A digital archive showcasing the extensive collection of jewellery and adornment images shared on the former Ethnic Jewels Ning site over the years. These images have significantly enriched discussions on cultural adornment and its global dispersion.
You need to be a member of Adorned Histories to add comments!
Request your copy of our newsletter.
If you would like to receive our newsletter
Comments
I think we could do with more comment on something like this. That would potentially be helpful.
Surely, Patricia, the first comment should be made by a person posting the piece? Don't you think it is normal, and potentially helpful to others, for a poster to provide a caption?
If I posted this, I might say something like this. "This is an assembly suggesting the bottom end of a necklace purporting to be Turkoman. The pendant at the bottom (an "asyk") looks vaguely as though it might be 19th c but the proportions are not in tune with tradition, and the workmanship is not fine enough. Nevertheless, it is interesing to see such a pendant. The other pieces are quite untraditional, and to my mind look out of keeping with the asyk. All in all, we seem to be viewing an inconsistent hybrid." This is - quite honestly - what I would myself say if it were my own piece, and I have made similar statements about pieces of ours on Facebook. I comment just as frankly on my own pieces as on others. In short, I say what I think. Others can then disagree, or prove me wrong.That way discussions seem to me to progress. You have asked me for my comment, and this is it - reluctantly offered, for the poster might well have said something similar - or, alternatively, disagree with my view. I hope we shall hear! I don't think that this piece would mislead many people - it is too discordant for that. But I think it fails on the basis of its being aesthetically incoherent and inconsistent.