Drinking Vessel in the Form of a Foot Possibly 1200 - 1450

Curator: Looking at this drinking vessel, its rough texture gives it a striking, almost ancient quality. It seems remarkably sturdy for a piece that’s possibly from 1200 to 1450. Editor: Yes, its primitive charm is immediately apparent. We're looking at a ceramic drinking vessel in the form of a foot, made by the Chimú-Inca people. What strikes me is the very literal, perhaps even subversive, gesture of crafting a vessel from something so fundamentally connected to movement and grounding. Curator: Subversive how? Is it mocking the idea of conquest through consumption? Editor: In a way, yes. Feet are about travel, about power structures, both literal and metaphorical, given who was in charge during the time of creation. Making it into a drinking vessel invites us to consider these power dynamics and how the dominated might satirize or reimagine symbols of the dominant. I also find the ceramic so tactile and earthbound, underscoring these connections to labor. Curator: I agree with that idea about labor. This piece also invites a discussion about the representation of the human body in art from colonized regions. Was the form chosen for ceremonial use? Did its symbolic function reinforce or subvert established power dynamics? It raises many critical questions about the indigenous experience under imperialism. Editor: Exactly. We have to examine the act of creation under colonial pressure, its materiality as indicative of forced labor, appropriation, and resistance all rolled into one. You can almost see the maker’s hand, feel the weight of the earth used in forming this very earthy, foot-shaped object. Curator: What about the incompleteness, the fractured top rim? Does that influence our interpretations, perhaps evoking a sense of brokenness or loss? Or maybe this missing fragment is evidence of functionality, a testament to its use within ritualistic or even mundane contexts? Editor: It introduces fragility, of course, the recognition of an object that has persisted but carries the signs of social ruptures across time. It begs the question, what kinds of narratives were held, and poured, from it? Curator: A history, then, poured through the lens of material and making—as well as cultural subjugation, embodied quite literally by a foot, weighed down but resilient. Editor: A history grounded in material and making indeed, one that still allows new questions with each encounter.