Fragment of a Ship Flag c. 1606 - 1700

Editor: Here we have a fragment of a ship flag, made with mixed media textile around 1606 to 1700 by an anonymous artist. It feels...worn, almost like a relic. What historical context am I missing? Curator: You're right to see the "worn" aspect as key. This isn't just a flag; it’s a fragment, suggesting loss, conflict, perhaps even survival. Think about the history it represents: maritime power, colonialism, and the complex narratives of trade and conflict woven into the very fabric. Consider whose stories might be missing or marginalized within this representation of power. What does this flag *not* tell us? Editor: So, it's not just about British naval history. It's also about...resistance to it? Curator: Exactly. Whose ships were being boarded under this flag? What resources were being extracted and from whom? Look closely at the tears and repairs. Do you see those as signs of strength, or vulnerability, or both? This fragment becomes a focal point for understanding power dynamics and inequalities that are always involved in visual culture. Editor: It’s funny, seeing the Union Jack, I just assumed "victory" and strength. The damage hadn't made me rethink the power dynamics inherent in this object. Curator: That’s precisely what the dominant narrative wants you to think. Art like this challenges us to question whose perspectives are prioritized in our understanding of history and the world around us. How does viewing a simple flag encourage dialogues about contemporary inequalities? Editor: I see. Thinking about the exploitation enabled by British naval power really reframes my understanding of this artifact. It is really not so simple! Curator: Exactly! Now you can apply these kinds of intersectional questions everywhere and examine many artworks.