ethnic minority

[eggbasket]

Given that large chunks of the ethnically English population don't give a stuff about their own archaeology and history, how do you expect to engage those whose families have only recently arrived in this country? After all, if a 6 year old child whose grandparents emigrated to England and whose parents were born in England still describes himself as Indian, what is the relevance of English archaeology to this person's roots (ref. Eggy's colleague, pers comm)? They obviously consider themselves as separate from British culture so why would it's archaeology engage them?

WRT representation, should the number of people from minority groups reflect the total population of the country, or just that part of it that actually cares about English cultural heritage?

Can the interest that some show in English archaeology not be considered in the same light as the interest shown in Chinese Neolithic archaeology by some ethnically British people? That is, it is not directly relevant to their native culture but it intellectually stimulates them.

Finally, as if I had not rambled enough already, why would ethnic minorities want to engage with English archaeology and culture when we are constantly pounded with stories and news articles about why we should be ashamed to be English? It seems to me that there is such a huge movement out there denigrating everything English that there is no reason for anyone to want to subscribe to English culture be it represented by the archaeology, history or anything else.

Cheers,
Eggbasket
Gentleman Adventurer and Antique

"Ask not for whom the bell tolls, the ringing's in your head"

[Tim]

When I was in Uni, several friends had worked on digs in the Carribean. One was reading a book on the archaeology of the carribean on the Tube and was asked by several afro-carribean people where they could buy the book. The interest is there but not catered too.
The IoA, UCL always had many ethnic/foreign staff/students. That was Wheelers original dream.

Little Tim

[leg11aug]

Everything Eggbasket just said. Did occur to me though that european archaeology as an institution, might have different connotations for someone who's(sp?) country of origin was plundered in the 19th/early 20th century by gentlemen "archaeologists", just a thought.

When the going gets weird...

[judy]

1- People who accidentally enrol to study the subject drop out in the first or second year any way.

2- Any one who studied archaeology may know that you can?t succeed in it unless you love it. And archaeology is not the history of this country or that, it the science it self, digging, inspecting, analysing and so on, so the argument of black and white does not work here, the only thing that is clear from our discussion is the lack of ethnic minority in this field of study which I think we need to address in the coming conference, and I don?t think we going to have thousand of ethnic minority graduate taking over British archaeology, do you?

3- leg11aug: What about the 21st century dear?

4- kevin wooldridge: thank you, your input was very useful. But the worry is not about being outdated culturally rather the fact that people don?t want to employ you when they see your name because of what all of you have said, they haven?t seen lots of ethic student in the class room and so they automatically assume you are foreign and don?t understand British archaeology.




And please forgive me but even the cows are not British so I don?t know why every one in a huff about a mere suggestion, Any way I learned a lot and I?ll do my best to get the paper ready for September.

(I don?t like to say I apologise but for those who think I stepped on their toes I do if I offended them unintentionally.


I do not agree with the argument of being ashamed of being British, because if you study archaeology you?ll know that many other countries were "Britain" at some stage during their history).

English is my third language so some tolerance please.


??The weird really get going

[eggbasket]

Judy,

There is absolutely no need to apologise for your grasp of the English language; there are many native speakers whose command of the language and ability to express themselves in it is poorer than your own.

To address some of your points:

I don't think that anyone is worried about people from minority groups taking over British archaeology. But I do think that archaeology and its interpretation is tied more closely to the social and historical framework of the country than you give it credit for. One example I can think of is the Ban Po Neolithic village in China. This was touted as a proto-communist society because there was a large central hut. The Chinese interpreted this as a communal meeting house where decisions for the whole community would be voted on. If this had been found in the UK there is a good chance that it would have been interpreted as the headman's hut, finds notwithstanding.

You talk of British archaeology as if it is a single entity. This is not the case. If all of your experience is in England you will find it hard to get a job in Scotland because, in my experience, Scottish archaeology is seen as different to English.

