(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] elanya.livejournal.com at 02:18pm on 10/09/2004
I did indeed. He seemed more than willing to sit on a comittee for me, and to chair it if it turns out that he is the best to do it. I'm still considering my options there. I need to talk to my theory prof now (Babits) about some of this. I'll probably do that on Tuesday. I don't know if it will result in a separate post or if I will just make an addendum to this one, but if you like I can let you know ;)

So, if I do this, will you consider me more than just a historian, or what? ;p
[parent entry] [link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] forthright.livejournal.com at 02:20pm on 10/09/2004
Yes, either of those projects will make you a historical archaeologist, fair and true. Arr! ;P

P.S. Something along the lines of an analytical theory for identifying piratical material in sites will be just the kind of theory that a positivistically-minded arch theorist will be keen on.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] elanya.livejournal.com at 02:32pm on 10/09/2004
I have notice a trend, which I am sure someone has formalized somewhere or other, that even the most esoteric flaky post-modern/post-structralist/whatever archaeology needs to have a good grounding in more solid, basic science before it really has a chance to play. It's still at heart a scientific, quantitative discipline. At this stage of the game, for me at least, there isn't enough ground work laid to start looking at the really interesting issues/questions (like identity) archaeologically in a more than superficial way. See my Sheffield Dissertation ;)

It *will* be a good basis for going further at the PhD level. That's the point. I just hope it works :)
[link] [parent] [reply]

May

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
        1
 
 2
 
 3
 
4
 
 5
 
 6
1
 7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
11
 
 12
 
 13
 
 14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
18
 
 19
 
 20
 
 21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
25
 
 26
 
 27
 
 28
 
 29
 
 30
 
 31