+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Archaeology and the global crisis (/showthread.php?tid=2291)
Archaeology and the global crisis - BAJR Host - 2nd September 2009
Damn...wish I had seen the long reply!
I would contour that although what you say is true in many cases, it is just that, the public benefit/private cost ratio is often non existent, where reading about another null result watching brief is not that interesting. (and thats for the member of the public who actually even knows about OASIS ... the HERs themselves term OASIS as a development tool rather than a public resource)
The output for the public that is more often wanted is the immediate... ie hey, we have archaeologists in town...WOW... ah.. we will have to wait for six months until you are gone and even then, we have to work out for ourselves where to find out what happened.. so by the time the report is out, I have lost interest. Sad but true.
I am of course able to reel off many sites that have public involvement AND/OR press releases.. BUT in general most of what we do is seen only by the few.
paulbelford Wrote:external (the state of the economy, for example) and internal (poor management, for example)I agree with that, but I was perhaps not clear in what I meant (as usual) and I was trying to suggest that by trying to change our public perception from bearded stripey jumpered diggers to hi viz commercial professionals, we may have left behind the very thing that made people want archaeology and see it as important to them.
PLUS the crisis...AND the poor management. Archaeologists should stick to archaeology and get managers :face-confused:
Archaeology and the global crisis - paulbelford - 2nd September 2009
Quote:I was trying to suggest that by trying to change our public perception from bearded stripey jumpered diggers to hi viz commercial professionals, we may have left behind the very thing that made people want archaeology and see it as important to them
Part of me does wonder whether this is indeed the case, every day. I would hope that we can be both professional and engaging! But that is a very difficult tightrope to try and walk along, and I know that most of us do try and do that to the best of our abilities. Some days archaeology is utterly **** and very depressing, but as long as for most of the time it is personally engaging, rewarding (not financially of course) and we learn new things, then I will continue to do it!
To be entirely honest and personal, I am not sure that we will ever gain parity with other professions (such as architects, engineers, lawyers and doctors)... simply because society regards new buildings, roads, legal services and medical treatment as essentials, and an understanding of the past as a luxury. You and I (and all of us) all know that where we are today is entirely a result of where we have come from, and understanding the past is essential. But I think we are in the minority. For instance we have a Prime Minister with a PhD in History from Edinburgh who desires to 'streamline' the planning process to encourage development.
Conflicting demands, and no easy answers. If we want to change things we just have to keep shouting as loud as we can - and for that reason I genuinely believe that getting behind the IfA and presenting a united professional front is the only way forward.
Archaeology and the global crisis - RedEarth - 2nd September 2009
I really don't think people actually care that much whether we have beards and stripey jumpers or whether we are clean shaven and wear hi-viz vests (or indeed, whether we are women - who would probably have more sense than to be seen in a stripey jumper
). If they are interested in archaeology they will be interested regardless. There is nothing inherently wrong with the system and planning and no reason why it couldn't provide a framework for improved professionalism/pay/conditions etc etc. I totally agree with David that being able to explain the results of what we are finding (if they are actually interesting) at the time would be ideal but it is not always practical, the developer might well not be interested (and indeed wonder why they had to fund that as well - it's hard enough getting them to fund the work and the post-ex in the first place - would it be better if they paid for a big open day, perhaps with balloons and clowns thrown in and we forgot about publishing the results?). I get the impression that developers are scared in some cases that if they find something interesting a local group will spring up to try and prevent its destruction. I would also ask this - in the ye olden days, pre PPGs, when people were given the occassional opportunity to dive in front of a bulldozer to save nationally important remains, did they always have the opportunity to present the results to the public at the time it happened?
I think Paul is totally right about the public/private funding - that really isn't the issue.
Archaeology and the global crisis - BAJR Host - 2nd September 2009
RedEarth Wrote:I would also ask this - in the ye olden days, pre PPGs, when people were given the occassional opportunity to dive in front of a bulldozer to save nationally important remains, did they always have the opportunity to present the results to the public at the time it happened?
From what I remember...yes...indeed it was often the public that did it... before you had to have a piece of paper that somehow gave an air of mystery to a job that when push comes to shove is about observation, discovery, interest and a desire to share. The fact that many of the public, with some training and a bit of help can actually do a pretty good job at excavating, surveying, field walking AND publish reports shows that what we do as a job can just as easily be done as a hobby.
The question keeps coming back though... and over the years the answers are talked about plenty... but where be the action? And I don't mean setting up sub committees to look at the viability of producing a report to understand the profile in a standard table format within a framework of stakeholder led issue driven concepts. I mean, the real nitty gritty of what it physically takes to challenge the current methods of archaeology, the current issues in archaeology and the current presentation of archaeology.
Look for example at the recent Guardian Article... on how to get involved in archaeology....
No commercial Sites there.. but of course, the article was for people who wanted to get involved in archaeology... see what I mean.
and add to that this anon quote from the same article
Quote:"Perhaps I expect too much; management acting in an ethical manner to their staff or developers not reaching for the minimum costs because there is work of archaeological significance under their proposed new development," he says sadly."Then we see where archaeology in the commercial world is heading.... Cut the tenders....shave off the costs.... and er... the future? Perhaps we do live in the past.
