Bag c. 19th century

Editor: So, here we have a "Bag" from around the 19th century, an anonymous piece currently held at the Minneapolis Institute of Art. It’s crafted using fibre art techniques, combining silk, weaving, and embroidery. It has this intriguing earthy colour palette and mesmerizing geometric pattern. What immediately jumps out at you about this work? Curator: Immediately, I'm drawn to the labor involved. Look at the meticulous hand-embroidery and weaving; someone spent considerable time on this object. How does understanding the means of production shift your perspective on what we consider "art"? Editor: I guess it makes me appreciate it more! It's easy to forget the human effort when you just see the finished product in a museum. Thinking about it as "labor" almost reclaims it, giving it a new kind of value. What can we infer about its purpose from the materials used? Curator: The use of silk indicates a certain value placed on the bag itself; this wasn't meant for rough, utilitarian labor. Perhaps this reveals status. Also consider what dyes were accessible and their geographical origin, the process of weaving – the social context informs everything! The repetition of geometric motifs can be found across the world, but notice the combination with very particular stitching choices that make it unique. Do you think we can consider "fashion and textile design" an art movement, and what would that even mean? Editor: That's interesting… it's functional, but elevated. Calling fashion and textile design an art movement, if the bag's artistic expression is related to personal adornment and status. I never thought about something practical having a value that has to do with the context, the place. Thanks, it really makes it connect to me more. Curator: Indeed, this connects artistic expressions with culture and the means and systems of production. It's always in how we interpret art with both our minds and hands, by doing or appreciating it, to grasp the complete image.