What does a scientific souvenir remind us of?

The Whipple museum owns at least three alabaster viewers created by J. H. Cardin in the 19th century. At the time, alabaster viewers were quite widespread as voyage souvenirs because of their capacity to connect memory of a place (while watching the proposed image) and surprise (while looking at the size of the image). It is also probable that they were felt as valuable objects: as a material, alabaster was likely chosen not only because of its particular translucency properties, but also because a long tradition looked at alabaster as to a precious material.
But the alabaster viewers on show at the Whipple were not souvenirs, at least of a trip. They didn’t display any image connected with a particular place, but rather a mineral collection: that is to say one of the oldest way to show richness and beauty of nature.
I would like to call this a “doubling” object, where art recalls nature and vice-versa. Surprise in viewing was doubled because an entire collection was available in a little article. Sense of richness was increased by the discovery that alabaster was hiding precious natural objects. The beauty pursued by the craftsman was intended to introduce and echo the beauty of inner minerals.
But are beauty, surprise and richness enough to understand the reasons why these objects were produced and put on display in middle-class houses? Maybe the concept of souvenir could help us to consider also a more intimate reason for collecting. Maybe the inner power of these objects was to activate memory about a trustful concept of knowledge, in which art and nature cooperated in complete harmony for the wellness of mankind. And maybe we should add that if objects are successful in activating a particular kind of memory, then it is also quite understandable why grand narratives are so flourishing there…


















.