The recent BBC series Bonekickers, a dramatic depiction of life in a fictitious archaeology field unit, divided critical opinion. Many viewers enjoyed the excitement and the action, while just as many decried the lack of accuracy and preposterous storylines. Either way, it looks like Bonekickers has generated enough viewers to warrant the commissioning of a second series.
Archaeology on television has long held an important place among viewing audiences, as do history programmes, highlighted by the development of specifically themed television channels. Where then, in an environment that provides a platform for archaeology and history, are the museums?
Museums certainly provide the backdrop for many productions, as do the professionals who work in them, but their depiction is often far from positive. For individuals whom we might suppose to be at the cutting edge of their field in terms of curatorial experience and visitor services, the depiction of a museum professional is more often than not a male, in his 40-50s, who not only is a bumbling fool, as likely to drop an Etruscan vase as to identify it as such, but is also one who detests visitors above all things.
Actor Ricky Gervais's performance in the 2006 film Night at the Museum conforms to many of the stereotypes of how we have come to expect a museum professional to be portrayed.
So could a museum version of Bonekickers go some way to reversing this trend? The nature of museum work may not translate well to small or big screens, but then neither does archaeology. The view of archaeology provided by Bonekickers is largely fictitious. As wonderful as instant radiocarbon dating results would be, it just doesn't work like that. The truth is that reality does not sell; Bonekickers does.
But the word from some universities is that Bonekickers, like the Time Team series and the Indiana Jones films before it, has been a contributory factor for students deciding to apply for archaeology courses.
Its positive depiction of female and black archaeologists (unfortunately, real-life archaeology is not as ethnically diverse as Bonekickers would have us believe) might also be seen as a positive way of attracting a more diverse workforce.
The stories that could be told based around museums are waiting for a voice and it doesn't have to be "real" or accurate to have a positive effect. The development of a contemporary museum-based drama has the potential to reach new audiences - just as Bonekickers did for archaeology, and as CSI has done for forensic science - and attract new communities to a field that otherwise many may dismiss as being "boring" and "just not for me".
David Howell is an associate lecturer at the University of Wales, Newport
Archaeology on television has long held an important place among viewing audiences, as do history programmes, highlighted by the development of specifically themed television channels. Where then, in an environment that provides a platform for archaeology and history, are the museums?
Museums certainly provide the backdrop for many productions, as do the professionals who work in them, but their depiction is often far from positive. For individuals whom we might suppose to be at the cutting edge of their field in terms of curatorial experience and visitor services, the depiction of a museum professional is more often than not a male, in his 40-50s, who not only is a bumbling fool, as likely to drop an Etruscan vase as to identify it as such, but is also one who detests visitors above all things.
Actor Ricky Gervais's performance in the 2006 film Night at the Museum conforms to many of the stereotypes of how we have come to expect a museum professional to be portrayed.
So could a museum version of Bonekickers go some way to reversing this trend? The nature of museum work may not translate well to small or big screens, but then neither does archaeology. The view of archaeology provided by Bonekickers is largely fictitious. As wonderful as instant radiocarbon dating results would be, it just doesn't work like that. The truth is that reality does not sell; Bonekickers does.
But the word from some universities is that Bonekickers, like the Time Team series and the Indiana Jones films before it, has been a contributory factor for students deciding to apply for archaeology courses.
Its positive depiction of female and black archaeologists (unfortunately, real-life archaeology is not as ethnically diverse as Bonekickers would have us believe) might also be seen as a positive way of attracting a more diverse workforce.
The stories that could be told based around museums are waiting for a voice and it doesn't have to be "real" or accurate to have a positive effect. The development of a contemporary museum-based drama has the potential to reach new audiences - just as Bonekickers did for archaeology, and as CSI has done for forensic science - and attract new communities to a field that otherwise many may dismiss as being "boring" and "just not for me".
David Howell is an associate lecturer at the University of Wales, Newport
