New Titanic Evidence...?

[Guest]

There has bee NO serious archaeology, even in the sense of a good "non-disturbance survey" done on this ship. It is all curiosity-seeking and sensationalism. Now, of course, the wreck site is so completely disturbed by the thrill-mongers that only a minimum of archaeological value even remains

i watched the scott cameron documentery on discovery not too long ago and i can say that it fit right in with this description. cameron wasn't there for any reason but to show off his psuedo expertise on the ship.

even though i find that the titanic has little archaeological value anyways, because it is just too recent, i find the attitude surrounding this disaster is more childish than scientific. here are a couple quots fromthe book 'Underwater Archaeology' by Jean Yves-Blot pg. 160:

"The Titanic, especially,has roused strong emotionsover the question of 'to touch' or 'not to touch.'"

"The Titanic is no morean archaeologicalsite than is the andrea dora, yet there have been no outcries about disturbing the latter."

"It is said that the Ttianic should not be disturbed because lives were lostduring her sinking, but such reasoning would put both salvos and nautical archaeologists out of business around the world."

reverence can only go so far, and i do not see what makes the titanic more special than say pompeii or thera. people died inthose catastrophes also so should we stop all archaeological investigation because of that?

people like cameron, who hold no real ownership rights or professional expertise, should not be allowed to dictate or complain about what happens to the titanic. that should be left to the owners of the vessel.

i certainly am tired of hearing about the ship especially since no one can go there to view it as a memorial or that it was the last ship ever built. the disaster certainly didn't curtail the shipping industry, so why are people so hung up over it (besides the ghoulish attraction).

either bring it all up or let it rest in history in peace.

as a p.s.--- i saw thew modern movie once and only once. if that is a woman's idea of romance--a man dying for her-- then they better think again. for if all men died for their women to be romantic, soon there would be no men left to be romantic with. or why would the idea of your lover dying for you be considered romantic? the woman then is left alone while her lover is gone. that sure isn't romantic.

[Der Lange]

Ahhhh, the romance writers and filmmakers are in a different category. You can find THEIR discussion board --- over ... THERE.

I am not wandering anywhere into the land of literary form and content with the people here - way too much opportunity to get seriously mired. Even discussing form for professional papers could lead to some nasty grammar baiting.

I disagree that the Titanic does not have - or did not have - archaeologcial significance. Despite its relatively recent origins, this ship is also the parent of cruise liner design of today. Her technology is a direct ancestor of that in use right now. The metals, woods, glass, and other materials used in her construction, while revised, supplanted and improved, remain linear antecedents of liner components now. There were even primitive forms of plastics employed in Titanic's construction.

Titanic had three "sister" ships. One was lost in a most mysterious accident a few years later in WWI, the Brittanic. Although present evidence suggests she was sunk by a mine, no one is even yet sure. None of Titanic's sister ships survive, although the Harland-Wolff designs and plans do. Both Titanic and Brittanic represent important markers in ship design and significant subjects of serious study, partly because they SANK and thus survive.

At least Britannic has managed to avoid the notoriety and ostrich-peeping bent upon her sister vessel. I hope that in the near future, serious marine archaeologists equipped properly for the job will devote months every year to detailed examination of the Titanic wreck pieces and give us a genuinely meaningful report of the wreck, its components, and the best available analysis of why she sank.