1. She elaborates on how human nature and impulse is what gives ordinary objects their value. Along with this, if it is something from years before such as an antique, it holds a different value. She also briefly covers how objects communicate different things for everyone and this can add or take away from their value to certain people. Also, the way other people react to certain objects can change the value of that object for you.
The point she makes that I find most convincing is when she discusses how it is human nature to give value to ordinary objects. This is convincing to me because I believe she is correct in this respect. Our emotions play a huge role in the way we see things and this is no different to when we are holding something that belongs to a deceased relative or the shoes you wore when you won an important race.
I’d say all of the things she talked about resonated with my experience. I feel I have experiences the wonder of all of these things. I own a fair number of antiques myself that intrigue me simply because of their role in history, as well as items I have kept that have sentimental value to me because of what they remind me of, or, simply, objects that I own because they mean certain things to me.
One thing I believe Busch omitted was the simple childish wonder one can have when looking upon something that is alien to them. I remember as a child I would keep rocks that were colored differently, or grew interesting crystals on them. I kept these things not because they had any sentimental value to me but simply because I did not understand their nature so I wanted to hold on to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment