10th June 2005, 05:00 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by kevin wooldridge(rant mode/on)
combs its hair, smells all kind of clean
See what I don't get is why combing your hair and washing is so looked down upon by many archaeoologists. Why is this? I have shared dig houses with people who did not know what soap was and it just made being around them extremely unpleasant. Actually bothering to keep clean and take care of your appearance shows a level of respect for yourself that can carry over into your work. (Bloody hell, I sound like my parents).
WRT "employment is on an equal basis with equal shares of responsibility and reward" just try getting experienced archaeologists to accept that. Why should someone who has worked in the field for years and is really good be paid the same as someone fresh onto the site? This has been one of the biggest complaints that I have heard at units where I have worked. In many cases, experienced staff are paid the same as inexperienced staff because they were employed at the same time but the experienced staff are expected to train the inexperienced staff. This leads into another point; some people are simply not competent enough to take on an equal share of the responsibility, so why should they get an equal share of the reward. Some of these people that are incompetent have been working on site for years and have just never learnt anything. Others are not willing to accept the responsibility, while others are just plain bloody-minded and awkward and will not work as part of a team, whatever you do. Finally, in a commercial world, which units are likely to get together and sort out a system like this? Or is it to be imposed from outside and if so how?
(rant mode/off)
Changing job titles seems a little futile to me. It's the kind of thing that people who want to appear to be doing something without actually doing anything do. As a digger, I never had a problem with that title but others seem to be rabidly opposed to it. What I would be more worried about is how I am treated and paid, not my job title. So, the important questions are; does my unit provide the appropriate PPE? Is my pay reasonable compared to the marketplace? Does my employer show me a decent level of respect by communicating all the right information to me in good time so that I can organise myself? Do my co-workers show me a reasonable level of respect by thinking about my health and safety in the same way that I consider theirs when working? See, it's not all about the units, it is also about the way that your co-workers treat you and how you treat them. If they have no respect for you and don't wear the PPE they are bought and don't act in a safe manner then you are better off out of there because chances are they will cause you problems regardless of how much respect you show them. So, I guess what I am saying is that the name does not really matter as much as the way people act, and too many archaeologists treat each other like ****, not just as bosses but also as co-workers.
As far as the original question goes, I reckon the pinnacle of fieldwork has to be supervising/directing a site. You are out on site with the overview of the fieldwork and you then get to bring it all together and tell the story of the site (in theory). Which brings me to another question; why do so many archaeologists think that the purpose of archaeology is to dig things up and nothing more? Many people I know seem to think that writing the site up is not proper archaeology. Why is this?
Cheers,
Eggbasket
There's nothing like a Dane ...