Constructive thoughts on the effect of cuts to archaeology and heritage

[moreno]

Keeping with GPStone's intial post and linking with Kel's, I hijacked my own post. I think it is more relevant here.

I met up with and had dinner with some mates. They own their homes in a very small and archaeologically significant village, one just bought a grade II listed property, others are having extentions built. Not that it should matter in any way, but these folks are fairly affluent. Inevitably the subject of listed buildings and archaeology came up. I explained the relationship of archaeology and planning. Their most important issue was the added cost, and they asked me only one question in terms of expense and importance that I had trouble answering to their satisfaction so I'll pose it here:

Why is archaeology important and why should "I" care?

As Kel suggests, these are the people we need to bring on side.

[Tache]

Not everybody likes archaeology. Thats a fact. But equally, not everybody cares that the govrnment wanted to sell off the nations woodland. However, there are people who do, and similarly there will be those that like archaeology and think it's important.
I suspect that justifying ourselves is much harder than anybody is willing to admit. I suspect that a group of jaded archaeologists may in general struggle to come up with all of the reasons that most people relate to. It is therefore important that people continue to speak to their friends and family to gauge 'public' opinion. I am often surprised at what other people are interested in and think are important...

[Wax]

Archaeology matters because
It is away of understanding our direct physical environment, it enables us to read the evidence encapsulated in that environment and tell the stories of the people who created it.

Without archaeology that environment is thoughtlessly destroyed and the complex evidence it contains is lost and with it the stories it holds.
The job of all archaeologists is to tell those stories
We have no other purpose and stories are what makes us human. In all societies story tellers are important whether it is a famous film director or the local character down the pub

[kevin wooldridge]

I remember many many years ago (well before I became actively involved in field archaeology) out local archaeologist (well intentioned amateur with some family fortune to sustain his efforts) stood as an independent in the county council elections against the leader of the ruling Conservative party. I forget the imperative that inspired him to run for high office (probably the refusal at the time of the county council to fund some minor watching brief), but I do remember his election address. He spoke of the vast wealth of that particular county council and how it would only require a small percentage of the money spent on social services to be reallocated to ensure that all of the county's archaeological assets could be protected in perpetuity!! Needless to say his appeal had little appeal to the general voting public, even in a traditional Tory area where you would think that archaeology and heritage matters would have a potentially receptive audience.....I was reminded of this when listening to the podcast of yesterday's Any Questions and hearing the government spokesman regretting spending cuts, but reminding us that 'we face difficult choices'.......

In the light of the 'Save Our Archaeology' campaign coming up against the 'difficult choices' argument, shouldn't we, rather than defining archaeology, be making the case for how maintaining archaeology spending can be justified in light of cuts to social services or defence or hospitals or schools or libraries or universities etc etc or at least how an effective balance can be achieved....?

[Wax]

If we cannot define what makes archaeology important even amongst our selves how can we expect the public to give it a second thought when faced with the current political mess . We have to sell ourselves to the public or go under. Given the choice between keeping the local care home or a listed building what would any sane person go for? People are worth more than heritage and that is the bottom line:face-stir:

If the general public value what we do then archaeology has a chance, something that is regarded as an exclusive club for a select band will alienate those who might otherwise support it.

[tinybitgreen]

Kel
I remember a consultation a number of years ago when a local authority was making cuts, it asked something like ?which do you value most??
1, The Community archaeologist
2, Two crossing guards at the local school
3, Street lighting on that dangerous street
I am sure these wernt the exact points but you get the idea. Guess what ? community archaeology wasn?t that important!!
It is always possible to frame the argument that way, but where do you stop?
1, Fire fighters
2, Primary care nurses
3, Teachers
Well actually the civil society I pay my taxes for will provide Fire Fighters, Primary Care Nurses AND Teachers, if you can?t organise it that way we will vote for someone who will. . .
similarly
The civil society I pay my taxes for can provide lollipop men, meals on wheel AND environmental protection and I would like other options please, such as not upgrading nuclear weapons, eliminating large corporations tax avoidance ect.
I know its not that easy but we can?t fall for that simplistic utilitarian ranking approach, its designed to divide and conquer and I suspect we will be getting a lot of that across the board soon.

