Small Beaker 1793

Editor: Here we have a Small Beaker, created around 1793. It’s a delicate piece – ceramic and glass with enamel, residing here at the Minneapolis Institute of Art. It feels like a celebratory object. How do you interpret its function and context? Curator: I see this beaker as a potent symbol of the era it comes from. It appears fragile, almost unassuming, yet it speaks volumes about craft production and daily life. How does it sit within a broader narrative? Consider the social function of decorative arts. Could this beaker have been used for communal gatherings, where shared rituals and ideologies were reinforced? Editor: I hadn't thought about it as a communal object, given its size, but I guess a shared ritual could also involve smaller numbers of people, couldn't it? So, are you saying this reflects the community it came from? Curator: Absolutely. Let's examine the date – 1793. This aligns with a crucial point in history, think about the socio-political shifts happening then. Does the floral design hint at certain values or beliefs? Are there similar patterns from that era we can relate to contemporary movements of resistance? What does it tell us about power and aesthetics? Editor: So you're saying this object, while beautiful, is actually a product of all the political things happening at the time? Curator: Precisely! Consider that objects such as this weren’t created in a vacuum. This connects to larger power structures that determine what art gets made, who it’s for, and whose stories get told. This is a great example of situating what is decorative to consider art’s intersectionality. Editor: That's fascinating; it definitely changes how I see it. Curator: Right? Thinking about the social context really illuminates its significance. I mean, art isn’t just aesthetics. Editor: Definitely gives you something to think about, seeing it beyond face value.