I am carrying on from our IRLS672 database efforts my collection of mosaics made and photographed. I hope that this does not prove too simple-minded and self-centered as we go; it offers the advantage of clarity of ownership of both objects and digital surrogates, and I hope to expand the collection to include related material.
There are currently about 17 physical objects, but I also have photographs I’ve taken of mosaic work I’ve visited and found inspirational or just interesting. I took up this hobby about two years ago as something I had visited in childhood and always wanted to return to; I have in mind eventually selling some pieces, and miraculously sold one at an arts benefit silent auction. I have considered listing the pieces on Etsy.com, eventually, when I’m roaring good. Meanwhile, they are fodder for metadata manipulation.
Anyone may access this collection, though I should devise copyright insignia possibly, or not.
The Shirky article did (re-)awaken my consciousness of all the interesting problems around organization. I get it that “there is no shelf”, from time to time; it is hard to shake the schooling and training that has built certain automatic expectations. One of my first thoughts was that someone else might assign the word “kitsch” to mosaics, or something else that might get my hackles up. My collection qualifies well for ontological classification, actually, according to Shirky, being small and well-defined, described by an authoritative source of judgment, and with “edges” (physically and metaphorically).
So some terms, a la Shirky, not Library of Congress, might include:
abstract, art, beads, ceramic, color, crafts, decoration, design, encrustation, garden design, geometric, glass, grout, hobby, inlay, interior design, kitsch, millefiori, mirrors, mosaicists, mosaics, oblong, ornament, oval, pavement, pebbles, round, shards, shells, square, stained glass, stones, tesserae, tile, vitreous.
I may create an EAD finding aid for all of the pieces collectively, one for the research material…could, if I had an ILS, create a MARC record for each piece…with the images I could create a METS file…but my mind is not expansive enough to see all the possibilities. Must expand.
greenleopard reporting in from DigIn 