too many buzzwords, not many new ideas; the stated theoretical ambition should be further debated and refined, and does not quite match up with individual studies, which nevertheless are interesting cases to think with and research into.
为写论文和课堂展示把intro来回读了三遍，还蛮喜欢两位编者提出的transcultural approach to objects（very ambitious）：打破地理位置/线性时间/genre的区隔，把关于讨论从寻找特定、唯一的审美/工艺源头解放出来，而去关注具体物件与它的多层makers之间的互动（makers of matter as well as makers of craft, makers of trade connections and makers of taste）。总之让object narrates its own story（which is necessarily a polyphonous story）。但后面章节似乎并没有真正落实此approach...
1 有用 felsina 2020-11-24 12:55:50
too many buzzwords, not many new ideas; the stated theoretical ambition should be further debated and refined, and does not quite match up with individual studies, which nevertheless are interesting cases to think with and research into.
1 有用 Barroquería 2021-03-04 09:56:33
为写论文和课堂展示把intro来回读了三遍，还蛮喜欢两位编者提出的transcultural approach to objects（very ambitious）：打破地理位置/线性时间/genre的区隔，把关于讨论从寻找特定、唯一的审美/工艺源头解放出来，而去关注具体物件与它的多层makers之间的互动（makers of matter as well as makers of craft, makers of trade connections and makers of taste）。总之让object narrates its own story（which is necessarily a polyphonous story）。但后面章节似乎并没有真正落实此approach...
0 有用 gudetama 2023-07-18 17:09:56 广东
只读了“unknown transcultural objects”一章，艺术史和物质文化研究相结合的视角，研究rose engine lathe-turning在清朝的接受和衰落，蛮有意思。