18
jn: B' Smith and T' Prewitt (eds')'
S' Monahan'
"Collecting: A semiotic perspecti ve'" 2OO7
siiiiii it 7 oo tt z o o s. ottawa: Legas' Pp' 218-232'
Cor.rrccrmc: A Srcurorrc PrcnsrrcrlvE
I
Frank Nuessel
Univer sity of Louisville
Introduction
This paper will examine the phenomenon of collecting, the
people who engage in this activity, and their reasons for doing so.
In particular, it will consider the following aspects of this pastime:
(1) a definition of collection; (2) a brief note on the history of
collecting (from Roman times to present); (3) types of collectors;
(4) types of collections (private/public); (5) examples of
collectibles (postage stamps, coins, and so forth); and (6) the
semiotic dimensions of this activity.
Although Danet and Katriel (1989: 254) point out that
"[u]ntil very recently collecting was only rarely the subject of
serious academic research," they further observe that this situation
has changed "[s]uddenly, in the latter half of this decade [1980s],
there has been a spurt of publications in a number of academic
disciplines...". In fact, the literature on collecting is burgeoning
with many articles and books now devoted to it (Alsop 1982,
Aristides 1988, Belk 1995, Belk et al., 1990, Csikszentmihalyi and
Rochberg-Halton 1981, Danet and Katriel 1989, 1994, Durost
1932, Henderson and Kaeppler 1997b, Klamkin 1981, Land-
Webber 1980, Muensterberger 1994, O'Brien 1981, Pearce 1993,
1998) and various anthologies (Dilworth 2003a, Elsner and
, C oLLrcrmo/F n uu x Nutssrr 2t9
Cardinal 1994a, Henderson and Kaeppler 1997a, Johnston and
Beddow 1986, Riggins 1994, Schroeder 1981).
In the introductory remarks to their now classic study,
The Meaning of Things, Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton
(1981: xi) note certain historical precedents for the study of the
interaction of humans and objects. An important literary one is les
choses (Perec 1965) by the French novelist George Perec, a
member of the avant-garde literary movement Oulipo (Oulvroir I
de] Lilitt er ature) P ofot entielle]'workshop of potential literature').
This novel describes an ephemeral movement called chosisme,
'thingism,' that sought to ".. . portray human life mainly in terms of
the characters' acquisition, use, and disposal of objects, and not in
terms of an inner stream of consciousness or of a sequence of
actions and events" (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981:
xi).
D efint tio ns of C o llecting
As Baudrillard (1994:22) points out, the Latin word from which
'collect' is derived rs colligere which means to collect and to assemble, an
etymology that captures the essence of this common form of human
behavior. Baudrillard (1994: 22) distinguishes collecting from
accumulating which is merely the piling up of objects, e.g., old
newspapers or magazines. Likewise, he differentiates collecting from
serial accumulation of identical ob.jects. For Baudrillard (1994: 22,
emphasis in original, FN):
Collecting proper emerges at first with an orientation to the
cultural: it aspires to discriminate between objects, privileging
those which have some exchange value or which are also
'objects' of conversation, of cofiunerce, of social ritual, of
display - possibly which are even a source of profit. Such
objects are always associated with human projects. While
ceaselessly referring to one another, they admit within their
orbit the extemal dimension of social and human intercourse.
Finally, for Baudrillard (1994: 23), a collection is not only
culturally complex but it generally /acts something, i.e., there is an
aspect of "incompletedness." The goal of a collection is to find the
missing pieces. Once achieved, however, the collector must be content,
, 220 Szutoucs 2004/2005
or seek a new challenge through a new collection, or possibly upgrading
the quality of the specimens in an existing collection.
Wajda (2003:45) also addresses a hidden aspect of a collection,
i.e., the reference to an invisible domain such as the implicit allusion to
the Linnaean classification system of biology in the Peale museum of
natural history. This same sort of covert allusion is inherent in all
collections. For the neophyte, the invisible system may be unintelligible,
yet for the sophisticate, the implicit allusion will be immediately I
obvious. With respect to collectors, Belk (1995: 55) notes that they "...
create, combine, classifu, and curate the objects they acquire in such a
way that a new product, the collection, emerges. In the process they also
produce meanings. More precisely, they participate in the process of
socially reconstructing shared meanings for the objects they collect."
Pearce (1998: 2) aptly notes that the definition of collection is
elusive. Pearce (1998: 2) cites Durost's (1932: 10, emphasis in original,
FN) definition of collection as a starting point.
A collection is basically determined by the nature of the value
assigned to the objects or ideas possessed. lf lhe predominant
value of an object or an idea for the person possessing it is
intrinsic, i.e., if it is valued primarily for use, or pu{pose, or
aesthetically pleasing quality, or other value inherent in the
object accruing to it by whatever circumstances of custom,
training, or habit, it is not a collection. If the predominant
value is representative or representational, i.e., ifsaid object or
idea is valued chiefly for the relation it bears to some other
object or idea, or objects, or ideas, such as being one of a
series, part of a whole, a specimen of a class, then it is the
subject of a collection.
More recent definitions add precision to the notion of collection.
Pearce (1998: 2) cites Aristides (1988: 330), for example, who states that
"collection .. . [is] 'obsession organised.' One of the distinctions between
possessing and collecting is that the latter implies order, system, perhaps
completion. The collector's interest is not bounded by the intrinsic worth
of the objects of his desire; whatever they cost, he must have them."
