Defending Indiana Jones, Archaeologist

Dr. Indiana Jones was a well-regarded, if fictional, archaeologist in his day. That is, well-regarded by his colleagues in the movies. In the real world, he's been criticized as a grave-robber, looter, and an all-around disaster as a scientist. His catch phrase "It belongs in a museum!" seems just plain silly, considering the way museums were run in the 1930s and '40s.

Jones is the last great monster of the treasure-hunting age of archaeology. To judge him by modern standards is to indulge the same comforting temporal parochialism that leads us to dismiss post-Roman Europe as a “Dark Age.” Jones may be a lousy archaeologist as we understand the field today. But is he a lousy archaeologist in context?

Max Gladstone presents arguments defending Dr. Jones' abilities as a scientist at Tor. He may have been an unrepentant looter, but at least he was good at it. -via Metafilter


Newest 1
Newest 1 Comment

When we meet Dr. Jones, he's presented as the 'good guy' archaeologist. His 'bad' counterpart is Bellocq, and nobody ever criticizes his work. A movie about him would be lively, I'm sure. Of course, he dies in 'Raiders'.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Commenting is closed.
Email This Post to a Friend
"Defending Indiana Jones, Archaeologist"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More