posted by [identity profile] forthright.livejournal.com at 10:41pm on 13/02/2010
Heh - maybe, maybe, although it's obviously much too long. But in all seriousness, the real problem may lie with the cultural people in your department - do they take seriously the notion that archaeological theory is anthropological theory? In your 'core' anth theory courses, do they give as much time to Binford as to Sahlins, for instance? I definitely get why archaeologists would feel that they are distinct - everyone treats them that way. But I don't know - I thought your dept. had a lot of science-oriented cultural ecology types who would see things in a broader way? And don't you have some nautical archaeologists who are thoroughly humanistic? I dunno, it's a mess.

Reply

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

May

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
        1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6 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