Alsop (1982: 70), again cited by Pearce (1998: 2), focuses on the
mentality of the collector, i.e., a collection is the result of what a
collector has collected, i.e., a collection is what a collector believes it to
be. Pearce (1998: 3) also cites Belk and his associates (1990: 8) when
jn: B' Smith and T' Prewitt (eds')'
S' Monahan'
"Collecting: A semiotic perspecti ve'" 2OO7
siiiiii it 7 oo tt z o o s. ottawa: Legas' Pp' 218-232'
Cor.rrccrmc: A Srcurorrc PrcnsrrcrlvE
I
Frank Nuessel
Univer sity of Louisville
Introduction
This paper will examine the phenomenon of collecting, the
people who engage in this activity, and their reasons for doing so.
In particular, it will consider the following aspects of this pastime:
(1) a definition of collection; (2) a brief note on the history of
collecting (from Roman times to present); (3) types of collectors;
(4) types of collections (private/public); (5) examples of
collectibles (postage stamps, coins, and so forth); and (6) the
semiotic dimensions of this activity.
Although Danet and Katriel (1989: 254) point out that
"[u]ntil very recently collecting was only rarely the subject of
serious academic research," they further observe that this situation
has changed "[s]uddenly, in the latter half of this decade [1980s],
there has been a spurt of publications in a number of academic
disciplines...". In fact, the literature on collecting is burgeoning
with many articles and books now devoted to it (Alsop 1982,
Aristides 1988, Belk 1995, Belk et al., 1990, Csikszentmihalyi and
Rochberg-Halton 1981, Danet and Katriel 1989, 1994, Durost
1932, Henderson and Kaeppler 1997b, Klamkin 1981, Land-
Webber 1980, Muensterberger 1994, O'Brien 1981, Pearce 1993,
1998) and various anthologies (Dilworth 2003a, Elsner and
, C oLLrcrmo/F n uu x Nutssrr 2t9
Cardinal 1994a, Henderson and Kaeppler 1997a, Johnston and
Beddow 1986, Riggins 1994, Schroeder 1981).
In the introductory remarks to their now classic study,
The Meaning of Things, Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton
(1981: xi) note certain historical precedents for the study of the
interaction of humans and objects. An important literary one is les
choses (Perec 1965) by the French novelist George Perec, a
member of the avant-garde literary movement Oulipo (Oulvroir I
de] Lilitt er ature) P ofot entielle]'workshop of potential literature').
This novel describes an ephemeral movement called chosisme,
'thingism,' that sought to ".. . portray human life mainly in terms of
the characters' acquisition, use, and disposal of objects, and not in
terms of an inner stream of consciousness or of a sequence of
actions and events" (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton 1981:
xi).
D efint tio ns of C o llecting
As Baudrillard (1994:22) points out, the Latin word from which
'collect' is derived rs colligere which means to collect and to assemble, an
etymology that captures the essence of this common form of human
behavior. Baudrillard (1994: 22) distinguishes collecting from
accumulating which is merely the piling up of objects, e.g., old
newspapers or magazines. Likewise, he differentiates collecting from
serial accumulation of identical ob.jects. For Baudrillard (1994: 22,
emphasis in original, FN):
Collecting proper emerges at first with an orientation to the
cultural: it aspires to discriminate between objects, privileging
those which have some exchange value or which are also
'objects' of conversation, of cofiunerce, of social ritual, of
display - possibly which are even a source of profit. Such
objects are always associated with human projects. While
ceaselessly referring to one another, they admit within their
orbit the extemal dimension of social and human intercourse.
Finally, for Baudrillard (1994: 23), a collection is not only
culturally complex but it generally /acts something, i.e., there is an
aspect of "incompletedness." The goal of a collection is to find the
missing pieces. Once achieved, however, the collector must be content,
, 220 Szutoucs 2004/2005
or seek a new challenge through a new collection, or possibly upgrading
the quality of the specimens in an existing collection.
Wajda (2003:45) also addresses a hidden aspect of a collection,
i.e., the reference to an invisible domain such as the implicit allusion to
the Linnaean classification system of biology in the Peale museum of
natural history. This same sort of covert allusion is inherent in all
collections. For the neophyte, the invisible system may be unintelligible,
yet for the sophisticate, the implicit allusion will be immediately I
obvious. With respect to collectors, Belk (1995: 55) notes that they "...
create, combine, classifu, and curate the objects they acquire in such a
way that a new product, the collection, emerges. In the process they also
produce meanings. More precisely, they participate in the process of
socially reconstructing shared meanings for the objects they collect."
Pearce (1998: 2) aptly notes that the definition of collection is
elusive. Pearce (1998: 2) cites Durost's (1932: 10, emphasis in original,
FN) definition of collection as a starting point.
A collection is basically determined by the nature of the value
assigned to the objects or ideas possessed. lf lhe predominant
value of an object or an idea for the person possessing it is
intrinsic, i.e., if it is valued primarily for use, or pu{pose, or
aesthetically pleasing quality, or other value inherent in the
object accruing to it by whatever circumstances of custom,
training, or habit, it is not a collection. If the predominant
value is representative or representational, i.e., ifsaid object or
idea is valued chiefly for the relation it bears to some other
object or idea, or objects, or ideas, such as being one of a
series, part of a whole, a specimen of a class, then it is the
subject of a collection.
More recent definitions add precision to the notion of collection.
Pearce (1998: 2) cites Aristides (1988: 330), for example, who states that
"collection .. . [is] 'obsession organised.' One of the distinctions between
possessing and collecting is that the latter implies order, system, perhaps
completion. The collector's interest is not bounded by the intrinsic worth
of the objects of his desire; whatever they cost, he must have them."
Alsop (1982: 70), again cited by Pearce (1998: 2), focuses on the
mentality of the collector, i.e., a collection is the result of what a
collector has collected, i.e., a collection is what a collector believes it to
be. Pearce (1998: 3) also cites Belk and his associates (1990: 8) when
