Donna ([info]radiotik) wrote,
@ 2007-03-15 21:59:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: crappy

Wow
This first year interview was about the most useless 45 minutes of my entire life.

My supervisor said I left with a bite and gave me congrats for that.  Basically they asked me if I had any questions.  I said "No, I mean I really hoping that you would talk about x, y, and z so I could come away with something helpful."  Apparently after I left he got into an epistemological debate with them.  They really don't seem to realize that we are creating something from the ground up.  I am my only framework.  There is no one else to compare this to.  There is no methodology.  Neil told them, sure 20 years from now someone can do some easy simplistic question and answer PhD on this topic but right now brave people are needed to forge ahead and that I am willing to forge.


He came away saying that there was no way that they would understand and that I'm just going to have to make some crap up to appease them and just continue to do my thing.

It is sad though.  I already felt very very alone in this research and I knew that the department was not going to be very supportive, but they seem so stuck, so mired down.  If I walked in there with some really simple, really meaningless PhD topic about something like subtle differences in Roman burials they would have loved me but what the hell kind of good would I be doing?  Ok yes I am in totally uncharted territories when it comes to this research BUT THAT IS WHY IT IS NEEDED.  Jesus.


What was really disturbing was their complete lack of understanding of what I am doing.  This massive issue that threatens all archaeology everywhere and they dont even know the simple background.  Neil had to keep jumping in and saying things like "No actually, no one else has done that anywhere before" and "well she is dealing with major crime, she can't really give people questionaires now can she?" and "No really, seriously, SERIOUSLY, only three people in the world study this issue and I am one of them."  He is so great, Neil is.  He really has vision.  He also has confidence in me I think and that makes me feel good.  He was saying today that he felt what we do is better off in History or Criminology in the UK.  Not in the US though, in the US people are on it.  They understand.

I really don't want to come to hate this department but I am afraid I might.  Neil said the word 'post doc' in association with me going over to Stanford so I have my fingers crossed on that front.  The other person who is doing a PhD in illicit antiquities got this same grilling, she said we just have to publish our crap and show them all how wrong they are.  I think she is right.

I really see it.  There is something there.  Something big.  I am going to write about it and it will be hard but it will be so valid.

(19 comments) - (Post a new comment)

It's called the road less traveled for a reason.
[info]nikisublime
2007-03-15 11:52 pm UTC (link)
I think you are really inspiring. Someday, when I get my journalism career back off the ground (out of the shadows of financial instability), I'll write a profile about your work.

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: It's called the road less traveled for a reason.
[info]sandmistress
2007-03-16 02:06 pm UTC (link)
SECONDED. Donna is a rock star.

Keep pushing, ladies. I'm proud of both of you.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]philentropist
2007-03-16 12:02 am UTC (link)
Keep fighting the good fight.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 07:37 am UTC (link)
yeah well I am trying not to break. It woke me up at 4 am last night and I worked for a few hours.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ody_see_us
2007-03-16 06:14 am UTC (link)
wait, they found the parthenon and it's in pristine condition, just as it always was:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/castxshadow/parthenon/02hero.jpg

By the way, on that topic of how to make a good dissertation: I've always found the best dissertation topic is the one that is the quickest to do and the one that will get you on to your next step of writing the articles that will get you somewhere in your career (or the next step in making you feel and know that you're doing something worthwhile). I've often seen that trying to challenge a committee to think beyond their little world can be a exhausting, if not a waste of time. Just "please" the diss committee... and then later challenge the world with the new ideas that I know you'll definately have. Thats just my two cents. Hope your doing well donna by the way :)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 07:36 am UTC (link)
seriously, SERIOUSLY there is no quick and no easy "get it done fast" phd for this topic. It doesn't exist. Maybe in 10 years (more like 20) it might if I do all of my work but now it doesnt exists. The issue is that the committee had no idea about this and no idea about my topic.

Im not doing this for academia, or my carrier, I am not going into academia. I'm not going to waste my time doing a phd if it is a crap phd. I am not just churning something out and the moment I thought I would do that I would quit and go back to south america and actually help people. The only next step for me is to create this area of study for this part of the world.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]flats
2007-03-16 11:00 am UTC (link)
Dude dude dude back up a couple of steps: what exactly is the topic you're investigating for your PhD, so I might understand why it's causing all this hassle? It sounds big and exciting, so I'm very curious!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 11:37 am UTC (link)
Well the 'question' that I am going to submit to them now (because they want a clean cut question) is: "How does the history of archaeological looting and present realities of antiquties trafficking in Ecuador manifest itself as a tangible and definable loss to scholarship and to local culture?" Which is kind of crappy but is as far as i can go to make them happy.

I'm studying the looting of archaeological sites there, its relation to both poverty and ethonolitics and its relation to modern ecuadorian identity and archaeological practice. Basically in a country where people are both struggling to capture and preserve an idea of indiginaity and to stand up against the continuation of spanish colonial atrocities, how and why does this practice continue? What is being lost? What is the impact to both scholarly life and everyday life in Ecuador? blah blah. etc etc.

People get hurt, people get killed, people get taken advantage of by rich white people just because they are poor, people are forced to sell out their culture when they dont really want to and it really sucks.

Ultimately I am trying to push for community control of archaeological resources as both a source of local pride (the white people ARENT better than us! We rule!) and local income (the gringos will pay for anything). Also this could encourage unionization for archaeological workers etc. My site in Bolivia does all of this and it rules. It needs to be other places. It is working for them. They have no other resource.

My superviser said he sat up half the night gritting his teeth about what happened yesterday.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]ouwiyaru
2007-03-16 12:48 pm UTC (link)
So, kind of separating out 'what we don't know' into "doesn't preserve / sins from before the 20th c." and "modern practice" defining 'practice' to include the entire system. If carbon-dating, for instance, destroyed other data on an artifact, we would consider....stopping that method.

I see how it's hard, because framing it is often going to sound like 'what if' scenarios. I hope you post on your findings as they develop.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 01:01 pm UTC (link)
Well nothing about carbon dating or archaeological digging, I am specifically looking at illegal/illicit archaeological looting. I will be seeing how archaeology may incourage/discourage this. Nothing really about preservation too. Just distruction at the hands of this endimic looting phenomenon that has been going on in some form since the spanish conquest and was intensified starting in the 1950s/60s to fill up western museums.

What we don't know is, say, a culture that no longer exists as a physical site, where everything that anyone knows about them is based on looted and contextless objects existing in western museums. The culture has been erased. Or, say, if we don't know if items on the international market are real or fakes: the uncertanty leads to false understanding.

Does this make sense?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]ouwiyaru
2007-03-16 02:18 pm UTC (link)
I guess I'm asking if it's right to see it as methods research. The carbon-dating was an analogy. One methods paper could be on how if we stopped carbon-dating, we would get this other bit of technical, even-more-useful, data. Your thesis seems to be looking at the socioeconomic methods of the mid-20th c. onward and somehow assessing the collateral damage?

I will be seeing how archaeology may incourage/discourage [looting].
What does 'archaeology' constitute here, wrt your thesis?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 02:23 pm UTC (link)
I really dont know what you mean by methods...methods of what? I'm a bit confused at what you are saying...and my research starts in roughly 1532...huh?

Archaeology = legal excavation. Excavation done with a government issued permit. Only trained archaeologists receive permits and only trained archaeologists are able to dig legally.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]ouwiyaru
2007-03-16 02:54 pm UTC (link)
Well, I think I understand better and also even less.

As I understand it, in every PhD thesis there's a big Methods section. A 'standard' thesis will generally just say which methods were used, why, and possibly their history/ubiquity in the field. Methods include statistical methods, approaches to primary sources, tools used, etc, etc.

A 'methods thesis' (as I understand it, but I've heard the term in a lot of fields) is when the basic research includes findings that critique old methods and/or propose new methods--i.e. about how research should be done.

So my first impression was that you were doing one or more of the following:
1. looking at modern/contemporary looting and how current institutions enable it.
2. assessing the summation of all archaeological data we have lost because of modern looting
3. assessing the local social impact.
(any one of which sounds beautifully ambitious)

I'm more confused now, because if you're going back as early as 1532 you're going through multiple periods where the idea of 'legal excavation' changed radically over time. Even in the 19th c. it was 'legal' to add your own bit of graffiti to archaeological discoveries, with little to no regulation on what someone without a government issued permit (did they exist?) could take away from a site.

Unless your conclusions will be something as broad as 'looting is bad,' I'm confused about why your research includes such a broad timeline.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 03:06 pm UTC (link)
The conclusion probably will be quite broad, something along the lines of "this practice has had summarily negative effects on scholarship and local cultural identity" and will end with reccomendations as to the steps Ecuador needs to take to secure a Memorandum of Understanding with the USA barring the import of antiquities into that country. They are the only country in the region to not have that strict international law. Remember, this is a totally uncharted territory. I am laying the foundation. Someone needs to conclude that looting in Ecuador does cause some sort of detriment to science and society. That someone is me.

1. Yes totally; 2. Kinda, naturally that is hard to do, the idea is more gauging levels of uncertainty but yes enough; 3. Yes, that aspect cannot be ignored or else my entire everything is useless. It is local people who loot and local people who are the most hurt by looting.

Youd be surprised how little it changed and if I do not go back that far I not only ignore how the entire issue of looting started in the country but I ignore early collecting and even early attempts to stop the plunder. The legal framework changes over time and the way that the objects translate into other cultures change as well, It is an important part of the story. Really all of this goes in background chapter 2. Its a chapter of historical research that I have already done.

I am creating how research should be done. There are no old methods to critique. This is very very new. I know that sounds strange but it is true. I am inventing this as I go along. My methods section will probably just relate what I did and what did and didnt work so future researcher of this topic in other geographic areas can refine and adapt.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]bottled_cat
2007-03-16 12:14 pm UTC (link)
What was really disturbing was their complete lack of understanding of what I am doing.

Sounds oh so familiar I'm afraid...this is the Cam way, just keep doing what you're doing for yourself, and consider all of the departmental stuff just another bureaucratic challenge to overcome.

(Reply to this)


[info]sievetronix
2007-03-16 02:57 pm UTC (link)
To be honest, and maybe just maybe it's just me but being the first is kinda cool in the way that you can kinda trailblaze a bit and make some headway. Nothing worse that dealing with the wreckage of what people did before you.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]radiotik
2007-03-16 03:07 pm UTC (link)
Hell yeah!
I deal with people who write entire dissertations about how someone else was either right or wrong when they said someone else was right or wrong. I'm actually trying to do something. Take a giant leap for the region...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sievetronix
2007-03-16 03:16 pm UTC (link)
Especially when they get all of their artifacts together and it turns out it was a giant superweapon.

Who is the superpower now motherfucker!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]mshepburn
2007-03-18 12:09 am UTC (link)
you know all the greats were the firsts. youre going to be the donna of archeological looting as McNeil is to World History. It is always difficult for scholars to accept new ideas. and they love to critique htem. the best solution is to do it and do it well, and then they will all have to shut up.

By the Way. I got a job!
love you! SEE YOU SOON!

(Reply to this)

(19 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…