National Geographic - What do you think?

Gaieus

Hi All,

Last month in the Hungarian edition of the National Geographic Magazine there was an article abot the new tourist centre which was build underground in the late antique / early Christian cemetery (UNESCO World Heitage site) in my home town, Pécs.
You - as most of you are architects - may also be interested in the architectural solutions of the underground museum so here's a pdf version of the article (not a "scanned" or "ripped" version - as a "contributor", I got it like this from the editor) and some further pictures here by the photographer, Béla Szandelszky (also with his approval to "publish" them).

Anyway, in the pdf version (though it is in Hungarian and most of you will probably not be able to read it - but see the pictures) you can see some 3D "reconstructions" of the original buildings.
I was rather unhappy when I saw this for several reasons. One is that the whole reconstruction is not correct. As an archaeologist who worked at the excavations, I have a whole lot of exact measurements on the basis of wich I started to "rebuild" the whole site (including the contemporary terrain - thanks to Didier's rubies). I have also "built" most of these buildings already and when the author was here (about 5 or 6 times) to consult with me, I even offered to give them the reconstructiuons but they said they weren't going to put any in the article this time. Finally they did and there's the result.

The other thing is that I think the image they finally ended up is not nice at all. I even guess that it is not proper perspectively but there's something really wrong with it.
So what do you guys think of it?

The "Big Brother" (the American NG Magazine) is somewhat interested in the article (or another one about this site) and they are planning to publish it there, too. I already discussed with them that if they wish to put 3D-s in it I'd share my reconstructions with them to make sure such "mistakes" won't again happen. I hope they'll keep themselves to it!

p.s. There is a photo about one of the Roman churches from above under which my name is porinted - that's not true though, it was Gábor Orbán, a young colleague of mine who took it during the excavation.
Also, I started to make a website for the excavations but as it looks now, it is probably the same as Paul's never ending church...

Maggy

NG's illustration is just that, an illustration, and IMHO a not very good one. I can hardly call it an "artists impression", it looks more like the style of a cheap fairy tale booklet. And it definately has a sea-sickness perspective, some strange barrel/pincushion distortion. It looks like the masonry is done by a couple of drunks, too drunk to lift a stone.

Why bother? People buy NG and that's NG's first goal. It's not an actual scientific journal, but a glossy for the masses who want to taste from every aspect of science in bite size chunks.

Well, actually I'm not very fond of NG's current behavior. I don't know much about archeology in general, but I'm closely related to someone who has some more inside information about the current archeological digs in Egypt. As most NG readers/watchers worldwide might have noticed, in each and every article/documentary about Egypt you see and hear Dr Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities. In the land of the blind is one-eye king.

Whenever there's an important find, he has to be there before the camera crews roll in. I understand that, that's part of his job. But always showing his face as if he were a film star, always hearing his comments, always seeing him brush off some sand as if he is actually making the discovery makes me (and others) sick. Not just because the sand he brushes away is always carefully put on top of the items he "discovers" to make good pictures, people want to be fooled.

But more importantly because he behaves on these sites like a mad elephant, opening sacophagus with a crow bar, putting his heavy feet on mummies in priceless brittle cartonnages, ruining beautiful bead nets covering mummies just to get nice tv shots for the masses. That's imho a much more serious matter than a bad illustration.

I do understand that when someone steps on your toes it hurts you more than when someone steps on your neighbour's toes.

Regards

Maggy

poster-Maggy

Gaieus

Thanks Maggy, than it seems that it's not only me who doesn't like the illustration.

As for your example - we are often asked by journalists to "act" like if we were just finding the things but whenever I can I try to avoid these situations. Still I also know some "media-archaeologists" (as we call them ) who love always being in the focus...