (my view) that we should police the boundaries even more rigorously, be it RO, Charter or licensing.?
That?s not the same as saying no to community projects ? just drawing firmer lines around what those projects should and shouldn?t be. Any other approach devalues our skills, experience and contribution to knowledge. Because everyone can be an archaeologist ? right?
PS: Current Archaeology haters, get over your selves! Differentcolourmud: not sure I get the gag ? it says ?best selling magazine? because it sells more copies than the competition.
PPS: P Prentice: might be able to put a link up over at my place after the weekend ? out of town for the now, but will let you know.