• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Archaeological Practicalities In A Digital Age

"...the term ‘infrasomatization’ (Berry 2016) which he defines as the production of constitutive infrastructures; specifically the way that digital algorithms are deployed and change existing infrastructures, and how they alter rationalities by introducing computational interdependencies and structural brittleness into our systems..."

:bored:

I think that there's a subtle but important distinction between popularisation and dumbing-down. I thoroughly enjoyed Time Team; for me, it was unmissable telly. Was I aware that things often didn't occur exactly as depicted on screen? Duh! It served its purpose, however, by keeping archaeology in the public eye in an entertaining, intelligent and informative way.

I agree entirely with brother Coal (above) however, when it comes to space and resources being wasted by museums pandering to fads of the moment. I grit my teeth when I walk past displays which squander irreplaceable floor space in hectoring us about the PC red-button cause du jour.

Further still off-topic: "Interactive" exhibits for kids. No. Just no. For me, one of the last great delights of this country is our tradition of free museums. The Victorians believed that exposing the minds of all to the treasures of the past, and to intelligent comment on said treasures, could elevate people. I agree wholeheartedly. Exposing quiet seekers after knowledge to other people's hyperactive, overcaffeinated, indulged little lords and madames? Not so much.

maximus otter
 
Last edited:
"...the term ‘infrasomatization’ (Berry 2016) which he defines as the production of constitutive infrastructures; specifically the way that digital algorithms are deployed and change existing infrastructures, and how they alter rationalities by introducing computational interdependencies and structural brittleness into our systems..."

:bored:

I think that there's a subtle but important distinction between popularisation and dumbing-down. I thoroughly enjoyed Time Team; for me, it was unmissable telly. Was I aware that things often didn't occur exactly as depicted on screen? Duh! It served its purpose, however, by keeping archaeology in the public eye in an entertaining, intelligent and informative way.

I agree entirely with brother Coal (above) however, when it comes to space and resources being wasted by museums pandering to fads of the moment. I grit my teeth when I walk past displays which squander irreplaceable floor space in hectoring us about the PC red-button cause du jour.

Further still off-topic: "interactive" exhibits for kids. No. Just no. For me, one of the last great delights of this country is our tradition of free museums. The Victorians believed that exposing the minds of all to the treasures of the past, and to intelligent comment on said treasures, could elevate people. I agree wholeheartedly. Exposing quiet seekers after knowledge to other people's hyperactive, overcaffeinated, indulged little lords and madames? Not so much.

maximus otter

LGBTQI+ Neanderthals have a right to recognition.
 
The Victorians believed that exposing the minds of all to the treasures of the past, and to intelligent comment on said treasures, could elevate people.

This belief endured well into the middle of the twentieth century; in fact it was probably at its most potent in the immediate post-war years when cultural well-being was regarded as underpinning the material reconstruction of Europe*. Growing up in a world of free art galleries, museums, libraries etc. was as significant as access to free health-care and welfare. It was certainly directed by public funding and patrician attitudes with regard to taste: the BBC's Third Programme was the opposite of populist but it was essentially free and within reach of all. With the expansion of higher education, intelligent material was visible everwhere. Paperback books and budget-priced records carried the message that the best things were not just accessible but commercially viable. Looking back, this cultural prosperity was taken for granted. Now it has been taken away.

The questions of how and why can be debated but - central to the museums issue - the attention-span of youngsters is shorter in a world which has pandered to the vulnerabilities of their unformed minds. Books, which used to be the gateway to the adult world, are now tailored for each age-group; if books appeal at all, it will be these dungeons, dragons, dystopian victim-narratives and superhero sagas which shout for attention. The rest is greyed-out, though modern editions may redesign Macbeth as a bulging green hulk and notch up the gore to eleven.

The horrid truth is that the generation which wanted to be elevated is in decline, not just ageing and dropping off the map but probably affected by the news-bite world themselves; middle-aged pests are as addicted to their mobiles as any kids. I could maunder on but I really don't see any way of reversing the trend. The greatest irony of all is that the best things have never been more easily accessible and nearly for free online. I spend a lot of time trying to open young minds to the range of stuff available but it is almost never taken-up. Other things are more pressing . . . :omr:

*Here is a transcript of a BBC radio programme from 1945. In patrician style, it introduces the musical favourites of "The Man in the Street." Fear not, "a theatrical landlady" and "a young woman who works in an office" are also included. Anyone curious can click on the links to hear the records they chose. Of course, it may have been made up without leaving the studio but someone thought it was at least plausible! Incidentally, this was not the Brahmin Third Programme but a feature on the mainstream Midlands Home Service.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top