tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137246730421866659.post1192599216623465478..comments2023-10-09T06:54:04.099-06:00Comments on Past Times and Present Tensions: The thrill of the hunt: addendumJohn Hooker FSAhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10001080340384925879noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137246730421866659.post-36059334430099232342014-12-09T10:25:10.486-07:002014-12-09T10:25:10.486-07:00Hi John,
In my opinion, the sort of personality t...Hi John,<br /><br />In my opinion, the sort of personality that is most likely to be best at interpreting an archaeological site is also the sort of personality that dislikes report writing. A corollary is that the sort of person who is best at report writing is also the sort of person least likely to be an innovator. Whose name appears at the top of the paper is most often based on their status rather than their ability to write concise reports.<br /><br />As archaeological excavation is a destructive process, the absence of an excavation report equates to complete destruction. Vandalism, indeed. Perhaps a lot of the criticism against collectors and detectorists is unconsciously guilt-based. The use of lying and ad hominem attacks certainly points in that direction. A common Black PR technique is to accuse an opponent of what the accuser is doing to deflect suspicion, and every conscious act can also be found as an unconscious act in some others. Nothing that a couple of hundred hours of Jungian analysis couldn't fix though ;-)<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />JohnJohn Hooker FSAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10001080340384925879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3137246730421866659.post-13069985761486840602014-12-09T09:02:45.656-07:002014-12-09T09:02:45.656-07:00Excavation reports are a can of worms few archaeol...Excavation reports are a can of worms few archaeologists want opened, or indeed openly debated. Failure to to do a follow-up excavation report is vandalism of the worst kind. Sadly for society, those representative archaeological bodies obviously lack any credible oversight or the ability to enforce standards equally lacking. Unfit for purpose is a phrase that springs to my mind.<br /><br />I agree too, with your sentiments that:- "So when you see criticism of the amateur by the professional, just ask yourself what that particular professional has discovered and published. If the answer is "nothing" then thoughts about conservatism, sour grapes and even jealousy should enter the picture,..." <br /><br />...which certainly deals with one undistinguished archaeo-blogger of our mutual acquaintance and I look forward to his yap, yapping, ad hominen abuse.<br /><br />Very best regards<br /><br />John Howland<br />EnglandJohn Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752752229384757087noreply@blogger.com