Rather than restructuring, and taking the opportunity, we do seem to be heads down and driving on... with the odd chat about it to help us on our way?
Archaeology and the global crisis - Guest - 2nd September 2009
paulbelford Wrote:keep shouting as loud as we can
But what are 'we' shouting ... and to who? I have yet to hear? I for one am happy to stand alongside the IfA and the IHBC and other groups. where a unified, well thought out, agreed and sensible plan is put forward...
What do we want... " er....stuff! " oh, I thought we wanted other stuff! "er...hang on, I demand that we add my stuff" etc... }
paulbelford Wrote:I am not sure that we will ever gain parity with other professions
I agree, and this is the point, perhaps we should stop trying to be like the big boys, and be ourselves.. then WE can sort out OUR own problems
Archaeology and the global crisis - paulbelford - 2nd September 2009
Quote:what we do as a job can just as easily be done as a hobby
Er, isn't this a bit of a sweeping statement? So why don't I give up now, become a merchant banker and fanny about in my spare time with a metal detector and some mates... throw out artefacts that don't interest me (oh what's that, a piece of flint, nah... oh some iron-working slag, nah... ooooh shiney metal, oooh!), not record to any acceptable standards, fail to produce a report... and in so doing destroy another bit of 'finite and non-renewable resource'? Hmmm. I would hope that my experience, qualifications and professional ethic might count for something?
!
Archaeology and the global crisis - BAJR Host - 2nd September 2009
to continue that quote... it does say that it can be done WITH archaeologists who have experience, qualifications (if you like) and professional ethics? I am able to be both and to accept both... I have no formal qualifications in archaeology, but do seem to be a reasonable archaeologist... I write my reports and present to the public, I am happy in my archaeology. I also work with people now that carry on archaeology as a hobby (I did not say detecting mind ) and are merchant bankers (well, today they were investment brokers) they dug the hole where I want the hole, they took the levels with the right heights.. they took samples and bagged finds... I and others provide the expertise to make sure it works to a level of competence and finish off with a good report...
Remember this is a debate, and a debate about archaeology and the future of the profession... you seem to think the opposite to the holy archaeologist is the evil MD. and that is a sweeping statement as well.
[Edit - for clarification] For example, I would decide on where the trench went (pro) they can dig the trench (am) I would set up the total station and locate it in 3D (Pro) they can take the readings etc (am) I have the knowledge to guide, they have the enthusiasm to keep me going!
Lets keep this on track... argue against me, by all means. :face-confused:
Now I am off to an adult learning to teach people how to dig! :0
Archaeology and the global crisis - paulbelford - 2nd September 2009
Sorry for the momentary burst of anger and, yes, a sweeping statement of my own! Don't get me wrong, there is a great deal that metal-detectorists, merchant bankers and others can contribute to our understanding of the past. I am not an 'either-or' person. I too work with a wide range of volunteers and others, and have worked with many archaeologists whose route into the profession was extremely interesting, let us say. I would suggest that the issue of 'qualifications' is probably worthy of another thread...
As you say, this is a debate about archaeology and the future of the profession. I agree that we can only survive as a profession if we are prepared to engage widely with everyone. But equally we must stay true to our own values and ethos.
To go back to the original discussion: I think there is a great deal of potential in the current climate to think about where we are, what we are all about and what we are doing. But I am not sure that the system of private sector archaeology is the cause of the problems we all face. To that end I do think that, as you say, 'standing alongside' the professional institutes which do (like it or not) represent us to government and others, is essential. Moreover, discussing and debating the issues across Europe, listening to and learning from colleagues with other experiences (as the EAA session which this thread began with is going to do) is the only way forward.
The resulting action may be slow, but I do think that action is possible... yet as I said in an earlier post, it will always be gradual and inevitably tempered by the demands of other sections of society.
:face-confused:
Archaeology and the global crisis - RedEarth - 2nd September 2009
I've said many a time that you could pretty much find someone to do almost every job in archaeology for nothing, assuming you were willing to spend a lot longer doing the work. That is surely one of the main reasons it doesn't happen, the planning guidelines are there to provide a way for the archaeology to be dealt with at a realistic speed and within a larger framework that covers al sorts of broadly environmental factors. You could find volunteers to do almost any job, within reason. It's got nothing to do with gaining and 'air of mystery' it's about ensuring work will be done on time, to a decent standard with a suitably archived result. Not that this couldn't happen if 'non professional' archaeologists were doing it but I am aware of any number of pieces of work done in my area in the 1980s that have never seen the light of day - why? In some cases at least because there was no planning control badgering for the results to be published so the condition could be discharged. PPG is a stick to beat archaeologists, as well as developers.
Not only that, but how many volunteers would happily choose to stand in the rain for hours watching a machine knowing full well that the chances are the best you will find is a few 19th century field drains? People who have the choice would be far better off sticking to sites that might actually add to our knowledge!
Archaeology and the global crisis - BAJR Host - 2nd September 2009
nae worries... I am trying to be provocative to spark a real hot debate ! and I am off as I said to do some adult learning class... can't wait!