Submit your own Neatorama post and vote for others' posts to earn NeatoPoints that you can redeem for T-shirts, hoodies and more over at the NeatoShop!

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.)
Login to comment.

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

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