6th July 2005, 04:08 AM
The girl who quit probably realized it would be better to work with muppets than work for muppets. Why are there less ethnic minorities in archaeology? Is it just the statistics, there aren't exactly massive numbers of archaeologists.
There seems to be a strong sense of roots in archaeology, in America there are more archaeologists in ethnic groups that see themselves as having roots in that country's past, particularly Amerindians (what with it being their country and everything) and Black Americans (having been uprooted to America in the 16th century). The attachment of British ethnic minorities to Britain's past is presumably lesser as their arrival is not as emotive, relatively recent (in terms of large population movements) and their history can be traced to a different country quite easily (not having been repressed as it has in America).
Maybe archaeology as an academic discipline is closer than we would like to the unpalatable image of the Great White Hunter. Archaeology does not contribute a great deal to society and it could be argued that it is a trait of decadent, imperialistic western society. Would you trust a society that keeps looking back over it's shoulder? What are we trying to justify? Are we looking for something to back up a feeling of superiority?
I did read some research that suggested the lack of ethnic minorities in archaeology was due to the fact that they are under pressure to get higher paid professional jobs. If we are honest this is probably because until recently our society was at least moderately racist and these kinds of jobs just weren't open to ethnic minorities. Are all archaeologists the children of middle class bank managers who just want to get dirty and experience some hardship so they can sleep at night? Then again, most unit managers know they would be shot dead in the street if they put a group of non-white people to work in a field under archaeologists pay and conditions.
There seems to be a strong sense of roots in archaeology, in America there are more archaeologists in ethnic groups that see themselves as having roots in that country's past, particularly Amerindians (what with it being their country and everything) and Black Americans (having been uprooted to America in the 16th century). The attachment of British ethnic minorities to Britain's past is presumably lesser as their arrival is not as emotive, relatively recent (in terms of large population movements) and their history can be traced to a different country quite easily (not having been repressed as it has in America).
Maybe archaeology as an academic discipline is closer than we would like to the unpalatable image of the Great White Hunter. Archaeology does not contribute a great deal to society and it could be argued that it is a trait of decadent, imperialistic western society. Would you trust a society that keeps looking back over it's shoulder? What are we trying to justify? Are we looking for something to back up a feeling of superiority?
I did read some research that suggested the lack of ethnic minorities in archaeology was due to the fact that they are under pressure to get higher paid professional jobs. If we are honest this is probably because until recently our society was at least moderately racist and these kinds of jobs just weren't open to ethnic minorities. Are all archaeologists the children of middle class bank managers who just want to get dirty and experience some hardship so they can sleep at night? Then again, most unit managers know they would be shot dead in the street if they put a group of non-white people to work in a field under archaeologists pay and conditions.