I do not see anyone as being in a huff over what has been said. I think that there is room for constructive debate here now that the subject has been broached. One problem we have here is that it is often difficult to have a frank and open exchange of views regarding ethnic minorities, even when trying to be constructive, because many people are overly sensitive and touchy about the subject.

The comments about being ashamed are not about being British, they are about being English. There is a difference. It is perfectly alright to be Welsh, Scottish or Irish and be proud of that origin, but the overwhelming impression that the English have is that it is a shameful thing to be English. We were not even allowed to have a display of ships to celebrate the Battle of Trafalgar without them being called red and blue fleets for fear of offending the French and Spanish. The Battle of Trafalgar was a major historical event that had a significant effect on the result of the Napoleonic Wars and resulted in the death of a national hero. Why is it shameful for the English to celebrate this event, when the Scots fete Wallace or Bruce openly? Culturally, England is being castrated too. The recent fuss over the "Winter Lights" in Lambeth is one example of this. I find this highly offensive, but it has a bearing on why some might not wish to delve deeper into the culture and history of England. After all, why bother when it is a shameful thing to be an English person?

Anyway, I look forward to your paper.

Cheers,
Eggbasket
Gentleman Adventurer and Antique

"Ask not for whom the bell tolls, the ringing's in your head"

[BAJR Host]

This debate is a real star... fascinating and informative on many levels.. A real change from many of the normal topics.

I look forward to your paper... I think it will be of real interest.



Another day another WSI?

[leg11aug]

Judy. Good point! B)

When the going gets weird...

[eggbasket]

quote:Originally posted by leg11aug

When the going gets weird...

the weird turn pro ...

Cheers,
Eggbasket
Gentleman Adventurer and Antique

"Ask not for whom the bell tolls, the ringing's in your head"

[judy]

eggbasket ??????.Posted - 04/11/2005 : 13:40:01
There is absolutely no need to apologise for your grasp of the English language; there are many native speakers whose command of the language and ability to express themselves in it is poorer than your own.

You really made me laugh (thank you any way)


The Chinese interpreted this as a communal meeting house where decisions for the whole community would be voted on. If this had been found in the UK there is a good chance that it would have been interpreted as the headman's hut, finds notwithstanding.


(A socialist thinking English archaeologist might have reached the same conclusion. NO?)

The argument of English Scottish Indian Archaeology is really poor because we are talking about mankind in general, they just happen to be on a land called England at the present time, and who knows what would it be in 3000 years.


BAJR Host
Finally some thing interesting you.
Honestly my interest was in British archaeology, but never mind (I started the topic I deserve to be punish for it).


If the topic turns personal with out any concerns for others feelings I might as well call it a day I thought I?m among open minded colleagues.

[BAJR Host]

Fear not judy... I can see no personal slights in this thread. What I can see is an exciting look into archaeology/ identity / concepts of origin and touching on the odd concept where it is ok for 'British Archaeology' to exploit another countries archaeology .... what would we feel if a team of Uzbeck archaeologists for example turned up in Little Diddleswick and began opening up trenches and employing locals as shovelmen?

That aside... a comment of Scottish Archaeology to make you laugh... when I was working at Melrose Abbey and we found the heart of Robert the Bruce (a true Scot... ooooops... I mean Anglo Norman!) it fell to me as the only Scottish (by birth) person on the site team to carry his heart to Edinburgh... this was at the request of teh site Director (also english) who laughed and suggested I had to represent the 13 knights of scotland who first carried his heart!

:face-approve:

But you are right about an emasculation of what it is to be English.. too much embarresment about the past... rather than moving forward... (blimey the Scots know b####r all about their real past... its all Bonnie Prince Charlie and how the Scots drove out the Romans .... I weep sometimes)[:0]

Anyhoo.... I feel the conference would be best held at a 'hub point in the middle of the UK... So York / Bradford / Sheffield... York preffered.



Another day another WSI?