Dinner plate c. 1865

Curator: This is a dinner plate, circa 1865, created by Minton's Pottery and Porcelain Factory, crafted from earthenware. What do you make of it? Editor: It feels incredibly opulent, almost ridiculously so. The intricate detail and the fact that it’s *just* a plate seems...excessive. As someone engaging with these objects, what social commentary might we unpack from its existence? Curator: Let's consider the material production. Earthenware, at this time, speaks to industrial processes and perhaps the division of labor within Minton’s factory. This wasn't created by a lone artist, but by an assembly line. What implications does that have? Editor: That disrupts the romantic idea of the artist. This piece becomes more about factory workers and the business of selling luxury, doesn’t it? And I see ceramic identified as one of the materials as well. Why? Curator: Exactly. Think about the ceramic medium itself. The transformation of raw earth into this refined object speaks volumes. Ceramic's ubiquity in everyday life contrasts sharply with its elevation to high art on this plate, blurring boundaries between craft and art. And what about the decorations on the plate – the patterns, the colors? What materials were needed to make those colours? How were they sourced and applied? Editor: I see. The colors, probably from different mineral sources. So even a seemingly simple plate opens up questions about labor, industry, trade, and consumption habits of the time. The fact that it exists at all is quite the statement, even though it's “just” a plate. Curator: Precisely! It's not *just* a plate. By examining the processes and the materials, we uncover a rich history of production and social values embedded within a commonplace object. Editor: Thanks! Looking at this plate through a materialist lens definitely helps to see more beyond its decorative surface.