Quick Curation: Making Object Links

The strikingly different material, form, and elaboration used on these two miniatures inspire us to consider the model makers’ motivations. Did they seek to create an anthropological model or tourist souvenir? We can use their physical qualities to think through this important question.

These pieces exemplify the iconic style of Solomon island carving across different forms: incised lines accent the overall shape as they cut through a black pigmented surface; precious mother of pearl inlay highlights eyes and elaborates edges.

This textural hut and bright hat seem to have little in common. Yet, in their appealing use of color and scale, both show the influence tourism had on the production of goods across the Pacific world. They also remind us that tourist items often enter scholarly collections.

These everyday items epitomize aesthetic effects achievable through use of warp and weft in skilled basketry.

In both these pieces, binary light and dark splints create striking geometric patterns that reward close looking.

SUAC’s pristine yam mask is highlighted with traditional mineral pigments. The Cantor’s has commercial acrylic paint, while its deformed and sooty surface are clear signs of use. Paired, they ask us to consider what makes an item valued in art and anthropology contexts.

Tree bark provided the raw fibers for this tapa cloth and the canvas for this board painting. Through their materials, both items retain symbolic associations with trees while accepting new significance through surface decoration.

This carved stone hei tiki pendant figure, with its characteristic curved limbs, pointed mouth, and round inlaid eyes, is reminiscent of the carved ancestral figures on  the blade and handle of SUAC’s finely carved wooden mere (club). These pieces elaborate on an iconic aspect of Maori makers’ culturally-appropriate styles.

Material expressions of color contributed to certain items’ prestige in Maori society. Nephrite jade was prized according to its depth of color and variegations, seen here on this hei tiki. Kiwi feathers, like those on this kete kiwi (kiwi feather bag), were also valued according to hue. Weavers incorporated feathers to create patterned effects of light and dark, like the subtle banding seen here.

The complete fishhook of abalone shell has a brighter and more colorful shine than the broken mother of pearl hook. This distinction, plus the fact that it is complete, may be why the art museum kept the piece and did not transfer it to the Anthropology Department. This idea leads us to ask whether these different shells were also valued differently in the original cultures.

The use of curving boar tusks obviously unites these pieces. Both the arm bands and the figure also materialize significant moments of transformation and initiation: the arm bands for boys’ transition to adulthood, the funerary spirit figure for commemorations of death.

Shell work is featured on these items, despite their very different uses and the very different cultures that produced them. The centrality of shell—whole, pierced, carved, and burned for lime—is shared across the Pacific and even (as in Jane Stanford’s shell necklace) beyond.