| Page Number in Jewellery Manifest | Author | Quote | Page number in source | Reference Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Page 5 | Robert Bringhurst | “…designed by John Baskerville in the 1750s, it is the epitome of neoclassicism and eighteenth-century rationalism in type…” | Page 205 | Bringhurst, R. (2001). The elements of typographic style. 2nd ed. Point Roberts, WA: Hartley & Marks Publishers. |
| Page 5 | Robert Bringhurst | “Gill Sans is a distinctly British but highly readable sans-serif, composed of latently humanist and overtly geometric forms…” | Page 242 | Bringhurst, R. (2001). The elements of typographic style. 2nd ed. Point Roberts, WA: Hartley & Marks Publishers. |
| Page 9 | Jaques Derrida/ Simon Geldinning | The preface announces in the future tense (this is what you are going to read) the conceptual content or significance of what will already have been written and thus sufficiently read to be gathered up to semantic tenor and proposed in advance. From (this) viewpoint, which re-creates an intention-to-say after the fact, the (main) text exists as something written – a past – which, under the false appearance of a present, a hidden omnipotent author (in full mastery of his product) is presenting to the reader as his future. Here is what I wrote, then read, and what I am writing that you are going to read. After which you will again be able to take position of the preface, which in sum you have not yet begun to read, even though, once you have read it, you will have already anticipated everything that follows and thus you might just as well dispense with reading the rest. | Page 33 | Glendinning, S. (2011). Derrida. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| Page 10 | Roland Barthes | ‘The modern writer (scriptor) is born simultaneously with his text; he is in no way supplied with a being which precedes or transcends his writing, he is in no way the subject of which his book is the predicate; there is no other time than that of the utterance, and every text is eternally written here and now.’ | n/a | Barthes, R. (n.d.). The Death of the Author. http://www.tbook.constantvzw.org/wpcontent/death_authorbarthes.pdf. |
|
Page 15 | Jane Bennett | ‘Assemblages are not governed by any central head: no one materiality or type of material has sufficient competence to determine consistently the trajectory or impact of the group. The effects generated by an assemblage are, rather, emerging properties, emergent in their ability to make something happen (a newly inflected materialism, a blackout, a hurricane, a war on terror) as distinct from the sum of the vital force of each materiality considered alone. Each member and proto-member of the assemblage has a certain vital force, but there is also an effectiveness proper to the grouping as such: an agency of the assemblage. And precisely because each member-actant maintains an energetic pulse slightly “off” from that of the assemblage, an assemblage is never a stolid block but an open-ended collective, a “non-totalizable” sum…The elements of this assemblage, while they include humans and their (social, legal, linguistic) constructions, also include some very active and powerful non-humans: electrons, trees, wind, fire, electromagnetic fields.’ (Bennett) | Page 24 | Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. |
| Page 17 | Brown | ‘Transactions between people and things they create constitute a central aspect of the human condition. Past memories, present experiences and future dreams of each person are inextricably linked to objects that compromise his or her environment.’ | TBC | Brown, B. (2003). A sense of things: the object matter of American literature. Chicago, IL.: University of Chicago Press. |
| Page 19 | Raymond Williams | ‘Culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language. This is so partly because of its intricate historical development, in several European languages, but mainly because it has now come to be used for important concepts in several distinct intellectual disciplines and in several distinct and incompatible systems of thought…Within this complex argument there are fundamentally opposed as well as effectively overlapping positions; there are also, understandably, many unresolved questions and confused answers. But these arguments and questions cannot be resolved by reducing the complexity of actual usage.’ | Page 87 | Williams, R. (1976). Keywords: a vocabulary of culture and society. London: Croom Helm. |
| Page 21 | Lucretius | ‘Nothing turns to nothing. All things decompose. Back to the elemental particles from which they rose.’ | Stanza 240 | Lucretius (2007). The Nature of Things. 1st ed. Penguin Classics. |
