Rich,
My 'plaudits' for presenting a reasoned reply to Phil's
concerns. We need more of that...on Britarch too.
Bea
On 1/26/01 8:38 AM Rich Pederick writes:
>
>
>Phil,
>
>I agree that Time Team can be criticised on a number of
>levels and agree with some of the points that you have
>made. Certainly, compromises will have to be made in order
>to present an interesting and entertaining programme. And
>one could certainly criticise the format as being too
>lightweight in that it is not possible to perform an
>archaeological investigation with any depth in a mere 3
>days.
>
>However, on the positive side it has done a great deal to
>educate the public (i know you consider this miseducation
>Phil, but i have spoken to a number of professionals who
>are less critical of the programme than the people you
>cite). And perhaps more importantly, it has done a great
>deal to raise the profile of archaeology in the UK. There
>is precious little money available for archaeology in this
>country as it is, maybe the presentation of archaeology in
>this way will raise the profile of the subject in the
>future, (e.g. by inspiring more young people to enter the
>profession).
>
>Taking your points in turn,
>
>i) i agree that there is likely to be some manipulation of
>the details for the purposes of entertainment, but i don't
>think this is a bad thing. Facts are facts and as long as
>the "experts" are not trying to tell us, for example, that
>it is common to find Roman coins glued back together or a
>La Tene sword would be expected to be found in a layer
>above a 20 year old barbed wire fence, then where is the
>problem?
>
>ii) certainly the media plays a large part. And Tim Taylor
>himself is very adept at playing the media game. But if
>facts are not distorted, where is the problem with that? As
>far as i am aware, the team has a good pedigree and are
>very experienced in the field.
>
>iii) what "facts" are you talking about here Phil? Are you
>accusing the programme makers of falsifying data? Do you
>have any examples?
>
>> It is ironic that these deceivers made a programme out of
>> debunking a hoax. It is possible (nay, likely) that the
>> hoax itself was dreamed up and staged by the Team. That
>> would explain much of what was shown, and how a real La
>> Tene sword was there (if it was real). You bet they have
>> alot of fun. -At our expense!
>
>Now i am a cynical man, but you are clearly super-cynical
>(not that that is a criticism :-) I don't see any smileys
>in your statement so am assuming you are being serious. The
>sword was examined by Ian Stead a recognised expert on Iron
>Age finds and the dig witnessed by (amongst others) Miranda
>Green who needs no introduction to members of this list i'm
>sure. Somebody has certainly faked this site, as the local
>archaeologists seem to have known, and as Tristan Gray
>Hulse clearly recognised back in the mid 1990s. But i'm
>sure there are plenty of genuine sites that TT could
>investigate without the need for faking something for TV.
>
>Present me with facts, Phil. Facts that show that TT is
>"fabrication" and "deceptive" and i will change my mind
>about it. Until then i will continue to watch it with my
>usual blend of awe of the world and free-thought, and enjoy
>it for what it is - a popular archaeological adventure that
>never fails to illuminate.
>
>With best wishes,
>
>Rich
>
>P.S. i don't watch soap operas :-)
>
>On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:43:19 -0000 Philip David
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Friends,
>> As a grad student of archaeology, I feel I should really jump in here...
>> The following is the opinion of my professors and of all the professional
>> archaeologists I have spoken with regarding Time Team:
>> Time Team is pure entertainment, not science ("popular," or otherwise).
>> i) Situations are frequently fabricated to the point where thay are
>> indistinguisable from the genuine.
>> ii) The only "experts" involved with this show are media experts; masters of
>> deception, often deceiving the most qualified archaeologists.
>> iii) It is advised not to watch this show at all if you are interested in
>> scientific truth. Their "facts" are so convincing that even the most
>> intelligent, discerning and sceptical viewer can be conned on a subconcious
>> level where such "facts" are stored.
>>
>> It is ironic that these deceivers made a programme out of debunking a hoax.
>> It is possible (nay, likely) that the hoax itself was dreamed up and staged
>> by the Team. That would explain much of what was shown, and how a real La
>> Tene sword was there (if it was real). You bet they have alot of fun. -At
>> our expense!
>> Unless your viewing preferences are strictly limited to soap operas and the
>> like, I would advise you not to watch Time Team. There are many other
>> legitamate sources of archaeological information available...
>> phil david
>
>----------------------
>Rich Pederick
>[log in to unmask]
>----------------------
>Living Spring Journal - THE International Electronic
>Forum for Research into Holy Wells & Waterlore
>http://www.bath.ac.uk/lispring/journal/front.htm
Beatrice Hopkinson 73071,327@compuserve
|