Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 8 May 1998 10:41:10 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Eloquently stated!
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Lantry <[log in to unmask]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.museum-l
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, May 08, 1998 9:48 AM
Subject: military uniforms: artifact/politics
>One listmember posted on the notion of artifacts being separate
>from policy and actions (see re-post underneath riposte below).
>
>Alternative view on the absolute separation of
>artifacts from politics:
>
>Some (me included) feel artifacts *do* have politics. For a convincing
>explanation, see Langdon Winner's essay "Do Artifacts have Politics?"
>I don't have the bib ref right now, but if anyone wants it I can find
>it.
>
>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.
>
>So is it too big a stretch to say that artifacts *are* politics? That
>uniforms *are* politics? Or should we back off semantically and just
>say they *have* politics? I think that's an interesting question. Sorry if
>I've misconstrued or oversimplified, but it simply occurred to me that
>separating artifacts from politics might lead to missing chances for
>interpretive insight.
>
>best regards to all,
>Doug
>
>........................................
>Doug Lantry
>The Ohio Historical Society
>Statehouse Education and Visitors Center
>Columbus, Ohio
>[log in to unmask]
>
>On Thu, 7 May 1998, Dave wrote:
>
>> Military uniforms are only a part of the presentation of history, and
>> are not of themselves more than historic documents. Do not confuse
>> policy and actions with material culture objects/artefacts as they are
>> VERY different. (One never sees that automobile museums present the
>> on-road deaths or destruction of the landscape as that is neither their
>> mission nor their intent.)
>>
>> On this original topic of uniforms in exhibtion, please check the New
>> York Public Library's Resources on Military Uniforms:
>> http://www.nypl.org/research/chss/subguides/milhist/costnypl.html
>>
|
|
|