Trent de Boer

"The Archaeological Zine Shovel Bum" by Trent de Boer

• fanzine, usually defined as 'magazine for fans,' for de Boer became a fanatic magazine
• started in 1997, while doing CRM (cultural resource management) with wife Betty at Oachita National Forest in Arkansas
• Shovel Bum = " a periodical geared toward fanatical archaeological field technicians"
• inspired by Porcellino's King-Cat and Other Stories to write "comix" (comics for adults) about the day-to-day life of the CRM archaeologist
• target audience in the beginning: family and friends
• at the start, the fanzine was about methods, reasons for methods, and about dispelling stereotypes about archaeology (pyramids, fossils and mummies) by explaining things like orienteering and site recordation
• the use of humor was an important element in all the comix
• Shovel Bum was a way for de Boer to show people the joys of being an archaeologist
• with more popularity, Shovel Bum became about the lifestyle of the archaeologist and incorporated stories and content from other archaeologists
• zine structured by themes: food, bad motels, field vehicles, e.g.
• miscellaneous content made it into the zines as well: recipes, letters to the editor, games, poetry
• because the CRM community is small, the zine helps bring members together and help others feel like a part of the community
• CRM sites = Shovel Bum reunions
• collection of Shovel Bum comix published by AltaMira Press
• at the end of the article, de Boer solicits submissions/contributions to Shovel Bum: even YOU can be a shovel bum...

Stories

Christine Finn's likening of journalists to archaeologists -- and her analysis of how they differ -- exposes the shortcomings of archaeologists vis-a-vis the presentation of findings and telling of narratives for public audiences. Some "borrowing" is in order, she says; archaeologists, typically concerned with communicating with colleagues in the academy, are not so good at the laymen stuff. If archeologists could tell more engaging stories -- the kind that journalists are known for -- they might be able to gain a mainstream following that not only popularizes archeology but popularizes the true archaeology. As last week's readings demonstrate, the archaeologists of popular media are typically not the real deal. Sabloff's article echoes Finn's assertion that better storytelling can help develop a more accurate and instructive understanding of archaeology among the public. Archeologists have important roles to play in the business of looking back to look forward. But as the National Geographic piece warns, attempts to bring archeology into mainstream culture (well-intentioned attempts as they may be) can carry underlying social, political and nationalistic biases. While the National Geographic article is perhaps overly admonishing, it does present some of the dangers of formulating images and stories of the past from a single point of view. Gero and Root argue that National Geographic portrays archeology "...as an enterprise [that] legitimizes the hegemony of Western culture and Western imperialism and imposes a congruent view onto the past" (p. 35); like in Indiana Jones and Lara Croft, the protagonists of the stories, the settings, the background actors, and the props construct a certain image of the past. Journalists, movie directors, photographers and the archeologists themselves must avoid imposing ethnocentric or biased points of view and, as Pyburn calls for, maintain strict ethical standards. Clarity of method, acknowledgment of baggage and the shade of one's spectacles, and careful outlining of goals help make a responsible archaeologist. It all comes down to stories: what makes the cut and what doesn't, how they're told, for whom they're told, where they're told and when.

And the movie is...

The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)






















Archaeology and Woody Allen... what more could one ask for?

Here's a trailer, courtesy of nytimes.com