Tall Necked Jar in the Form of an Abstract Head with Animal Forms Possibly 500 - 1000

Editor: This is the “Tall Necked Jar in the Form of an Abstract Head with Animal Forms,” believed to have been made sometime between 500 and 1000. It's currently housed here at the Art Institute of Chicago. Made of ceramic, the piece feels really intriguing; the shapes are so unusual and the surface has so much texture. What's your perspective on this artwork? Curator: What strikes me is the materiality of this piece and its relation to labor. It's easy to admire the final product, this sculptural form, but let’s consider the clay itself. Where did it come from? Who dug it, processed it, and then painstakingly formed this vessel? We often separate "art" from "craft," but here, the very making of this object collapses those distinctions. How does this ceramic object reflect the society that produced and consumed it? Editor: That's a really interesting point! I hadn’t considered the hands that physically worked the materials. The abstract human head with those simple shapes seemed purely aesthetic to me. Curator: And look at the details of construction, for example, the marks suggesting coiling methods. These aren’t flaws to be hidden, but rather traces of the labor and choices inherent to the process. How does the visual vocabulary speak to the daily lives, and perhaps spiritual beliefs, tied to these resources? Editor: So, rather than just seeing a stylized depiction, we should also be thinking about how the artist's choices with the materials contribute to the meaning? Curator: Exactly. The social context is inextricably linked to its very existence. How available was the clay, what types of tools and knowledge was required to produce and fire this ceramic, and to what end it would serve once complete? Editor: That’s given me so much to consider about the object beyond just its formal qualities. Thanks for sharing this perspective, seeing the art beyond the finished product, to appreciate the labour! Curator: It has helped me think of how it questions our typical definition of art. The function itself creates an intimate bond between the maker, user, and their shared experience.