1. A process of selection is necessary, as not all items examined at the Level One stage will be carried over for scrutiny in Level Two.
   
2. Of those objects carried over, not all properties will be relevant, but only those that speak to the larger historical questions being investigated.

Comments:
Finley's methodology provides a useful template to direct the categorization and comparison of related objects. His method, however, neglects to consider issues of design, cultural meaning, consumptive patterns, semiotics and environmentalism.

Fleming's Method:

In his article, "Artifact Study: A Proposed Model" (1974), Fleming outlines four operations to be performed on five properties in order to yield information on the artifact.

The Five Properties

1. History: where and when the object is made, by whom, for whom;changes in ownership, condition and function of the object
   
2. Material: what object is made of--wood, fibre, glass etc…
   
3. Construction: techniques of manufacture, workmanship
   
4. Design: structure, form, style, ornament, iconography
   
5. Function: uses (intended functions), roles (unintended functions)

1. Identification: establishment of distinctive facts--classification, authentication, and description
   
2. Evaluation: judgements based on comparison with others of its kind
   
3. Cultural Analysis: interrelationship of object with its contemporary culture
   
4. Interpretation: meaning of artifact in relation to our own culture.

Comments:
Fleming's analytical model provides useful methods for considering objects in relation to culture. In fact, in the "interpretation" stage he suggests that the object should be evaluated in terms of the contemporary cultural values of social mobility, nationalism, urbanization, ecology, democracy, feminism and mechanization. This analysis expands upon Finley's method and is similar to the methodologies of Prown and McCracken outlined below. Like the latter theorists, Flemming regards objects as repositories of culture and reflectors of cultural meaning. His methodology, however, is problematic for my purposes since it assumes a certain level of connoisseurship. As most of the coffee cups I will be examining are are contemporary utilitarian objects, I am unconcerned with questions of authenticity and judgement of aesthetics as "art".

Prown's Method:

Prown's methodology, outlined in "Mind and Matter: An Introduction to Material Culture Theory and Method" (1982) and "On the 'Art' in Artifacts" (1993), is a foundational attempt to develop a rigorous methodology to analyse objects and uncover their meaning. To Prown, artifacts express belief and values metaphorically. His methodology is designed to uncover these metaphors.

1. Description--based on observation: physical inventory of material, dimensions, iconographic content
2. Deduction--based on direct sensory engagement: involving a certain amount of feigned innocence, involving considerations of what object does and how it does it
3. Speculation--involving creative imagining and free association of ideas to formulate theories and hypothesis;
4. Emotional response--linking the object to experiences and feelings
5. Program of Research--formulation of a program for validation of hypothesis using interdisciplinary techniques

Comments
Prown's definition of artifacts illuminates the methodologies of Finley and Flemming. By beginning with the knowledge that an artifact is a manifestation of the beliefs and values of the culture that created it, one can then begin to uncover those hidden meanings. The feigning of innocence in the "deduction" stage, and the creative imagining in the "speculation" stage are necessary for a discovery of meaning and the formulation of theories.

McCracken: Culture and Consumption

In his article, "Meaning Manufacture and Movement in the World of Goods" (1988), McCracken, like Prown, suggests that objects are a visible record of cultural meaning. He argues that cultural meaning is constantly in transit between three locations: the culturally constituted world (the world of everyday experience), the consumer good and the individual consumer. Meaning is transferred from the culturally constituted world to the consumer good through advertising and the fashion system. The rituals of possession, exchange, grooming and divestment then transfer meaning from the good to the consumer.

Comments:
My main criticism of McCracken's theory is that it is overly deterministic. By suggesting that the direction of transfer is fixed, he implies that all actors in the system constantly behave according to their prescribed roles. A more realistic diagram of meaning transfer might allow for reciprocal tranfers. Overall,however, McCracken's theory provides a useful template for analysing the coffee cup as a consumer good and a locus of meaning. His model begs questions about the location of meaning in a good, and the motivation behind consumption. Does one buy an object because of its known meaning, or is meaning established afterwards? Is meaning variable? How does this apply to the coffee cup? The coffee cup is a peculiar item; it functions as a consumer good, and also as a good that is necessary for the consumption of another item--coffee. Coffee cannot be consumed without the aid of the coffee cup, or some sort of vessel that isolates hands from heat. Where would such an item fit in McCracken's diagram?

Adrian Forty: Theories of Design

In his book, Objects of Desire: Design and Society Since 1750 (1992), Forty looks at the history of design in terms of the social circumstances in which objects were produced. To be successful every product must incorporate ideas that will make it marketable. The task of design is to bring about the conjunction between such ideas and the available means of production. Society, Forty argues, is fundamentally resistant to innovation. Design must therefore alter the ways people see commodities by disguising the shape of what we take to be reality. According to Forty, the disguises can fall into three categories -- the archaic, the suppressive and the utopian. Archaic design disguises the newness of an object by presenting it in an old-fashioned form, thus referring to the past. The suppressive presents the new object as a part of some other established form that serves an entirely different purpose. The utopian form suggests that the object belongs to a future and better world.

Comments:
While conducting my preliminary research, I noticed that the coffee cup resembled, in one instance, a bowl, and in another, a jar. I have also observed that the form of the cup has remained constant over the last 350 years. I would like to investigate this observation in terms of Forty's observation.