For this week, respond to the article: Leslie Shannon Miller, "The Many Figures of Eve: Styles of Womanhood Embodied in a Late-Nineteenth-Century Corset," in Jules David Prown and Kenneth Haltman, editors, American Artifacts: Essays in Material Culture (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 200), 129-147.
Please remember to give mye a short synopsis of what the article is about and then make observations, ask questions, bring up points of discussion for the class.
Course Description and Outcomes
This seminar is an introduction to the art history methodology of material culture. Simply put, the study of material culture is the study of “things”—human-made or human-modified products. These “things” can include clothing, your grandmother’s heirloom jewelry, a formally landscaped garden, a painting, or the contents of a trash can. Scholars of material culture investigate these cultural products as a way to uncover the beliefs, values, attitudes, needs, hopes and fears of a particular society at a particular moment. In this class we will look at art (early American portraiture; southern plantation architecture; hand-built wooden furniture), luxury goods (Marie Antoinette’s clothing; silver teapots), consumer goods (Tupperware; table forks), and popular imagery (photographs of President Kennedy; the interior decor of Graceland) through the material culture lens.
However, the study of objects alone is not enough. Material culture scholars must study contexts as well as objects, for it is only by considering the historical, social, spatial, and cultural contexts that we can come to a fuller understanding of the meaning expressed by the human-made/modified product itself.
In addition, the field of material culture studies is filled with challenges and debates. Scholars sometimes argue that objects “speak” to us about the past. What does this mean? How can we know for sure what the artifact(s) is “saying” to us? What are the limitations of using objects as evidence? Is it possible to overstate an object’s value as evidence? Is it possible to overstrain an interpretation? Such questions are endemic to the field and are important to our investigations this semester.
This course introduces students to the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary field of material culture studies through readings, discussion, and research in an array of fields including art history, anthropology, folklore, and history. It is important to recognize that our readings will NOT deal primarily with contemporary art. Rather, this seminar is designed to help you develop critical skills of object analysis and will encourage you to consider the relationships between human –made/modified products and cultural meaning.
However, the study of objects alone is not enough. Material culture scholars must study contexts as well as objects, for it is only by considering the historical, social, spatial, and cultural contexts that we can come to a fuller understanding of the meaning expressed by the human-made/modified product itself.
In addition, the field of material culture studies is filled with challenges and debates. Scholars sometimes argue that objects “speak” to us about the past. What does this mean? How can we know for sure what the artifact(s) is “saying” to us? What are the limitations of using objects as evidence? Is it possible to overstate an object’s value as evidence? Is it possible to overstrain an interpretation? Such questions are endemic to the field and are important to our investigations this semester.
This course introduces students to the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary field of material culture studies through readings, discussion, and research in an array of fields including art history, anthropology, folklore, and history. It is important to recognize that our readings will NOT deal primarily with contemporary art. Rather, this seminar is designed to help you develop critical skills of object analysis and will encourage you to consider the relationships between human –made/modified products and cultural meaning.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
In Leslie Shannon Millers the many figures of eve: styles of womanhood embodied in a late-nineteenth-century corset is very much about not only the corset itself but what it means for a woman to wear it and what meaning the viewer gets from seeing a woman in a corset. The corset was seen as a sign of maturity and the transformation from little girl into womanhood.
One thing that was interesting to me was the fact that she states that the viewer will think that the wearer of the corset is young and untouchable but also shows that the women in their roles as mothers and their capability to reproduce. it also suggest the fact that women that wore corsets where never alone, they had people to care for or do things for them. meaning wearing one constricted the activities one could do, because of how it held the body. this is also a symbol of status.
One observation that stood out to me was the fact that miller says a London corsetiere says "to preserve the measure of one's waist [is] to preserve the measure of one's years." she goes on to say that the whalebone strips in the corset are "binding power" they're called "stays" which also implies that the role of a corset is to maintain or help a woman "stay" as she is. To stop time and alter the body from changing. I was wondering about everyone's thoughts on that
In her article, Miller describes the physical qualities of a late-nineteenth century corset and what corsets meant for the women of the time who wore them as well as the people who viewed them. What really stood out in my mind was that corsets were known to cause miscarriages and were even deliberately used to do so.
I thought that the comparison between the shape of a corset and a stalk of wheat was a bit of a stretch. All of the other points made about corsets, such as it being hourglass shaped, virginal, motherly, etc. all seemed like logical conclusions to draw, but I don't think a stalk of wheat really relates that closely. I like at the end where Miller points out that the woman who CHOSE to wear a corset was accepting her place in society where she is not a "primary actor". Although there were certain expectations at that time, women did ultimately choose to wear corsets and thus be unable to do anything for themselves.
I also thought it was interesting what Chelsea was saying about "staying" as you are. Really, you aren't staying as you are because no one, not even "a young girl recently matured" is shaped that dramatically.
Leslie Shannon Miller's article The Many Figures of Eve: Styles of Womanhood Embodied in a Late-Nineteenth-Century Corest is about the history behind the corest. Miller goes into detail about the structure of what makes a good corset back in the 1800s and what women endured while wearing it day to day. Miller discusses how the corset when worn by women would overtime flatten their stomachs and their waists. The fact that these women couldn't put on their corsets without a second set of hands means that beauty takes a toll on the body.
An observation that got to me while reading Miller's article was when she stated a comparison to the wearers to the idea of virginity. I didn't know that fact or really think about that because usually when I see or picture someone wearing a corset I see that person being an elder of some sorts. Miller put a smile on my face when she discusses why the older women would wear them and why the women would hold these corsets with such high stature.
