I must first question the motives of an archaeologist who would ridicule an inquiry into the human past. Whether the subject is 20 years old or 2000 old, our research as archaeologists is to decipher past human behavior and action. Some do it just for the sake of research and discovery, and some do it out of a need for legislative compliance. While we may all have our preferences regarding research interests, there should be at least the vaguest effort to eliminate personal preferences, and biases against topics that we personally may not find interesting. If selectivity is rampant in an initial approach towards a project, then how scientific and reliable will the interpretation be?

This is an issue that was brought up a few years ago among historic preservationists, when Levittown turned 50 and became eligible for placement on the National Register. If we pick and choose what is significant based on personal preference, then the French Quarter in New Orleans, LA would today have an interstate running through it. Many small towns across the country today wish they still had their historic main streets, which were often sacrificed in the 1950s-70s in the wave of "progressive" thought and capitalist/corporate expansion that followed WWII. Use that as a lesson, if you will, for why it is important to not just blow-off archaeological materials that today may not seem incredibly important or interesting, but may, in the future, hold importance.





________________________________________________________________

GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!

Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!

Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:

http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.