Reflections: Object analysis methodologies
In the video about CSM Museum & Study Collection, Judy Willcocks mentions Jules Prown. I was introduced to Prown’s and Fleming’s object analysis methodologies during my MA in Museum Studies and found it very usual in thinking through objects, especially those that are unfamiliar.
Fleming, E. (1974) Artifact Study: A Proposed Model. Winterthur Portfolio, vol.9, pp.153-173
| 1. Identification | Factual description based on the five properties of the artefact (history, material, construction, design and function) |
| 2. Evaluation | Judgments based on comparison with other artefacts of its kind in quantifiable terms (size, cost, rarity) |
| 3. Cultural Analysis | Relationship between the artefact and its contemporary culture (place, meaning, value, signs, symbols) |
| 4. Interpretation | Significance of the artefact in relation to the perceiver’s current culture |
Prown, J. (1982) Mind and Matter: An Introduction to Material Culture Theory and Method. Winterthur Portfolio, vol.17, pp.1-19
| 1. Description | Physical inventory of the object based on observation (dimensions, material, fabrication, decoration, motifs and designs, shape, colour, texture) |
| 2. Deduction | Interpretation of the object’s functions and interactions with the perceiver |
| 3. Speculation | Hypotheses and questions which lead out to external evidence for testing and resolution |
What I found most interesting about the video is how she is applying this kind of formal staged analysis in handling sessions to encourage group learning. I suppose my application has always had the purpose of learning at its core – the learning of an individual researcher in a museum environment. However, the change of context seems interesting and something I would like to experiment with my students in the classroom. What kind of meanings could we collectively construct, especially during Interpretation/Speculation phases when personal experiences are key?