23-cm Steel Shell 1867

Curator: This object is called "23-cm Steel Shell" and was crafted in 1867. It is a steel sculpture. Editor: It’s imposing and starkly beautiful, although undeniably intimidating, given its function. The color and sheen make it seem simultaneously ancient and futuristic. Curator: Precisely. Let’s delve into the materiality. It's crafted from steel, an industrial material rapidly advancing military technology during the 19th century. The specific craftsmanship here speaks volumes about the relationship between artistic technique and manufacturing capabilities during that period. Its streamlined form embodies this tension, simultaneously artistic, and coldly functional. Editor: Indeed, considering the context of 1867, the year it was made, just a couple of years after the American Civil War concluded, the shell also acts as an eerie symbol of post-war anxieties, not only for the Americans, but for Europe too, anticipating further potential conflict on the horizon. This was a period of massive upheaval as modern warfare took shape and challenged many existing geopolitical and social structures. Curator: Absolutely. The seemingly simple geometric shape— a kind of sleek cylinder—hides complex processes: mining the ore, smelting, shaping, and then assembling this weapon. Think about the labor involved in its creation, the miners, the factory workers, each playing their part in creating an object ultimately meant for destruction. Editor: And it really asks us to think critically about power. Who controlled its manufacture and deployment? The piece silently screams with implications about national strategy and social inequities as some benefited from industrial manufacturing whilst others perished because of them, or through other modes of systemic and capitalist exploitations and uneven labor. Curator: Right. And it embodies the technological developments which made possible what some call the modern age, even as we see the horrible effects of it here too. Editor: For me, this artillery shell provokes questions about historical memory, the ethics of progress, and the stories we choose to tell, and ultimately about the costs associated with progress in human experience. Curator: I think it invites an unsettling blend of fascination and somber reflection on the very processes of material making, industry, and design. The fact that something designed to harm or end a life could also possess an austere beauty prompts reflection on human ingenuity as such, the potential for all human endeavor. Editor: So, let's leave our audience contemplating that ambiguous human potential today!