4th April 2010, 11:43 AM
"Geli, slightly confused at your post, is this aimed at me? "
No Dirty Boy the post was not aimed at you personally but was a general comment about the conceit which I have observed over the years. It's so easy to turn a blind eye to many of the shortcomings within commercial archaeology when you're in a secure position with a unit. Obviously the fear of falling out of favour with your employer is a genuine concern, but does that mean you clam up and then convince yourself that you're a doing a good job? My feeling is that many firms employ people who are compliant rather than competent in supervisory positions. Effectively what goes on is somewhat reminiscent of the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale The Emperors New Clothes! I am not trying to say these people have no skill or understanding of archaeology, but in the final analysis they won't rock the boat no matter what the outcome. Looking at many archives during the course of my working life I have felt something approaching despair at the quality of the job they represent. As a colleague has mentioned to me on a number of occasions recently no one seems to mention the importance of the primary record anymore!? Working on a number of projects recently I can only conclude that the site reports are written despite the archive rather than with its aid!
No Dirty Boy the post was not aimed at you personally but was a general comment about the conceit which I have observed over the years. It's so easy to turn a blind eye to many of the shortcomings within commercial archaeology when you're in a secure position with a unit. Obviously the fear of falling out of favour with your employer is a genuine concern, but does that mean you clam up and then convince yourself that you're a doing a good job? My feeling is that many firms employ people who are compliant rather than competent in supervisory positions. Effectively what goes on is somewhat reminiscent of the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale The Emperors New Clothes! I am not trying to say these people have no skill or understanding of archaeology, but in the final analysis they won't rock the boat no matter what the outcome. Looking at many archives during the course of my working life I have felt something approaching despair at the quality of the job they represent. As a colleague has mentioned to me on a number of occasions recently no one seems to mention the importance of the primary record anymore!? Working on a number of projects recently I can only conclude that the site reports are written despite the archive rather than with its aid!