Are cultural outlooks and attitudes politics? Hmm, I guess if you ask
someone to "explain their politics" they give you a summary of their
outlooks and attitudes with labels attached that signify parties or
agendas. So I guess I'm musing about as a whole universe of things bigger
than the political process of voting, parties, etc. If, as someone said
significantly, "the personal is political," then I think the idea works.
Cultural attitudes and outlooks are politics.

However, I can see how they could be separated too, if only to make
thinking and arguing easier! Still, I feel good about the idea of
artifacts having, or being the embodiment of, politics.

Hope I didn't muddy the water further...

-Doug

........................................
Doug Lantry
The Ohio Historical Society
Statehouse Education and Visitors Center
Columbus, Ohio
[log in to unmask]

On Fri, 8 May 1998, Janis Wilkens wrote:

> Doug Lantry wrote:
> >
> > The argument is simple: Made things turn out the way they do because
> > people who made them have attitudes, priorities, agendas, cultural
> > outlooks, etc. In this way, the politics of homo faber are embedded in
> > artifice. How could this kind of thing apply to military uniforms?
> > Here's a shot in the dark: I'll bet regalia of different nations and
> > military services look very different (and similar too) for reasons
> > related to the wishes of their designers and users, and are not entirely
> > dependent on the "form-function" question.
>
> Do you mean to say that *cultural outlooks* or *attitudes* are the same thing
> as *politics*?  Seems a bit of a stretch to me; though I'm willing to bet
> that politics *do* influence uniform design. . . .
> --
> Janis Wilkens
> Registrar
> Assistant to the Director for Planning & Special Projects
> Museum of York County, 4621 Mount Gallant Road
> Rock Hill, SC 29732-9905
> 803/329-2121 ext  122          Fax  803/329-5249
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> http://web.cetlink.net/~myco/index.html
>