Now that we have "resolved" the question of anthropology v. history
(thanks, Bob), let's get back to the real world.
Many will recall an earlier post from me concerning the now-notorious
syndicated medical columnist Dr. Peter Gott. Months ago he answered a
letter concerning potential health risks of digging in privies and
suggested that the person stop bothering with the mid-20th-century
sites and get into some of the really good 19th-century farmsteads.
Someone else was kind enough to post the full text of his column on
HISTARCH.
Well, I said at the time I was going to write "Dear Dr. Gott" and give
him what for, which I did. Yesterday, some of you may have seen his
rejoinder (interestingly enough, though I recognize some of my own
words, parts of the "letter" he answers are not familiar, so he must
have combined the texts of several while cutting out some of the
really important stuff). Here 'tis:
=========May 17, 2000======
Dear Dr. Gott: In a recent column about digging privies, you
suggested that while this practice would not ordinarily be a health
hazard, your reader would be better off seeking artifacts from really
old sources, such as turn-of-the-century privies.
Shame on you. Your :advice" will serve no other purpose but to
diminish our nation's finite, nonrenewable cultural resources. All in
the name of fun and profit.
We archaeologists have suffered decades of frustration because of
rank amateurs [not my term] with shovels, who up and tear their way
across the country, taking what they want and leaving behind disturbed
sites that lose their value to teach new archaeologists about the
past. I insist that you print a retraction.
Dear Reader: If you believe that 20th century privies are a
cultural resource, God bless you. Your orientation is marvelously
unique. I thought that privies were simply sites for human waster
disposal.
Actually, the reader was merely inuqiring about the possibility of
becoming sick from digging old privies. In my answer, I state the
older the site, the less the chances of health consequences [not
true]. I had no intention of opening a Pandora's box about amateur
archaeology.
But now that you raise the issue, do you really think that
privy-digging is a threat to our national heritage? I doubt that
anything significant would have been put into a privy. Most
interesting memorabilia were destined for the trash heap. Give me a
break. Sorry, no retraction.
==========
Dr. Gott is a clear case of someone educated beyond his intelligence
if ever there was one. Not only does he just not get it, and
contradicts himself at every turn, he is totally misrepresenting his
original column, wherein he clearly stated there was no risk even in
1950s privy fill. I didn't say "the practice would not ordinarily a
health hazard" in my letter, because he did not qualify his statement.
So I guess another letter is in order. Anyone care to join me? I
think a pile-on is in order this time.
Dr. Peter Gott
Newspaper Enterprise Assn.
200 madison Ave.
New York, NY 10016
[log in to unmask]
|