gordon : interpretation of artifacts

in summary : artifacts important when documentary record is not complete; technological artifacts often evade description or drawing, have to rely on the artifacts themselves. when writing exists about artifacts (rare), we need to be cautious about the artifacts being boosted or oversold. there are two steps to interpret artifacts of technology: archaeometry and context analysis. archaeometry relies on determining internal structure, analyzing form, observing surficial markings, and determining other physical properties. context can be thought of as backward-linkage components from the artifact (natural resources, human resources, function comparisons, and social structures) or forward-thinking (interactions of users withthe artifact and other observers of the artifact). three examples illuminate this approach, a partially completed ax, a piece of slag, and a steam locomotive. in all three instances, gordon capably demonstrates that even the simplest of objects and processes belie a complexity and skill level of artisans and craftspeople who made the objects.

FOR DISCUSSION : gordon reminds several times during the article of the importance of seeking, understanding, and explaining the context for artifacts. SPECULATE on any instance where you feel context might not be important for an artifact.

rawson : ancestry of chinese bronze vessels

IN SUMMARY : a case study to demonstrate the change in values of ding bronze vessels in six periods of chinese culture. in the first period, the vessels equated with power and hierarchy in the deployment of the material itself, and in the inscriptions placed in the vessels. as religious beliefs shifted in the second period, ancient ding re-discovered fueled interest in the past. as opposition to buddhism rose in the third period, leaders re-appropriated the meanings of the vessels as symbols of the ancient past linked to their present, prompting rubbings of the vessels and widespread collecting. the bronzes had relatively little value in the fourth period, only to be re-discovered again in the fifth period at the fall of yet another dynasty. the objects became a means to co-opt the ancient societies and beliefs for use in the present. in the twentieth century, the symbolization of the bronzes turned outward from china to the world, prompting another appreciation of their longevity and slow-changing form/style/content.

FOR DISCUSSION : rawson suggests that the ancient chinese bronzes are in museum collections because we have "inherited an interest in them generated in the past and sustained by Qing scholars" (p. 69). how often is what we collect influenced by the past? how does re-appropriating that past impact the values and meanings embedded in everyday objects as well as extraordinary ones?

friedel : some matters of substance

IN SUMMARY : the material conveys the message; only when we consider the material of the thing itself do we encounter its true history. function, availability, economy, style, and tradition all suggest reasons about why a thing is made with a particular material. geography, technology, science, fashion, and competition represent factors that impact material selection. the relationship between materials and values can be described in terms of scarcity, aesthetic, functional, and associative. the values are not inherent in the material but are determined by circumstances. the values attached to materials affect the values attached to things but they are not the same thing. over the last two centuries, our perception of objects has changed. by the middle of the twentieth century. we had embraced new materials and technologies, producing an ever more vast array of consumer goods in the "neotechnic" era (as distinguished from the "eotechnic" and "paleotechnic" eras heretofore). technical changes also impact the materials. perceptual changes indicate shifting relationships between objects and people...from bounty + stasis to ingenuity + change...and finally to science + novelty. rather than concentrate on one specific object in isolation, learn what can be seen when considering assemblages of objects as they inscribe individual and communal life.

FOR DISCUSSION : what did friedel mean when he indicated "all i can think to do is understand their making, their acquisition, their use, and even their disposal, all in terms of real people" (p. 50)?

maquet : objects as instruments + signs

IN SUMMARY : there are five ways to read objects...as instruments, as symbols, as images, as indicators, and as referents. written sources become increasingly significant when we move from instruments to referents. polysemous meanings perceived by others are best sorted through utilizing written records. "objects can illuminate words. they cannot replace them." (p. 40). meanings are not inherent to an object or ascribed by the designer, they belong to the group of people to whom the object is relevant. as meanings change, so do groups.


FOR CONVERSATION : discuss the importance of multiple sources in "doing" history. taking maquet's position, what happens if written sources are not available to pair with an object under scrutiny? speculate on maquet's approach that suggests the meanings of commissioner and designer are not relevant in the face of group-assigned significance. what happens when we leave the first two meanings out of the equation? discuss the "capital sins of research" and maquet's strategies to avoid them (p. 38).

csikszentmihalyi : why we need things

IN SUMMARY : artifacts compete with humans for resources, almost as a third entity beyond the natural world. we are burying ourselves under a mountain of objects, pre-conditioned by the presence of objects from the past. objects help to organize experience (keeping random-ness at bay). they do so by demonstrating power (largely along gender lines), in the continuity of self through time (in light of great change + mobility in our current society), and in providing evidence of one's place in the social hierarchy (illustrating family ties + notions of gentility, wisdom, care, creativity "we need objects to magnify our power, enhance our beauty, and extend control over our future.

FOR CONVERSATION : speculate about the challenge in assuming that objects are objective (p. 23). discuss the idea that one can train oneself to reduce reliance on objects by quieting one's mind (p. 28)