Question 5

Funny, I used the word “representation” in a previous answer (Q. 3) to describe the similarity of human form across culture and time-period. I actually think this representation is important in itself—it tells us about the self-image of the culture or the image they have of humans in general. A lack of that representation would also be interesting, such as the fact that many Islamic cultures do not depict any living thing since, in their belief system, that can only be done by God. I see what TL means when she says that a figurine is not necessarily representative, in a symbolic sense, for something else, but I took representation to mean the perception that a culture had of the object depicted, not that the object stood in the place of that which it depicted. (CBL)

The tendency to consider figurines as representations does detract from their position within a culture as real objects. While figurines may represent an abstract idea or deity, the object was that with which the people interacted in the most literal and visceral way; however, the reason for interacting with that object was to bring to mind the immaterial expression. To separate the two, to remove the reality of the object and consider only the object as a stand-in for something that won't be retained in the archaeological record, detracts from the usefulness of the figurine in interpreting a past culture. Also, as a side note, the dictionary definition of a figurine is "a small ornamental figure of pottery, metal, plastic, etc.; statuette" -- not necessarily a representation of something else, but something to be handled and experienced directly. (TL)