Sciences >
Anthropology
RSS FeedIs Indiana Jones bad for archaeology?
Results so far:
| Yes | 11% | 12 votes | Total: 109 votes | |
| No | 89% | 97 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesIs Indiana Jones Bad for Archaeology?:
Archaeology is the search for facts...forget about lost cities and exotic travel...' so said Indiana Jones in the film Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989). Yet the last part of that sentence typifies Indiana Jones and the facts get left by the wayside. His is the life of adventure, where skulduggery, quests and secret societies haunt the world. Yes, these may only be films, but what impression does it give about archaeology, when any self-respected and professional archaeologist is always compared to a fictional adventurer, rather than being appreciated for their real work.
It all started early for Indiana Jones, enjoying adventures that school boys and adults could only dream about. Later, his most famous adventures involved quests for supernatural objects, the Ark of the Covenant and the Holy Grail. You can't afford to take mythology at face value,' he says, but off he goes gallivanting around the world; adventure over archaeology. His every adventure has a conspiracy, whether it's Nazis or evil temple worshippers, and there are secret societies such as the Brotherhood of the Cruciform Sword who are sworn to protect the secret of the Holy Grail. Even for an Inter-War period film, there is also a lack of proper procedures and often destruction of viable property is used to reach artefacts. Who can forget that scene in the church in Venice when Indiana Jones discovers that the tomb of Sir Richard lies beneath the 'X' marked on the floor and proceeds to hammer a hole into it, in what is a scene of comic relief. This was an irresponsible action and prejudices people to the way archaeologists behave.
Indiana Jones is driven by a passion to find things. Many of his colleagues and rivals have obsessions and personal ambitions leading to deceit and double-crosses. Even his own father, a historian, is obsessed with finding the Holy Grail and bizarrely states The search for the Grail is not archaeology, but a race against evil.'; more supernatural clap-trap and definitely not the words of a devoted professional. The life of Indiana Jones is more adventure than work. Nothing is learned, nor nothing gained through or about archaeology. Through the films, archaeologists are trivialised as treasure hunters, so archaeology is also trivialised. Archaeologists are seen as glory seekers with maps to lost lands, as greedy grave robbers intent on outwitting the 'savage natives', and enduring all sorts of creepy-crawlies and booby-traps to find their treasure. Belief in archaeological truth and evidence is stretched as the implausibility of the storylines slights the profession, which in turn causes people to become wary of archaeological claims.
The films have also stirred controversy, alienating audiences in Asia in the film Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, which they saw as depicting Asians as untrustworthy, child-enslavers and sacrificers. It also gives credible Biblical Archaeology a bashing in Raiders of the Lost Ark, again making archaeologists seem either ultra pious or completely sceptical of heavenly powers. In both cases it could serve to confuse the public with myth and innuendo interwoven into history. Indiana Jones is such a cult figure with his trademark fedora and rugged character that such things are overlooked in favour of action and box office dollars.
A real-life Indiana Jones had been unearthed. He was the late explorer Gene Savoy. He discovered a lost civilisation deep in the Amazon jungle. Now, the mythical Cloud People have emerged from history, but Savoy was marginalised as more coverage was given to scientists who examined the mummified bodies discovered at the site. The archaeological community was more interested in the scientists' research than in Savoy's exploits and he continued to be ignored. There was and is no place for an Indiana Jones in the real world.
Is it a coincidence that because of the Indiana Jones films, there has been a rise in maverick adventurers claiming to have found the secrets of ancient civilisations? These non-archaeologists roam the world, professing great knowledge, and write popular new-age books. It seems that the films broke the mould, allowing discussion and literature to appear about the Ark and the Grail outside of the biblical stories and the Arthur legends. Before the Indiana Jones films, Hollywood archaeologists dealt with untold treasures and haunted tombs, but the arrival of Indiana Jones has added the esoteric factor and now everyone has joined in. This has caused controversy between new age writers and professional archaeologists. Do the faux Indiana Jones' know more than the dedicated archaeologists? I think not, they only offer creative stories, but no archaeological proofs.
The Indiana Jones factor has made adventurism in archaeology desirable, but upon closer inspection, many of the public and would-be archaeologists are disillusioned by the actual reality of archaeology, which is academically based and hard physical work. And that is when they see that Indiana Jones has failed them; his life the stuff of Hollywood myth. And that is why Indiana Jones is bad for archaeology.
Learn more about this author, Ray Burke.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
No
Indiana Jones is bad for Archaeology like Braveheart is bad for history. It generates additional interest in a subject that many of our youth have little or no interest in. This interest then sparks research into the subject which these youths would not normally undertake. The only bad thing is that the fiction of the movies has given them preconceived notions of what to expect. However, once someone with these ideas is confronted with the cold hard facts of the science, the fiction quickly slips away and is replaced with the genuine facts that spur the fascination on to greater things.
The Indiana Jones movies are without a doubt an entertaining bunch of fantasy with a little bit of historical fact mixed in for legitimacy. It was never the intent of the writers, actors, directors or producers to portray the characters and events in the movies as anything but fantasy. While the stories do draw on actual historical places and objects, they do so with a totally fictitious cast and storyline. At no point in the movie series has there been any allusion that the events are attempting to depict actual archaeology or any cold hard scientific principles.
One of the advantages of having a major motion picture centered around a particular field of science is the good press that field of science receives which it would not have otherwise seen. For instance, the television series CSI does far more to depict itself as scientifically legitimate than the Indian Jones movies do for archaeology. Yet the "science" depicted in CSI for the most part is exaggerated at best. Much like any other fictional entertainment ventures they take a script and use the perception of scientific data to further that script, all the while using only a sprinkling of scientific facts and procedures in order to lend the appearance of credibility to the show. However, the number of college students who took up the sciences associated with Crime Scene Investigation has skyrocketed since the shows inception.
While the number of Archaeology students hasn't hit an all time high in the wake of the Indiana Jones movies, the interest in history in general has. Since Raiders of the Lost Ark has been released we've seen scores of television shows based on archaeology and history created, several actual television networks created that are centered around history, and numerous other academic projects take off that would never have held the same appeal to the American public had the Indiana Jones movies never been made. In short, the Indiana Jones movies have been a major marketing machine for archaeology and history in general.
As with anything that comes out of Hollywood we must take the stories of the Indiana Jones series with a grain of salt. They are meant for one purpose only, entertainment. If they can educate, inspire and motivate people beyond the movie theater then that can only be a positive thing. Think of the mystery and allure that surrounded the discovery of the lost tomb of King Tut. While this was indeed a factual scientific endeavor, it was shrouded in mysticism and legend, inspired by the fiction of ancient Egypt and supported by the media and fictional writers of the day. Despite the inaccuracies of many of the writings and suppositions of the time, the science of Egyptology became more popular than ever. Those that became involved with the science as a result of the hype surrounding the discovery were quickly educated as to the true facts and proceeded further under the proper guidance of science.
Indiana Jones and his fictional cohorts are a refreshing look at aspects of history that some have never heard of, and others never found very interesting. If a movie, however historically inaccurate it may be, can inspire excitement in a science that many have difficulty finding interest in, how could that possibly be a bad thing? The old adage that "there is no such thing as bad press" is never more true than with Hollywood's ability to draw much needed attention to topics and sciences that would otherwise never see the light of day. I applaud the creators of the Indiana Jones series and hope that there are other creative minds out there that can do as much good for other sciences and topics that deserve more attention than today's society is currently interesting in paying homage to.
Learn more about this author, Joseph Whalen.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Anthropology
- Is cryptozoology a valid science?
