28th February 2012, 10:39 AM
Sorry oilks but I don’t think that you lot should get away with your collective love in about what standards are necessary .
This is typical rubbish
as for what martins commercial and pre-commercial- is meaningless what are you on about
Sites don’t get written up and yes it’s a rule that sites do not get written up. In fact so much so that I would say that I could go to any court and provide ample evidence that it is the rule, the standard. I will go further and say it is not a duty of a field archaeologist to write up their site. Maybe record something yes, write something on the back of an envelope and throw it in the air, if anybody cares to catch it (the shnty archives) its their problem and they should bloody well pay for it. It is the duty of a field archaeologist to look in the field (field being the physical world) and if they get excited and can be bothered to pick something up, then that has got a chance of becoming archaeology (but not much) and when they pick it up they should be fully aware of the cost implications to their families.
Its about time field archaeologists kept the money that they managed to get off the developers and stop wasting it on pretend writing up (oh we do that already) . In a nut shell writing up is bollocks and merely a ruse by the managers to oppress the workers. Its their one and only ruse at that.
This is typical rubbish
Quote:[SIZE=3]what i have a problem with is a free for all approach. sites don't get written up,. people carry out unnecessary work, people fail to carryout necessary work. furthermore, curators across the country have a variety of approaches which are sometimes inconsistent and are occasionally frustrating for their high-handeedness, other times extremely effective and forethoughtful.best practice needs transparency and agreed common standards. we all know ofsites that have been bollixed by poor curator handling, poor excavation, or poor writing up. and as for the shnky archives that are depsoited by some within the profession...[/SIZE]
as for what martins commercial and pre-commercial- is meaningless what are you on about
Sites don’t get written up and yes it’s a rule that sites do not get written up. In fact so much so that I would say that I could go to any court and provide ample evidence that it is the rule, the standard. I will go further and say it is not a duty of a field archaeologist to write up their site. Maybe record something yes, write something on the back of an envelope and throw it in the air, if anybody cares to catch it (the shnty archives) its their problem and they should bloody well pay for it. It is the duty of a field archaeologist to look in the field (field being the physical world) and if they get excited and can be bothered to pick something up, then that has got a chance of becoming archaeology (but not much) and when they pick it up they should be fully aware of the cost implications to their families.
Its about time field archaeologists kept the money that they managed to get off the developers and stop wasting it on pretend writing up (oh we do that already) . In a nut shell writing up is bollocks and merely a ruse by the managers to oppress the workers. Its their one and only ruse at that.
Reason: your past is my past