Hi all again
before India's truthful history takes over, let me say to Ehren that,
yes, I know Miles Russell's book and like it a lot -- thanks for
recommending it anyway and now everybody may feel (rightly!) that they
have to read it!
And to Sarah: defining pop culture is indeed difficult. What I mean is
the image of archaeology those people get who don't make any particular
effort to find out but just live their lives and take in what they come
across. So, yes, both TV and Agatha are a part of it, as is the way
people perceive some major heritage sites like Stonehenge. I guess that
is what you suspected anyway. I am not too sure if I want to get much
further into these kind of definitional subtleties -- after all, much of
popular culture itself is ill defined and without clear boundaries, and
it may well be entirely inappropriate to impose any rigid scheme on my
subject matter. So that is what I am interested in!
Cornelius
Cornelius Holtorf
Riksantikvarieämbetet, Stockholm
http://members.chello.se/cornelius
>>> [log in to unmask] 03-03-06 12:41 >>>
Dear Cornelius,
how are you defining popular culture? Does this mean representations
that are
not controlled by archaeologists, or simply representations that have a
mass
audience? Does Time team count? Does Agatha Christie? Is it something
you see
when you aren't lookijgn for archaeology (so as to discount heritage
presentation
which is meant to be popular culture? Not trying to be awkard (honest)
just
want to bend my mind around the things you are interested in.
thanks
Sarah
ps - I found your site a bit slow to load, any chance you could
resample the
images a bit more? S
|