Cup 1788

Editor: Here we have a silver cup, made in 1788. The museum tells us it’s attributed to Benjamin Pierpont. It's surprisingly plain, given its age. I find it quite elegant but also simple. What strikes you about it? Curator: Its functionality. It’s made from silver, a valuable material of course, but primarily it's a functional object. How was this object produced? Was it mass-produced or handmade? What can the materials tell us about the socio-economic conditions in which it was produced? Editor: That’s interesting. The inscription indicates it was a gift to a church. Curator: Exactly. This moves beyond mere aesthetic appreciation and speaks to ritual, gift-giving, and social status. How does the context of the church as the recipient change your interpretation? What labor was involved in extracting and refining the silver? Editor: It suggests a level of community wealth or at least the wealth of the giver. Maybe the craftsmanship reflects religious values as well, plain but valuable. The labor behind creating the materials would have been difficult and costly. Curator: Precisely. Consider how the object’s worth extends beyond the purely visual. Who had access to these types of crafted goods? How did this cup function in 18th-century life versus now? Editor: I see. I was initially focused on the look, but now I understand how important it is to think about production, materials, and how the object functioned within society to truly appreciate its significance. Thanks! Curator: Indeed, examining such factors will expand our understandings and help us consider how design may reflect and create social values and hierarchies.