The attatchement with valuable objects:
Firstly, nearly everyone out of the 10 people I interviewed brought in an object that was valuable to them for sentimental reasons in order to remind them of places or people. For example Hannah bought in a rock which her boyfriend had given her, Carl brought an african note of 1000 shillings to remind him of home, similar to Olivia who had a ring to remind her of her home in New Zealand whilst studying in England. All of these examples show how memory plays a big part in the valuability of obejcts.
Even stronger than the link of objects to memories is the link between objects and religion. Two out of the 10 people I asked brought in objects that were valuable for these reasons. One was Mark, an Orthodox Christian who explained how his cross worn around his neck was so valuable to him that he couldnt take it off because it is bad luck. I found it interesting when asking him if he was stranded on an Island and had to choose between his cross or his lighter (the less valuable object he chose) which one would he rather have with him. It was a hard decision for him because it was a choice between a practical object which ultimately could help him survive or his cross which he so stongly believed in. The fact that he chose the cross shows how strong his connection with the object is. Mark said that the cross “holds all his energy”.
Similar to Mark’s feelings about religion is, Olivia who explained how her ring “Spoke to her in the shop window” because of the aesthetics of the ring for exmaple the smoothness of the stone and soothing blue colours. The ring acts as her “window to the sea”, the sea being a very spiritual and God like element to her, hence why she uses it for meditation.
Aesthetics:
Rupert’s valuable object stood out from the rest because of its functional and aesthetic value. He said “I appreciate the size and feel of it in my hand”. When responding to the question “For the moment forget the object has a use or any value to you, now what would you use it for?” he referred back to the shape of the fork saying he could use it as a defensive weapon, to stab somone or to make things in order to survive. Because the object already has a function he was able to answer this question much more easily than those who bought more of a decorative object. A very common answer from people who did bring in a decorative object was that they would frame it or display it in some way in the home, rather than stating a functional use. Whilst answering the question Rupert found it useful to play around with its position on the table and moved it about with his hands which I think reflects how the will to interact with objects is much stronger when somthing is aesthetically pleasing. This is somthing I will concider when conducting further experiments.
Furthermore, Shawnee explained how the book she brought in was less valuable to her because she was used to how it felt. She said how the repetitive nature of turning pages and generic shape and form was uninteresting. In other words being familiar with an object makes it less appealing to play with rather than somthing thats new to the eye and other senses.
The importance of how people obtain their obejcts:
When looking at which objects people brought in it came apparent that the factor which made them less valuable to people was how they obtained them. For example Rupert brought in an empty envelope which he explained was “Thrust upon him, he didn’t ask for it” and therefore doesn’t value it. Jamie’s less valuable object was a leather wallet that he had originally bought for his mother as a present, then after loosing his own wallet, was given back the present from his mother. He explained how he attached the feeling of rejection to the new wallet because of how his mother had returned it back to him after not liking it. The new wallet was also in replacement for his previous and preffered wallet.
Maybe he wasn’t as attacthed to the object because it had been passed around and possessed by somone before him, therefore it didn’t quite feel like it was his wallet. However this idea of possession contradicts his feelings towards his valuable object of a cello, passed down to him from his father who obtained it from his uncle. The cello had multiple owners before Jamie, but still he valued it much more than the wallet. He described how he valued how long it had been in his family which explains how an increase in the amount of time somone has an object, also increases the valuability of it, hence why he valued his old wallet so much which he had used for years.
A change in value:
One factor I did not concider when writting my questionnaire was that objects may change in valuability to people when in a different context or when their function is removed. Rupert explained this concept when referring to his less valuable object, an empty used envelope. An envelope is essential for sending a letter but then as soon as it is ripped open, its original use is lost and is seen as rubbish. I suppose that this concept relates to any sort of packaging and it is up to the user if the left over material is of any further use.
This idea could be compared to Carl’s feelings about the African 1000 shilling note he brought in (his valuable object), as he said it was only valuable to him while he was away from home. As soon as he returns to Africa he would probably spend it as he would no longer need the object as a reminder of home.
Overall I think that the questionnaires proved to be very useful and have given me insight and more unerstanding of why people value certain objects. The questionnaire showed how sentimental value is probably he biggest factor in determening why objects are more valuabe to people. Linking to this, how people obtained the object plays a part in how sentimental somthing is to somone for example Jamie’s cello or wallet. A trend I found when asking people to completely forget the original use or value of the objects and to give them a new use, was to display or frame the valuable obejcts in some way and to throw/give away the less valuable ones. I have interpreted this trend, discovering that a valuable object subconciously still holds meaning to the individual therefore they are reluctant to damadging, taking apart the object or using it in a way that would destroy its value. The only option is to try and preserve it giving it the status of a piece of art work. I could explore my findings further by manipulating the objects that people brought in. On the other hand, I may also choose to leave results as a dead end and decide to move in a different direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment