Chris has thrown this idea around with Cady and I for some time. It is true that there are really no good TV programs about archaeology except for the occasional National Geographic, NOVA, or other documentary. Recently, the History Channel has begun a series about archaeology. I was turned off to the show just after I saw the advertsing...
Digging for the Truth
Although I see this as an attempt to put our field in mainstream media, using Hollywood gimmics (Indiana Jones-esque font and style) is so overused and steriotypical.
I propose we look to doing a show that exposes Joe Schmoe to archaeology as it is - scientific, historical, and expanding. In addition, each episode would not only expose the viewer to a new part of the world, but would involve an experiment, so-to-speak, each episode. For example, recently, an archaeologist produced his own yucca rope to see if it was strong enough to rapel down a cliff face into a grannery. This would take the science from the lab to be tested in the field. We could use experimental archaeology as the eye-catching, never before been done, aspect of the show. I know it may seem as though this brings a "reality TV" edge to the idea, but that is what people are used to watching and have grown to like.
Tell me what you think. Ideas, ideas, ideas.
8 comments:
Possible names:
Antiquity
World of Antiquity
World of the Past
Exploring Antiquity
The host of digging for truth is a joke. I got worried for a minute, but he isn't even an archaeologist. He's a reporter or something. Bah...
I've got it!! There's nothing like a 45-minute drive home to get the creative juices flowing. How about this for a name:
Lost and Found: Real Archaeologists, Real Digs, Real Science
Replace digs with "sites", "places" etc. anything that's catchy, you get the idea ....
and on another note ... Las Vegas can stick it ... no, I don't have road rage ... not at all
There's a show on the science channel called "survivor man."
This guy goes out with small video camera and the clothes on his back. He survives off the land for a week. Sometimes he uses tools of his own construct and sometimes he uses a pocket knife.
It could be fun to have a type of survival feature every now and then. An individual would go out with essentially nothing, and use their knowledge of ancient tech to survive in various climates.
I think it would give viewers a stronger appreciation for the difficulty living off the land.
And if they had archaeologists do it there would be some dead archaeologists. Can you see Joel out there on his hands and knees picking indian rice grass seeds and trying to make a meal?! As experimental archaeologists quickly come to realize, KNOWING things and DOING things can be very different.
Mike, is this a general idea or are you serious about really trying to get something together? And if so, how much does producing a television show cost and where would you get the molah?(I ask cause I have no idea about television)
I didn't say anything about not dying...in fact, it might clear out some of the competition for jobs...
But seriously, I argue that it would at least be interesting to include some sort of feature about ancient survival strategies.
We've been talking about this for a couple of years now. I've just kind of been waiting on the edge of my seat for someone to pull it off before we get the chance. Digging for Truth made me sweat a little, that is until I saw an episode.
Our real competition is here:
http://www.archaeologychannel.org/
I'm not too familiar with the programming, our cable doesn't get the channel, but I'm a little worried we getting beaten to the punch. What we need is to go mainstream, preferably a network program, maybe an hour on Sunday nights? Or at least a reputable cable channel, I'd say Discovery or the Travel Channel would be best. I think the Science channel and TLC are bogus.
Here are the problems as I see it:
The general public, and perhaps humans in general, are interested in people of the past, but:
1. They are given either boring documentary style programs or watered down "entertainment" programs.
2. Documentary programs are not engaging. Voice-over narration is lame, there needs to be a host or hosts, who are archaeologists and engaging.
Most in our discipline are either not charismatic enough to host such a program, or are more interested in pursuing a career in strict academia.
The general format of the show would be a regular host or hosts who are archaeologists doing two types of episode.
1. "Destination" shows, where a specific place or region is targeted for study. For example: Chaco Canyon, Ankgor Wat, The Moundbuilders, Great Zimbabwe, etc.
2. "Theme" or "Topic" shows. Examples: Maya writing, The Rise of Kingship, Irrigation Agriculture.
The regular archaeologists would be joined by guest archaeologists who are experts in their regions. If we went to the Olmec area, we'd take El Juan, at Paquime Whalen and Minnis. Our job would be to keep things interesting and interpretable to the viewers. We tell them the truth by summarizing the current research, but we steer clear of unnecesary jargon and boring details. We explain confusing things and focus heavily on great filming, including a lot of sexy panoramic or helicopter shots. It would sort of be like a really good coffee table book, in TV form.
This would totally work, but we need some Ph.D's to host and pitch the ideas. Get to work folks, or someone will beat us to the punch. The $$ would flow like wine. We could spin off a magazine, a website, and raise money for research, all while entertaining the masses. It's Gold Jerry, GOLD I tell ya!
I'm in if it gets rolling. A few thoughts...
First, as cons go, the danger of taking a couple of archaeologists and making them regular hosts is that you create the entertainment monster that you tried to avoid in the first place. I mean, come on, who wouldn't eat it alive given the chance?
Second, in the positive light, the simple fact that we're a bunch of real archaeologists looking to do something real 'for the world' scores wicked good pathos points with producers. I agree that we'd need a PhD-type for the name plate on the bottom of the screen, but if we started small and local--produced some stuff that was quality without the doctorate--then we could get picked up within a year or so and surely by then one or more of us would be close enough to PhD-ing that we'd be authorities AND 'starving students out to change the world through blah, blah blah...' It's all about playing the system right.
LET'S DO IT!
Post a Comment