There is, or should be, a preservationist element in industrial
archaeology, as Pat Martin points out. There must also be a strong voice
for the study of process. Unlike historical archaeology, industrial
archaeology is interdisciplinary and should stay that way. Recognition of
IA is essential to the proper study and appreciation of the industrial
heritage. Let me cite an example.

In a particular state there are two standing paper mill buildings.

One, on the National Register, manufactured toilet and facial tissue in its
later years. No machinery survives. It has been converted into a yuppie
warren, with expensive apartments in old and new buildings. It is very
cute.

The other, which has never been considered for the National Register,
operated til last year with a century-old papermaking machine. The mill was
200 years old. The operating mill contained not only that magnificent old
machine, but a room full of special rollers for impressing hundreds of
different watermarks. The mill produced some of the finest rag paper in the
world. Unfortunately, the front wall was ugly, built of cinder block, and
nobody rich lived there. When the mill was closed by the conglomerate that
owns it, the SHPO stood by. Nobody thought it was important.

There are dozens of standing historic canneries in the state, but the only
one on the National Register has been gutted, altered, beautified, and
turned into an office building. It doesn't even resemble a cannery anymore.

That's preservation? That's adaptation, and too frequently the adaptation
of an industrial site means its complete eradication as an industrial site.
Only the relatively unimportant architecture gets any preservation
attention.

That particular state was once at the very heart of American industrial
history, but there is no IA component in the state plan. There is no
industrial specialist in any preservation agency.

IA crosses the boundaries, as Patrick Martin points out, among disciplines
and interests. The study of industrial remains is a legitimate academic
concern, even if you can't force it into the niche of anthropology or any
other department. Until the larger archaeological and academic community
accepts this fact, and embraces the contributions IA has to offer, we will
be ignoring a significant component of our cultural history.


      _____
 ____(_____)__          Those who fail to study history
  |Baby the\            are doomed to repeat it,
  |1969 Land\_|===|_    especially when it is a
  |  ___Rover   ___ |o  graduation requirement.
  |_/ . \______/ . ||
  ___\_/________\_/____________________________________________
  Ned Heite, Camden, DE  http://home.dmv.com/~eheite/index.html