23rd February 2011, 10:31 PM
I agree that a small change or shift can make a huge difference in what is a fairly small industry like this. Imagine where archaeology could end up if we saw a big change, or perhaps a significant shift for a part of the current industry. Kevin's example of a small shift in curatorial practise resulting in a significant gain for communities or interested audiences is perfect. It underlines the fact that, from the position of those of us in the commercial sector, we perhaps find it difficult to perceive that value or the possibilities for those who do have the time, funding or ongoing research programs to utilise our products as they are at present (whether or not those people do capitalise on it at present), or just the fact that someone could capitalise on it even if they don't at present. The again, maybe we should use it more......
Incidentally, I had a thought recently. While I feel the need to specify the standard caveats regarding my views on the current financial cuts and distrust of the concept of the Big Society; to shift the responsibility for the social outcomes of the cuts away from central government and onto local government and communities;
What are the opportunities for archaeology and archaeologists (and companies, for that matter) within a huge social concept like the Big Society? Can we find and fill a space within such a thing?:face-huh:
Incidentally, I had a thought recently. While I feel the need to specify the standard caveats regarding my views on the current financial cuts and distrust of the concept of the Big Society; to shift the responsibility for the social outcomes of the cuts away from central government and onto local government and communities;
What are the opportunities for archaeology and archaeologists (and companies, for that matter) within a huge social concept like the Big Society? Can we find and fill a space within such a thing?:face-huh: