Is it "curating" or simply good old hoarding ...

[ed]

I wonder.

I read an interesting whine in Archeology magazine a while back. Seems this fellow (curator? field guy? Don't recall) was bemoaning the lack of adequite storage for all of the stuff in various collections ...

Ahha!! Found it. An abbreviated version is here:
http://www.archaeology.org/0511/abstracts/letter.html

Anyway, his point is that the "stuff" is outstripping the ability to store and conserve and catalog. Late in the piece he says something to the effect that the objects might just have to be chucked in the sea.

Hmmmmm...

This sort of sounds like the plaint of a failed businessman, does it not? After all Archeology is a business. If the interest (in a financial sense) is not there on the part of the public, the practitioners have failed. I wonder why he did not address the idea of selling off surplus? But that would ... what is the word ... enable those collecting people. So what? What is wrong with selling off the 1,000,000 and first bird point? Sure, there might be some breakthru embodied in that point, but does that argument really make any practicle sense? It seems to me that certain fields are gaining an unhealthy accquisitive character. I do not really see much of a difference between old JP Morgan puffing his stogie with his buds proprietorially enjoying the odd Elgin Marble while the hoi polli shuffles up Madison Avenue in the sleet (looking Dickensonian) and professional archeologists locking objects up in perpetuity in a Politically Correct Fuhrerbunker.

It seems like a self defeating attitude to me, particularly when taken to the extreme of destroying objects rather than letting the unwashed have them.

The difficulty, in my view, is at least twofold. The first is that personal lust for objects is self defeating. Sure, a kid can dream in front of a display case. Far better and more productive dreams ensue when one holds a thing in one's hand and is inspired to find out every last thing that there is to know about it and it's time. That is pretty self evident. That person is the one who will be the next generation of Archeologist at least and certainly will be a member of those whose interest results in funding.

Dunno. I certainly get a very elitest vibe when objects (and their interpretation) are under discussion.

Looting and such are a different matter and I think that the professional archeological community dishonestly makes a cause and effect argument. I sorta like the Brit Treasure Trove laws which (if I understand them correctly) gives the government first crack at finds but if they decide that the find is not worth a fair price to them, gently guides them to the collector community.

An interesting subject.

[Guest]

plaint

the correct english word is "COMplaint" it is not a one syllable word nor does it qualify to be shortened. i just can't stand it when people butcher the english language.

[ed]

plaint

the correct english word is "COMplaint" it is not a one syllable word nor does it qualify to be shortened. i just can't stand it when people butcher the english language.

I can't stand it when non english speakers comment on english usage or pretend to a vocabulary equal to mine.

plaint  /pleɪnt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pleynt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. a complaint.
2. Law. a statement of grievance made to a court for the purpose of asking redress.
3. a lament; lamentation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1175–1225; ME < MF < L planctus a striking or beating (the breast) in grief, equiv. to plang(ere) to beat, strike, mourn for + -tus, suffix of v. action]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search? ... &x=24&y=18

or the OED





Now that we know where we both stand (me correct, you wrong) please feel free to contribute to the OP.

[Guest]

according to the oxford dictionary that i have its first meaning is: 1. a complaint made against sb in court. (it is a legal word not for general usage) 2. a sad cry or sound.

thus your usage was wrong and the correct word is 'complaint'

[Beagle]

Hello Ed - welcome.

Interesting issue you bring up. I can think of other things to do with surplus artifacts than pitch them out. What is junk one day may be a pearl the next.

I didn't realize the problem was that bad. Thanks.

[Minimalist]

plaint
One entry found for plaint.


Main Entry: plaint
Pronunciation: 'plAnt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin planctus, from plangere to strike, beat one's breast, lament; akin to Old High German fluokhOn to curse, Greek plEssein to strike
1 : LAMENTATION, WAIL
2 : PROTEST, COMPLAINT

It's a bit old school but still perfectly acceptable English.

BTW. Arch speaks English perfectly well.

He's sometimes a little slow when it comes to understanding it.

[ed]

according to the oxford dictionary that i have its first meaning is: 1. a complaint made against sb in court. (it is a legal word not for general usage) 2. a sad cry or sound.

thus your usage was wrong and the correct word is 'complaint'

One post and I have you figured out. Arrogant and ignorant. Bad combination.

Now that your knowledge of english is established, perhaps you can contribute to the OP.

edit to add an "r". I don't care to risk a derail over spelling

[Beagle]

Arch, would you just be polite?

[Guest]

BTW. Arch speaks English perfectly well

no, i had ESPN on last night and i had that on the brain, my apologies.

[ed]

Hello Ed - welcome.

Interesting issue you bring up. I can think of other things to do with surplus artifacts than pitch them out. What is junk one day may be a pearl the next.

I didn't realize the problem was that bad. Thanks.

Well.... I guess it depends on which side of the looking glass one is on.

My area of interest brings me into contact with a lot of non-archeological material though I suspect that things are similar in that area. What I personally find (as distinct from the reference in the OP) is that collections tend to grow to meet the need of enhancing a "study" collection. If all were neatly and comprehensively cataloged I would have less of an issue. Sans cataloging, the materials are less objects and more "stuff". See what I mean?

I am sorta hoping that eventually we will get to a state where compositions are nailed and high res 3-D imagery is the norm so that the actual object will be of less importance.

I noted with interest that Colum Hourihane (at Princeton) was or shortly is conducting a symposium on technical advances in his area (Romanesque sculpture, I believe) and another bud who is a forensic osteologist routinely 3-D's her specimens.

Point is that technology will eventually solve some of the problems. Electrons are easier to store than objects

From a broader perspective, I really fear a future where, because it is "hard", basic science training falls out of favor. We can see the result of an ignorant population when various creationist lies are not laughed out of the room from the gitgo. I suppose my position is that professionals have to broaden their own definitions of their responsibilities and the fate of highly redundant collections figures into that.

[ed]

plaint
One entry found for plaint.


Main Entry: plaint
Pronunciation: 'plAnt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin planctus, from plangere to strike, beat one's breast, lament; akin to Old High German fluokhOn to curse, Greek plEssein to strike
1 : LAMENTATION, WAIL
2 : PROTEST, COMPLAINT

It's a bit old school but still perfectly acceptable English.

Irony meter close to breaking point (this is an archeology board, after all)

[Minimalist]

I wonder, Ed, if this isn't a little of the old "unfunded mandate," problem. From what I read it seems that in many cases government agencies are requiring archaeological surveys before projects can proceed but, as usual, are failing to provide money to house any finds. Instead, these private companies are being forced to warehouse these items until such time as they can get a public institution to get them off their hands.

The government does this a lot.

[ed]

I wonder, Ed, if this isn't a little of the old "unfunded mandate," problem. From what I read it seems that in many cases government agencies are requiring archaeological surveys before projects can proceed but, as usual, are failing to provide money to house any finds. Instead, these private companies are being forced to warehouse these items until such time as they can get a public institution to get them off their hands.

The government does this a lot.

Yeah. I was thinking about that.

One outfit that I have had some contact with is the Met in NYC. There was a time when old Uncle Ernie's Lincoln Head coin collection would be housed like forever. Now they specifically say that there is zero obligation on their part to hold onto stuff if it isn't needed. I suspect that museums might sign away their souls to get an authentic Zuni Mask of Death and in so doing agree to curate a truckload of potshards. Plus the stupid government with their mandates that sound so ... swell ... early on. I might be a bit harsh. But my JP Morgan analogy is too funny to give up

[Minimalist]

If you are running a museum and you already have a collection of clovis points how eager would you be to have to build an annex to hold more?

I'd love to explore that Florida law to see if there is a restriction on artifacts found in Florida being barred from leaving Florida in a kind of a Zahi Hawass-ish desire to acquire EVERYTHING ever found in Florida?

[stan]

There are a lot of people (collectors who) still see artifacts as trophies or "possessions" to be shown off to their pals at cocktail parties. They are driving the vast amount of looting that is going on all over the world these days.
I suppose these people will still be around for a long time to come. DId you see the article about Hecht in today's archaeologica news?

i raised the thought question a few months ago, if we could dig up all the good stuff in the world, all the evidence of past civilizations, art and so on, wherethe heck would we put it? and my answer was that we would need a whole nother planet to put it on!

Maybe some of it should just stay in the ground until we have a really good reason for digging it up.
It should stay in its country of origin or at least remain in the ownership of said country.

Welcome to the forum, ed. You raise some good questions.
And --hey-- I ain't gonna correct your spelling!