>
> Let me pose a suicidal premise ... the Public does not need archaeology but
> archaeologists sure as hell need the Public.
>
bingo

> I don't think that we fully recognize the depth of that statement. If we
> look to arguments against pothunting or arguments for public outreach ...
> they are bolstered by the belief that archaeology has an intrinisic worth.
> The more and more that I have thought about it ... and the more and more
> that I think about the "uses and abuses of history" (to steal a nice phrase
> from Nietzsche) ... the less and less I am persuaded by arguments that
> stress the worth, merit, glory, etc. of archaeology. Archaeology ... in
> large part ... remains an antiquated pursuit that has little to offer the
> present ...
>
> But ... perhaps ... I speak incorrectly. Perhaps ... archaeology does have
> much to offer ... and it is the archaeologists who have little to offer the
> present.
>

we have not been able (have we tried?) to explain ourselves properly - why arky
is important (having to fight for every penny, while big corporations
willingly sponsor operas and theatre, mcdonald's goes out of its way to be
friendly to the amazon and nike does everything to appear to be nice to
vietnamese kids... but a few extra bucks for a decent site report?

> In a recent issue of Historical Archaeology ... Randall McGuire and Mark
> Walker (I believe) discussed the class aspirations and self-interest that
> dominate archaeological discourse ... in the academic world and beyond.
> These are issues that few of us would like to face. These issues strike out
> not only at archaeology but at the entire academic system. How many
> individuals seek degrees for the sake of knowledge and in the pursuance of
> their duty to society? How many more seek their degrees to "get a job,"
> "enhance their prestige," "achieve that middle to upper class status that
> accompanies the letters that we place at the end of our names"?
>

very much the german case, if nothing else

>
> Although this might be a bit of digression from the initial topic ... I
> think that the points are directly related.
>
> Why should archaeological resources be given special consideration? Is the
> preservation of these resources merely a cry of self-preservation?
>
> I believe that until we are willing to face up to our social duty and moral
> responsibility as intellectuals ... we should not speak so high-handedly
> against pothunters. Pothunters are not solely motivated by monetary gain
> ... although many are. There is a reason for pothunting that we have failed
>
> to grasp ... and I think that we have failed to grasp it because the
> problem is not "out there" ... the problem is within our ranks.
>
we have met the enemy and he is us


geoff carver
http://home.t-online.de/home/gcarver/
[log in to unmask]