| Page 21 | Ian Hodder | ‘Things have lives, vibrant lives and temporalities, and they depend on each other and on humans. This separate world of things draws humans in. The social world of humans and the material world of things are entangled together by dependencies and dependencies that create potentials, further investments and entrapments.’ | Page 89 | Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled: an archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Chichester: Wiley- Blackwell. |
| Page 23 | Webb Keane | ‘efforts to rethink materiality are still commonly hampered by certain assumptions that built into the lineage that runs from Ferdinand de Saussure to poststructuralism. Guided by these assumptions, we tend to divide our attention between things and ideas. Those whose attention centres on things may be tempted to relegate ideas to epiphenomenal domain, subordinate to the real tangible stuff. Conversely, attention to ideas seems to render material forms into little more than transparent expressions of meaning…Signs are viewed, like other people, as thoroughly external to, or even at odds with, that interiority.’ (Keane) | Page 182 | Keane, W. (2005). Signs are not the garb of meaning: on the social analysis of material things. In: D. Miller, ed., Materiality, Durham, NC: Duke University Press. |
| Page 25 | Walter Gropius
/ Bruno Munari | When the objects we use every day and the surroundings we live in have become in themselves a work of art, then we shall be able to say that we have achieved a balanced life.’ | Page 27 | Munari, B. and Creagh, P. (2008). Design as art. London: Penguin. |
| Page 27 | Glenn Adamson | ‘Anything can be taken for art, craft included, and that is all there is to say on the matter. But as surely as this is a banal truism, the opposite proposition that art is not craft – that it might gain something by defining itself against that category, is a rather interesting one.’ | TBC | Adamson, G. (2007). Thinking Through Craft. 1st ed. Berg Publishers & V&A Museum.. |
| Page 27 | Alfred Gell | ‘We talk about objects, using signs, but art objects are not, except in special cases, signs themselves with “meanings”; and if they do have meanings, then they are part of language.’ | Page 8 | Gell, A. (2013). Art and agency. Oxford: Clarendon Press. |
| Page 29 | Anders Ljungberg | ‘Several ideas are contained in the notion of intimacy of an object and its material. In order to understand the ideas, we must take into account experiences of our own bodies… Through such a process, we understand and are made aware of our own physical presence. This encounter is intimate largely because it takes place beyond all intellectual modes of explanation… Intimate communication between an individual user and individual functional object arises on a completely wordless plane.’ | Page 116 | Ljungberg, A. (2019). An emotional perspective on everyday use. In: A. Gali, ed., Material perceptions: documents on contemporary crafts, No.5, Oslo: Norwegian Crafts/Arnoldsche Art Publishers. |
| Page 31 | Gilles Deluze | ‘[…] is itself independent of the creator through the self-positing of the created, which is preserved in itself. What is preserved – the thing or the work of art – is a bloc of sensations, that is to say, a compound of percept’s and affects. Percepts are no longer perceptions; they are independent of a state of those who experience them. Affects are no longer feelings or affections; they go beyond the strength of those who undergo them. Sensations, percepts, and affects are beings whose validity lies in themselves and exceeds any lived. They could be said to exist in the absence of man because man, as he is caught in stone, on the canvas, or by words, is himself a compound of percepts and affects. The work of art is a being of sensation and nothing else: it exists in itself.’ | Page 164 | Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1994). Percept, Affect and Concept. In: What is philosophy? London: Verso |
| Page 33 | Susan Stewart | ‘The book…is an object, it seems revealed; its physical aspects give way to abstraction and a nexus of new temporalities.’ | Page 37 | Stewart, S. (1993). On Longing: Narratives of the Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection. 8th ed. USA: Duke University Press. |
| Page 35 | Jaques Derrida | ‘The idea of the book is the ideal of totality, finite or infinite, of the signifier, this totality of the signifier cannot be a totality unless a totality of the signified pre-exists it supervises its inscriptions and its signs and is independent of its ideality. The idea of the book, which always refers to a natural totality, is profoundly alien to the sense of writing. If I distinguish the text from the book, I shall say that the destruction of the book, as it is now under way in all domains, denudes the surface of the text. That necessary violence responds to a violence that was no less necessary. | Page 18 | Derrida, J and Spivak, G. (1998). Of Grammatology. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. |
| Page 37 | Susan Stewart | ‘attempts to describe the miniature threaten an infinity of detail that becomes translated into an infinity of verbality. Language describing the miniature always displays the inadequacy of language.’ | Page 52 | Stewart, S. (1993). On Longing: Narratives of the Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection. 8th ed. USA: Duke University Press. |
| Page 39 | Michael Rowe | ‘I speak two languages, the English language and the visual language.” | n/a | Taken from short presentation at Royal College of Art Sept 2018 |
| Page 39 | Jaques Derrida | ‘I have but one language- yet that
language is not mine’ | Page 2
& Reverse of book | Derrida, J. and Mensah, P. (1998). Monolingualism of the other; or, the prosthesis of origin. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. |
| Page 41 | Vanhaeren, d’Errico, Van Niekerk and Henshilwood. | ‘body ornamentation complies with strict internalised norms, which assists with the maintenance of group cohesion, reinforcement of social rules, and the transmission of cultural traits’. | Page 503 | Vanhaeren, M., d’Errico, F., van Niekerk, K., Henshilwood, C. and Erasmus, R. (2013). Thinking strings: additional evidence for personal ornament use in the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Journal of Human Evolution, 64(6), 500-517. |
| Page 41 | Jane Bennett | ‘The world is not determined, that an element of chanciness resides at the heart of things, but also affirms that so-called in-animate things have a life, that deep within is an inexplicable vitality or energy, a moment of independence from and resistance to us and other bodies: a kind of thing power.’ | Page 18 | Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. |
| Page 43 | Adamson | ’It is notable that [there are] two types of supplementary that jewellery exemplifies – its inferior relation to the body and its conventional association with craft process.’ | TBC | Adamson, G. (2007). Thinking Through Craft. 1st ed. Berg Publishers & V&A Museum.. |
| Page 47 | Gray | ‘Lacking (the) self-image of the sort humans cherish, other animals are content to be what they are. For human beings, the struggle for survival is a struggle against themselves.’ | Page 21
(Harback) | Gray, J. (2013). The silence of animals: on progress and other modern myths. London: Allen Lane |
| Page 47 | Dillon | ‘Why devote your adult life, at the expense of more than one of security, to the composition of many hundreds – perhaps a few thousand, in the end – of responses to the world of things and books and pictures and places and memories? what is it all for exactly? To keep certain kinds of fear at bay, or to cultivate anxieties, to replicate the same fear a thousand times and more, as if it were the only thing keeping you alive? Which it sometimes seems it might be…’ | Page 35 | Dillon, B. (2017). Essayism. London: Fitzcarraldo. |
| Page 47 | Marineti | ‘Beauty exists only in struggle.’ | n/a | The Futurist Manifesto |
| Page 51 | Harold Bloom | ‘The word meaning goes back to a root that signifies “opinion” or “intention,” and is closely related to the word moaning. A poem’s meaning is a poem’s complaint’ | Page 1 | Bloom, H. (1979). “The breaking of form”. In: Deconstruction and criticism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. |
| Page 55 | Søren Kjørup | Traditional aesthetic theory looks upon craft as a kind of exception or odd man out in the aesthetic field. In many ways, it is rather the Fine Arts that are the exception. One may indeed argue that the Fine Arts were emancipated from the constraints of the older European, craft-dominated guild system of the Middle Ages, but that also that they, to a certain extent, turned their back on all the cultural values that we appreciate in the work of the talented and well-trained artisan: skilfulness, functionality and often also the special kind of function that we call embellishment. On the other hand, when painting and sculptures are not cooped up in museums of fine art all over the world, but hang on the walls in people’s homes, in offices and in private or public places, do they not take on the virtues of adornment and social function as the prerogatives of craft. | Page 26 | Kjørup, S. (2019). Art as other? Reflections on craft’s and fine art’s places in the aesthetic field. In: A. Gali, ed., Material perceptions: documents on contemporary crafts, No.5, Oslo: Norwegian Crafts/Arnoldsche Publishers. |
