Reading for Sept 17

     Both Kniffen and Glassie’s article of Building in Wood in the Eastern United States: A Time-Place Perspective and Deetz’s In Small Things Forgotten describe the way objects as a part of material culture reconstruct past. Kniffen and Glassie more focused on descriptions of objects and how those objects change in different time and places. Deetz applied more historical and cultural perspectives toward material culture.

   Kniffien and Glassie’s article analyze details of log constructions. They describe early Americans’ houses through materials, techniques, and methods of constructions. Since last weeks’ reading of methods of object analysis suggested, their analysis of log constructions follow the first part of Fleming’s method of material analysis. Identifications and descriptions of log cabins were well examined within the context of early American society and culture. Although they mentioned their next task would be focusing on cultural meaning of the several methods of timber construction in communities, their examination of log constructions made me considered cultural meaning of constructions. Their ideas of construction analysis added important perspective of culture and living space.

   Deetz’s explanations of historical archaeology intrigued me. Since archaeology was defined as study of past peoples based on the things they left behind (4), historical archaeology gives new standpoints of cultural interaction with global point of views. The methodology of historical archaeology, which analyzes objects connecting to culture, society, and people, reminds me cultural studies. This interdisciplinary approach toward historical archaeology widens possibilities of material and objects analysis. He uses ceramics, houses, and gravestones as objects of material culture and examining early seventeenth century’s people’s life from three different perspectives. Although approaches of three objects analysis were different, all three provide direct reflections of those people’s lives (166). He also points out the necessity of recognition of bias. Historians are tending to rely on a primary source, but having been written by one individual must reflect that person’s interests, biases, and attitude (259). Researchers need to be careful when they deal with object in cultural context, since there is no culture without any biases.

   When I apply their studies into my objects analysis, I figured wedding dresses are quite creations of culture. Since weddings are rituals which were created by different cultures and societies, analyzing dresses help to understand exact time, people, and society of that period. While exploring my research, I should recognize what kinds of biases and cultural attitudes I already hold, and carefully analyze objects as primary sources.