Professor Howard Williams has produced Archaeodeath Interview number 17 on "Is 'Digging for Treasure' a hit or a flop?" in conversation with Bethany Millburn (@ArchaeoSpook). The video went online overnight.
Coinciding with the publication of the new edited collection 'The Public Archaeology of Treasure' I interview Newcastle University archaeology student Bethany Millburn regarding episodes 1-3 of the new television series 'Digging up Treasure' on Channel 5..
The first 14 minutes introduces and characterises the show and its construction, admitting for all their enthusiasm for this "fresh" approach that it is a bit "eclectic' and a "mishmash". There is then discussion of the presentation ("too much quipping", "informative content derailed by other participants", "cringe"). This then morphs into a discussion of a feeling of a lack of direction in the narrative. The issue of content is broached. It becomes very clear from what they say that they think that the format and content of this are a rip-off of the successful UK archaeo-reality show "Time Team". They discuss the question of the degree to which the presentation of the events in the programme as "community archaeology" is an accurate reflection of what really was going on (suggesting that it could have been better, citing other examples where this was apparently achieved). The final part of the discussion concerns the "red flag term of Treasure" [that led into a plug of Prof. William's long-awaited book that is freshly out]. Then they go about summarising it. I was a bit irritated by the number of times that in discussing it they preceded comments by "to be fair", suggesting an over-exertion to find something good to say about a programme based on Collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record (because: "metal detecting"). Tellingly, both discutants said they would take part in a potential second series if asked, not seeing anything wrong with the underlying concept, nor seeing any danger of getting their own message derailed by idiotic TV-speak.
What I found particularly significant is that although the issue of "protection of the archaeological record" and the damage hoiking individual artefacts out of the context was alluded to, it was quickly sidestepped. Towards the end there is some confusion in the discussion concerning the issue of "metal detecting licences", concerning permits and landowners' permissions and the issue of preservation of the archaeological records. Also the detectorists' own "we aren't nighthawks, so wot we do i'nt damaging" is trotted out here. Then we get the "heavy ploughing" mantra, followed by the "could be worse - Nazi War Diggers" argument. Disappointing.
Not once do we get any mention in these 55 minutes that archaeology is not an exclusively object-centric discipline. On the contrary. Possibly the PAS has managed to convince many Brits that all archaeologists do is "dig up old things to tell stories about" - but endorsing and disseminating such a picture of what it is to the wider public does no service at all to the discipline.
No comments:
Post a Comment