Question 1

The variety of representational genres greatly increases the viewer's ability to relate to the site and the figurines. I especially enjoyed the reconstructions of the site itself, although I would have enjoyed seeing photographs or drawings of the site when it was undergoing the original excavation in the 1960s. The reconstructions, while visually engaging, also raised the question of subjectivity, particularly in the drawings focusing on people. If there are preserved materials that suggest, for example, the leopard-skin sashes and hats pictured in E1142.jpg and E947.jpg on the Reconstruction page, I would enjoy seeing the preserved material along with the reconstructions in juxtaposition. Having multiple artists' reconstructions side by side allows the viewer to create a general idea of the site through multiple interpretations, which deals partly with the probelem of subjectivity, but I think these views would be improved if there were more pictures of the locations or materials that inspired the reconstructions shown on the site. (CBL)

I enjoy the combination of all types of media on the web site- video, photo, drawings, etc. But because I do not know much about Çatalhöyük, it is difficult for me to interpret all of the images I am seeing. Is there a written introduction to the site that is not media? Maybe I missed it, but I would have liked to read a little about the media I am looking at. Just a little would be sufficient- maybe one line about each object or a general "this is where these things come from" introduction. (KP)

I’ve mentioned this in another answer, but I’m intrigued enough by this idea to explore it some more. What’s most notable about the way this website is presented is that I get more of a sense of the space in which the archaeological work is done rather than the actual objects themselves. If it’s an attempt to contextualize the objects, I think it’s extremely well done. When I envision Catalhoyuk, what I imagine are isolated buildings seemingly untouched by time. I forget that the archaeological work and its material presence is now part of the site as well. The video medium emphasizes the present rather than the past, producing an experience of these objects in the modern day rather than the imagined past that usually comes to mind. [LMR]

I agree with LMR -- the use of video and multimedia really pulls the work at Catalhoyuk forward into today's world, where using static photographs and drawings would constantly remind the viewer that it was an archaeological site from a long time ago. I think it's important, though, to remember that these do in fact come from an earlier time period, and that that is the context in which we can best understand them as a part of that culture. (TL)