Re: What did Indiana do for Archaeology?

Posted by bennett from spider-wk033.proxy.aol.com (205.188.198.163) on Tuesday, October 30, 2001 at 6:39pm :

In Reply to: What did Indiana do for Archaeology? posted by Chris from morgana.lamp.ac.uk (194.80.178.1) on Tuesday, October 30, 2001 at 11:08am :

I'll try to answer that from the perspective of a modern archaeologist --

Indiana Jones generated an interest in archaeology, without a doubt, so that is a positive thing. I seriously doubt that incidents of graverobbing, looting etc increased after the movies. Although his methods are not modern, nor are they really acceptable for the time, the movies make it clear that he is the ethical archaeologist, trying to do the right thing, versus the unscrupulous folks like Belloq, those trying to exploit the Chankara stones, and those looking for the grail. While the details are not right, his motivation is clear -- a kid would be far less likely to loot something after seeing Indiana Jones if that message got across --

I think Indiana Jones has not been particularly negative for archaeology. I think much of the reaction against it came from archaeologist who do very boring archaeology and would naturally feel negatively towards his kind of archaeology.

I should mention that not all archaeology is the boring kind you describe. I chose, for instance, to work in a remote area of Central America -- my archaeology involves trips through the jungle on foot and mule, going down rivers on rafts, upriver in canoes, and everything in between. There are parts that are tedious, sure (like report writing), but when this is interspersed with the exciting stuff, it's really great. I have seen a lot of archaeologists who spend a lot of time explaining how it is 'not like the movies'. Well, mine is sort of like the movies, to a degree (as much as real life can be) -- and part of the reason I designed it like that was because I loved the adventure in these movies.

That's my two cents --

Bennett

Follow Ups: Re: What did Indiana do for Archaeology? - Chris 4:31am 10/31/2001 Post a Followup Name: E-Mail: ( default ) Subject: Message: : I'll try to answer that from the perspective of a modern archaeologist -- : Indiana Jones generated an interest in archaeology, without a doubt, so that is a positive thing. I seriously doubt that incidents of graverobbing, looting etc increased after the movies. Although his methods are not modern, nor are they really acceptable for the time, the movies make it clear that he is the ethical archaeologist, trying to do the right thing, versus the unscrupulous folks like Belloq, those trying to exploit the Chankara stones, and those looking for the grail. While the details are not right, his motivation is clear -- a kid would be far less likely to loot something after seeing Indiana Jones if that message got across -- : I think Indiana Jones has not been particularly negative for archaeology. I think much of the reaction against it came from archaeologist who do very boring archaeology and would naturally feel negatively towards his kind of archaeology. : I should mention that not all archaeology is the boring kind you describe. I chose, for instance, to work in a remote area of Central America -- my archaeology involves trips through the jungle on foot and mule, going down rivers on rafts, upriver in canoes, and everything in between. There are parts that are tedious, sure (like report writing), but when this is interspersed with the exciting stuff, it's really great. I have seen a lot of archaeologists who spend a lot of time explaining how it is 'not like the movies'. Well, mine is sort of like the movies, to a degree (as much as real life can be) -- and part of the reason I designed it like that was because I loved the adventure in these movies. : That's my two cents -- : Bennett Optional Link ( default ) URL: Title: Optional Image Link ( default ) URL: This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com