31st December 2004, 12:52 PM
As it appears that commercial archaeology is still doomed to be on the wrong end of the "compromise", its about time we saw the industry in a different light. If we are to be embedded in a capitalist environment where cheap (and often destructive) units win the day, surely the way to raise standards would be to tender on the basis of quality-not on the basis of a reputation for compromise.Effective legislation would be nice... people in the job have brought standards up over and over again in the past. Those that set standards and recommend professionals on those standards, should police them.Effectively.Top to bottom, curators, consultancies, directors and diggers.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
31st December 2004, 03:43 PM
[8D]
This should be a rip snortting thread.... I will ponder over a glass of amber (laphroig that is) tonight...
in vino veritas... as they say.
I agree with what you say.... now how to do it.... hmmmmmmmmmmm
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
8th January 2005, 12:53 AM
Have just read the letter in Digger penned by Mr Neil Campling, the Principal arch of North Yorks Council.This bloke gets my curator of the year award! He has asked the people who do this for a living for their opinion!Now is`nt that something else! What better way of raising standards than to provide an open line of communication between professional curators and professional field archaeologists? Other than Tesser Jowel (wotever), the curator must accept overall responsibility for the archaeology in their juridiction and I raise a glass to Neil who clearly sees through the concept of an omnipotent and, innefective Institute.I think that in the spirit of reciprocity,we should all take part in the enrichment of our profession through the protection of our heritage by actively lancing muppets from curators lists.
