Mail Shirt c. 17th century

Editor: Here we have an anonymous mail shirt, likely from the 17th century, made of metal, and housed here at the Art Institute of Chicago. What strikes me immediately is how labor-intensive this must have been. How can we appreciate such a work today? Curator: Absolutely. Thinking about the repetitive, painstaking process of crafting this shirt is crucial. Consider the labor involved in producing the individual metal rings, likely iron, and then linking them together one by one. It's not just about protection; it's a testament to human ingenuity and skill within a specific system of production. Editor: It feels more craft than art, even. Was there a real distinction in the 17th century? Curator: That distinction is precisely what a materialist perspective questions! The "anonymous" label speaks volumes. The artisan’s individual expression is suppressed, their identity submerged into the functionality and purpose dictated by the military, and economic demands. Editor: So, how does the context of its creation change how we value it? Curator: It challenges our conventional definitions of "art" as solely objects of aesthetic contemplation, instead urging us to consider the conditions and modes of their creation. A king may commission it, but many anonymous metal-workers created it. Think about the value placed on war, and how that dictates how this came to be. The metal, too, would have been scarce or hard-earned. How would we treat materials today in creating armour? Editor: That’s fascinating, it makes you really appreciate what went into making it, far beyond just the design. Curator: Precisely. It encourages us to acknowledge the value of labor, the complex relationships between producers and consumers, and the broader historical circumstances that shape both the creation and interpretation of material objects. Considering the chain of production truly illuminates the garment's meaning.