HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Alasdair Brooks <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 19 Sep 1997 15:16:41 BST
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (48 lines)
On Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:21:40 BST Susan Buckham wrote:
 
> Dear All,
>
> At the moment there is no student fee available for
> the above conference. Is this stopping undergraduate
> and postgraduate attendance? A phone call which I
> made to Geoff Egan today hints that a new policy
> will be debated for future SPMA conferences (and there
> is a possibility of a compromise for the SMPA/SHA one)
> if we demonstrate that this is indeed so. Please show
> some solidarity comrades and get in touch with the
> conference organisers either by snail mail, fax
> or by emailling Histarch.
 
<snip>
 
This situation over the joint conference fees is utterly disgraceful.
It's appalling that students are essentially discouraged from attending by
this unfortunate refusal to offer a discount on the already eyebrow-raising
conference fee of 75 pounds / 150 dollars.  This isn't a matter of committment,
this is a matter of stretching an already limited budget to the
breaking point.  In case anyone hadn't noticed, London ain't cheap.
 
If the organisers want a conference solely for the
purpose of allowing the Old Boys (and Girls) network to pat themselves
on the back while spending 26 pounds to eat fish and chips in Chatham
(hardly the most charming location in the UK - and I should know, I was
born there), then so be it, but a little truth in advertising wouldn't have hurt
.
On the other hand, the excellent program (and it _is_ an excellent
program) is such that students, undergraduate and graduate, would
clearly benefit from the opportunity to share in the wider conference
experience.  Hasn't it occurred to anyone that the students who are
being left out of the conference are precisely the same people who
will be presenting papers at this sort of conference in the near future?
 
That said, would the organisers be willing to relent and offer a student
rate if enough people - student or non-student - contact
them to register their disapproval?  I would like to join Sue Buckham
in urging as many HISTARCH subscribers as possible to contact the
SPMA/SHA conference organisers forthwith.
 
Thatcher may be gone, but clearly her spirit lives on somewhere in the
bowels of SPMA.
 
Alasdair M. Brooks

ATOM RSS1 RSS2