[Kel]

I know its not that easy but we can’t fall for that simplistic utilitarian ranking approach, its designed to divide and conquer and I suspect we will be getting a lot of that across the board soon.

Unfortunately this is exactly how "ordinary" people like my parents think. They DO compare archaeology with lollipop ladies. There's no point saying they shouldn't - they do, and we have to try and find a way to address that approach. To do otherwise is like sitting on the deck of the Titanic, pointing out that it really shouldn't have hit an iceberg in the first place.

Everyone here *feels* how important archaeology is, even if we seem unable to come up with a way of expressing this coherently to people with only a passing occasional interest in archaeology.

Why is archaeology important and why should "I" care?

I suspect that justifying ourselves is much harder than anybody is willing to admit.

If we cannot define what makes archaeology important even amongst our selves how can we expect the public to give it a second thought

shouldn't we, rather than defining archaeology, be making the case for how maintaining archaeology spending can be justified in light of cuts to social services or defence or hospitals or schools or libraries or universities etc etc or at least how an effective balance can be achieved....?

Yes, yes, yes and yes.

It is away of understanding our direct physical environment, it enables us to read the evidence encapsulated in that environment and tell the stories of the people who created it.
Without archaeology that environment is thoughtlessly destroyed and the complex evidence it contains is lost and with it the stories it holds.
The job of all archaeologists is to tell those stories
We have no other purpose and stories are what makes us human

Due to see the rents tomorrow. Will try the communal history/storyteller angle on them and report back.

[BAJR]

If we cannot define what makes archaeology important even amongst our selves how can we expect the public to give it a second thought when faced with the current political mess

Wax, this is the very issue that hobbles us forever. As Digging teh Dirt said... he is onside, but can't see the point of what the message is.

The need to explain and all understand what we explain. No fluff no esoteric flim flam... clear concise and meaningful.

Support Archaeology or we kill the puppy - that is the kind of snappy concept. You know exactly what will happen, and why you should support. (of course..that is a joke... no really it was !) But perhaps we don't know why people should give a damn? Perhaps it is best taht councils close the HERs and ditch the curatorial services... perhaps it will lead to a new golden age of amateua and fun archaeology rather than the po faced exclusion archaeology of the last 2 decades? Or perhaps not?

Put it this way... I make a difference to hundreds of people a year... they care. I care. MAny many other people do this too. but all do it as individuals, as personalities. Where is the structure and framework for us all to lead... We have become so defensive and reclusive and individual that we have forgotten how to work as a team.

If we don't work as a team, then we may as well embrace the cuts.

[Kel]

I make a difference to hundreds of people a year... they care.

If you can explain - clearly, concisely and meaningfully - how you did that, in terms that a non-archaeologist can understand, then we may be part way there.

And were they the ones that cared to start with, or have you turned round folks who hadn't really given it much thought up until that point? I suspect the former is a much smaller constituency than the latter. There's little point preaching to the converted, because there don't seem to be enough of them to have our backs.

[Welsh Andy]

Archaeology is important because...
It allows us to uncover and understand the history of humanity in a way that other disciplines can not. It tells the tales not only of kings and queens but of people in all our riotous and colourful variety. Because of this it has lessons to teach us about the fragility of our societies and the transience of the monolithic structures that seem immutable and ever lasting. Archaeology can be an antidote to the hubris that implies our civilisation is somehow different to those that have come and gone throughout our history.
Alongside the other disciplines that study humanity, the universe and our place in it archaeology can educate us about where we have come from and how we can deal with the problems we face in the future. Through the study of environmental changes and how they have affected humans in the past we can engage with the discussion on how to deal with global warming and all the problems that entails. Archaeology can let us see how societies change over time and the sorts of change that can lead to, or result from, social upheavals.
A better understanding of who we are and where we come from can only help us to improve our quality of life and help ensure we make better decisions about how our society works.
I slightly reworked tinybitgreen's questions above.

Which of these do you value most?
1-The community archaeologists
2-The crossing guards outside the local school
3-Street lighting on dangerous streets

Well, to be honest I want all of them. How about we frame the question slightly differently?

Which of these do you value most?
1-The community archaeologists
2-Billions spent on nuclear weaponry that we must never use
3-Corporate tax avoidance robbing us of billions that could be spent on services

(probably been watching too much Carl Sagan of late...)