Watch 19th century

Editor: Here we have a decorative 19th-century silver watch from the Met collection. The filigree is just exquisite. I find it amazing that this object which seems like a simple craft actually involves intense manual labor, and it makes me wonder, what's the story behind a piece like this? Curator: Well, focusing on the materiality, consider the silver itself. Where did it come from? Who mined it? This object speaks volumes about colonial economies, wouldn't you say? Silver was often extracted from colonized lands through forced labor, fueling European craftsmanship. Editor: So, it’s not just a pretty watch, it's connected to larger systems of labor? The act of possessing the watch is like a statement by itself. Curator: Precisely! The meticulous filigree, each tiny curl painstakingly crafted, hides this exploitative labor practice. Think about the silversmith: their skill versus the social structures in place for silver mines during the era the piece was made. The labor of adornment versus labor to source it. Editor: Wow, I didn't see it that way initially. The red stone in the center becomes a flashpoint. What did it symbolize to its owner? Curator: Perhaps it denoted status, access to global trade. What looks delicate masks global trade networks, power dynamics, and inequalities inherent to ornamental consumption. Is it beautiful? Certainly. Is it ethical? That question is something it urges. Editor: It really makes you think differently about the 'decorative arts,' doesn't it? This level of filigree is essentially sculpture; the time and technique, wow. Curator: Indeed. By dissecting the materials and their origins, we unearth the intricate social tapestry woven into even the smallest of objects. What appears as luxury carries an intricate weight of context and cultural implications. Editor: I’ll certainly never look at decorative objects the same way again! Thank you!