Media Archaeology is thus really a fashion, something inordinately hyped to sell more books, music, clothes, etc… […] Meanwhile, Zielinski is always (if he still uses the label)  explicitly not a media archaeologist but a Media (an)archaeologist, a practice which has been increasingly one of biographing the anarchic margins of western thought and knowledge.  [Baruch Gottlieb]

Menotti in response says “To be diluted/ crystallized seems to be the gloomy fate of every theoretical framework that becomes originally successful and is then propagated and made trendy. Was Zielinski quick to jump off the boat of “anarcheology” before it felt prey to the same cycle? Should we spend our lives running from the conceptual edifices we spend so much time to build, right before they are gentrified? Or should we do something to barricade them and prevent the occupation of the masses? On the other hand, is there really anything wrong with the hype? When something becomes fashionable (e.g. Deleuze, incompatibility, practice-based PhDs), what is lost (if anything)?”

Fashion…