Like Chelsea I too kind of wondered about the "stay" part when referring to the whalebone. I want to know where did this originate from? Like what culture dubbed it "stay". Sorry if it sounds like I'm simply repeating her question.
In "The Many Figures of Eve: Styles of Womanhood Embodied in a Lat-Nineteenth-Century Corset," Leslie Shannon Miller examines the relationship of the corset to its wearer and to the society of its origin at large. Miller states that in the nineteenth century, corsets were not viewed as "torture devices" as they are contemporarily. Used by Western women at all levels of society, corsets enjoyed favor especially among the middle and upper class, as they had the ability to transform the wearer's waist into the diminutive standard of beauty upheld by that group. Despite the availability of medical literature detailing their downfalls, corsets remained "the norm" in Western society for years afterwards.
Miller asserts that the standard of beauty corsets promoted was particularly appealing to men and that this fact alone may have kept corsets in high regard for so long. Miller states that the exaggerated, enlarged breasts and hips created by corset wearing were intended to be reminiscent of a mother's body. In contrast to this was the slenderized waist created by the corset, a physical feature of a woman who has not given birth. Miller also claims that the tension created between the negative space of the narrowed waist and the exaggeratedly large forms of the breasts and the hips were another sexual feature of corsets.
Miller contends that the corset was also designed to control the progression of a woman's life, or at least, to mimic society's ideal of a woman's life. Free from the corset until puberty, it was seen as ushering a girl into womanhood. Once married the act of removing the corset for "romantic liaisons" symbolized the release of the act itself. And once pregnant the removal of the corset came to signify a woman's final maturing moment. Here it is interesting to note that Miller points out that, to some extent, corsets were used as a means of birth control, often causing a woman to miscarry.
The author claims that corsets detailed a woman's role in society. Aside from controlling the stages of a woman's life, the constriction of a corset kept women away from physical labor. This is intriguing, as donning a corset was intense labor in its own right, usually requiring the assistance of another. Obviously unfit for manual labor, states Miller, the work of a woman wearing a corset was to show the worth of her husband; a corset-wearing woman could not physically provide for herself.
Miller finally carefully points out that wearing a corset was ultimately a woman's individual choice. It offered the illusion of being financially well-off, as a woman in a corset could not perform physical tasks herself. The corset also gave the impression of morality. Moreover, the corset defined a specific role in society: a woman who was cared for, spoken for, and who had a clearly defined place in her world.
I found the relationship between the term "hourglass figure" and the corset's ability to give the appearance of cessation of age.
I also found it interesting that Miller claims that a woman not wearing a corset during the nineteenth century would probably have been considered indecently dressed. This seems to be in opposition to the many sexual features of the corset.
Leslie Shannon Millers many figures of eve: styles of womanhood embodied in a late-nineteenth-century corset discussed why, how, and when women would wear this item. The corset was used to create a specific shape to a womans body, and every part of the garment created a binding tension. Women would wear this garment from puberty to well into adulthood.
I was interested in the idea that the corset transforms the appearance of the female body. Not only does the corset change the form of the body, but the feeling, fluidity of the body as well. Although, Miller mentions the garment has," a softness suggested by the appearance," which is feminine yes, it does hot feel like a woman. It completely holds the womans torso like a cage. The image suggests a solid, textures, and bond feeling. Miller evenmentions its, "touch-me-not" aura about it.
I was also interested in what Erik touched on and Miller mentioned about woman not wearing a corset being "loose,' or indescent, and today wearing a corset is considered very sexual, or indescent.
There was a lot of description of the physical appearance of the corset while worn and while not worn during Leslie Shannon Miller's piece, but i think the representation for the use was the most fascinating. She said that the corset shaped the body like a pitcher of milk so that if you would tip the women the milk would come out. This course of thought made me think of all the ways this is objectifing the women.
Studying an object reveals something about the objects creator and user, so ask yourself the question what kind of a person makes such a thing. One could go down a path of thought that would suggest that the creator of the corset was this sexual deviant. Most likely a male using the object to cause torture to the female for his own sexual gratification. Then you would have to speculate again that the women who wore these or made thier children wear these had an entirely different view on how they should be treated in civilized society. It almost seems that some one who would willingly wear this is accepting there own lower value to the opposite sex.
This article is an educated, in-depth analysis and hypothesis concerning a corset from the late nineteenth century, a time in which women were accustomed (willingly or unwillingly) and expected to wear these. It was the more historical article out of the bunch, understandable on account of the large reference area pertaining to the item.
I was unaware to the extent of these items' usage. High class, yes, but the supposed "middle" class of those times as well surprised me.
The health risks caught my attention as well. ribs puncturing organs is not something that occurs due to a little discomfort. Miscarriages were a surprise, but made sense instantly. And the conscious use of them as a means of birth control has a drastically... analogue... characteristic to it
Back then women had no such rights, and were retained to that of one's ornament. These corsets werent created with the woman's feelings in mind. It was to groom your trophy and tighten it up for the public eye. Appearance...i liked the point made about the hourglass woman appearing to the petite, virgin, soft.... but then upon the touch of the whale bone...a tough... impenetrable exterior became apparent. If it punctured her rib... like your horses rib getting punctured... get a new one.
Not my view, but fascinating to think about such a drastically different mindset towards, the woman.
Post a Comment