Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VANDOO
YEP THIS WILL BE A CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT 
[snip]
THERE ARE THOSE TODAY WHO FEEL THAT WE ALL SHOULD ALL BE FORCED TO DO AS THEY SAY AND THEY WOULD NOT ALLOW US MUCH. WE WOULD ALL HAVE TO BECOME VEGITARIANS, FREE ALL THE ANIMALS AND WEAR ONLY CLOTHES MADE FROM PLANTS, LIVE IN HOLES IN THE GROUND SO WE WOULD NOT NEED TO CUT THE TREES OR DIG UP THE EARTH TO MAKE CEMENT OR MINE METALS, COAL OR OIL. ABSOLUTELY NO COLLECTING JUST STAY ON THE PATH AND TAKE NOTHING EXCEPT AIR AND SUN AND LEAVE ONLY FOOTPRINTS.  |
I mostly agree with what Vandoo's saying about collecting, so I snipped that part out. The point he made here is telling though, and since it affects my everyday work and my current collecting, I thought I'd comment on it.
Right now, I'm working as an ecologist in a conservancy. Yes, we've got lots of "stay on the path and don't eat the plants" rules. Since I saw what the place was like before the rules came in, I hate to say it, but there's a reason for them. The problem is that if you have to deal with a mass of people, all too often, you have to impose draconian rules to restrain the idiots. At least half the people could be given more freedom, if they could somehow be distinguished from idiots. Problem is, they can't. Some of the idiots may even be running the place.
I'll drag this back to ethnographic weapons in a sec, but the real irony for me is that the conservancy land was inhabited for thousands of years before it became a nature conservancy. The natives ate the plants--they had to, or they would starve. Similarly, they took amazingly good care of the place--they had to, or they would starve. Nowdays, our well-being does not depend on taking care of the conservancy lands as a sustainable food supply, and so we're left with "stay on the path and don't eat the plants." The place doesn't look as good as it once did, but no one is willing to risk starvation to care for it properly.
Getting back to ethnographic weapons, the similarity between collecting and managing the conservancy is, in my view, alienation from the subject. To us collectors, these are objects. They used to be everyday tools, or weapons that protected your family, killed your enemies, or whatever. But for the most part, we don't use them that way. We put them in cases and haul them out every once in a while to look at them and clean the rust off. We're as alienated from our ethnographic weapons as are the people who walk down that path in the Conservancy, and don't eat the plants.
One way to end the alienation is to view ourselves as custodians of items. We're not the first owners, and if we value objects as artifacts, then we care for them and pass them along. This is one good way to be an responsible collector.
Another good way is to support traditional bladesmiths who still make these weapons, but that's another post.
My 0.00002 cents,
F