Cann 1735 - 1750

Editor: Here we have William Cowell Jr.’s “Cann,” crafted sometime between 1735 and 1750. It’s a lovely silver vessel residing here at the Art Institute of Chicago. It feels so simple, almost austere in its form. What stands out to you about this piece? Curator: What interests me most is the silver itself, its origin, and how Cowell would have acquired and manipulated it. Silver in this period wasn't just a material, but a marker of social status, indicative of transatlantic trade networks and perhaps even colonial exploitation. How do you think access to such material shaped Cowell's production? Editor: That's a perspective I hadn't considered. I was thinking more about its function as a drinking vessel. Do you think its simple design impacted its value or its functionality? Curator: Functionality is key, but we must ask for whom? Silverware like this “Cann” wasn't for the masses. Its very existence speaks to a specific class and their consumption habits. Think about the labor involved in mining, transporting, and crafting the silver – these were not abstract processes, but ones impacting many lives. Editor: So, you're suggesting we should look at the social and economic structures behind the object, not just the object itself? Curator: Precisely. The artistry is undeniable, but inseparable from the social context and the systems of labor and resource extraction that made its creation possible. What more can we say about Cowell's practices as a silversmith within the economy? Editor: I see, this reframes the vessel as more than just decorative art. It's really interesting to consider the layers of production embedded within its materiality. Curator: Exactly. Considering that context challenges the distinction between “high art” and craft, shifting our focus toward the processes and human cost involved. Editor: Thinking about it this way really brings a new layer of meaning. I definitely see this piece differently now. Thanks for your insight.