10th August 2008, 07:41 PM
Thanks Mike for setting the record straight I think. Though I must admit I saw no insult to yourself.
as a matter of interest... who was the writer of Spoilheap?
I myself never got the Jul/August issue... though I was hoping to get a replacement, it has yet to arrive. The spoilheap column asked us to consider... people have, and people find it insulting... the final line in Spoilheap challenges us... in strong terms..
As a matter of interest the ILN stopped running archaeology stories in 1981 - after getting its fingers burnt in a sensational story, where people dared to use imagination, and were discredited.
The challenge there is if we can't like Bonekickers - we lack imagination and should leave digging to those who have.
My view is this... Bonekickers should have left the pretence of 'real' archaeology behind, and been a romp where belief can be suspended... a world where Indiana Jones can escape boulders a world where Mummies can return from the dead.
That is fine by me. To dress it in the tatty clothes of reality - deserves to be challenged in return. What the author of the Spoilheap article sees as jokey blokey joshing.. others see as sexual harassment. :face-confused:
We don't need told to use our imaginations, we don't need told to step back and look beyond the potsherd.. we certainly don't need told that the core values of the IFA are evident in the programme... Why not? because we are real archaeologists - who work in real archaeology - we are diggers and supervisors, illustrators and curators, consultants and unit managers, we are the ones who can look at this programme and say... listen, you don't need to throw in pretend-real archaeology ... make it surreal, make it escapism... because something the author of Spoilheap fails to see is what archaeology is really like in 21st century UK... and it ain't the archaeology they remember it to be.
As far as I can see... there are several clues in the article that point to it being written by or influenced by a certain person. seen all the comments before... made by the same person as well. :face-huh:
There was no slight on BA or yourself Mike, BA is a damn fine magazine... and sure... people might not agree with things - but they should be ready to take flak - and yes considered opinion.. :face-thinks:
I especially liked the line... there are people on the web who mistake their own vomit for thought... I am sure as people on the web, we do not take that personally either... though I suppose we could :face-huh: .. I don't.
I am sure the writer of the Spoilheap is more than welcome here as well. after all, this is a place where comment is welcome.
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
as a matter of interest... who was the writer of Spoilheap?
I myself never got the Jul/August issue... though I was hoping to get a replacement, it has yet to arrive. The spoilheap column asked us to consider... people have, and people find it insulting... the final line in Spoilheap challenges us... in strong terms..
Quote:quote:We're in the Illustrated London News and Look & Learn, where heroic explorers unearthed lost civilizations, found missing links and changed what it is to be human. And if we can't, just for a few hours identify with that, then we should leave the digging - and TV - to those who can.
As a matter of interest the ILN stopped running archaeology stories in 1981 - after getting its fingers burnt in a sensational story, where people dared to use imagination, and were discredited.
The challenge there is if we can't like Bonekickers - we lack imagination and should leave digging to those who have.
My view is this... Bonekickers should have left the pretence of 'real' archaeology behind, and been a romp where belief can be suspended... a world where Indiana Jones can escape boulders a world where Mummies can return from the dead.
That is fine by me. To dress it in the tatty clothes of reality - deserves to be challenged in return. What the author of the Spoilheap article sees as jokey blokey joshing.. others see as sexual harassment. :face-confused: We don't need told to use our imaginations, we don't need told to step back and look beyond the potsherd.. we certainly don't need told that the core values of the IFA are evident in the programme... Why not? because we are real archaeologists - who work in real archaeology - we are diggers and supervisors, illustrators and curators, consultants and unit managers, we are the ones who can look at this programme and say... listen, you don't need to throw in pretend-real archaeology ... make it surreal, make it escapism... because something the author of Spoilheap fails to see is what archaeology is really like in 21st century UK... and it ain't the archaeology they remember it to be.
As far as I can see... there are several clues in the article that point to it being written by or influenced by a certain person. seen all the comments before... made by the same person as well. :face-huh:
There was no slight on BA or yourself Mike, BA is a damn fine magazine... and sure... people might not agree with things - but they should be ready to take flak - and yes considered opinion.. :face-thinks:
I especially liked the line... there are people on the web who mistake their own vomit for thought... I am sure as people on the web, we do not take that personally either... though I suppose we could :face-huh: .. I don't.
I am sure the writer of the Spoilheap is more than welcome here as well. after all, this is a place where comment is welcome.
"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers