Hi, Asher,
I finally developed the idea that such pieces have fascination because of the shape and patterns and maybe, it's our genetic inheritance as homo sapiens that causes us to look further at fascinating patterns so we might expand our ways of relating to the world around us. When we collect these artifacts, we are saving fascination to be re-experienced, find more clues on life and at the same time exercise our imagination, fantasies and emotions. Maybe that is the glue that hold art together.
On top of the genetic "filter" and its serving "data base" there is the incredible sensitization of our individuate experiences.
There are all kinds of little things from my background that will call my attention to something (perhaps not in the sense of making me want to have it; more often in the sense of wanting to examine it, or know more about it).
I'll notice that, in a movie set in Manhattan in the 1950, when the character lifts up the telephone set base, I can see a little paper sticker on the bottom of it. Hmm, I think, there never would really have been such. I'll bet that's the prop department inventory label.
On that same note, when my late first wife, Bobbie, was properties master for the Albuquerque Little Theater, she made sure none of the telephone sets had little paper stickers on the bottom. "Might be somebody like you in the house", she would say.
So we each multiply the repertoire of sensations from seeing, or hearing, or smelling something by an incredible set of experiences and integrate the product; things pop out that would only do so to us, and it makes that object have an importance, or suggest a story, it might not to the vast majority of the populace.
This is one reason we have the incredible diversity or "takes" on many of the pictures we have here: the photographer of a nice shot of a locomotive tender calls attention to the bright red oil can sitting on the wood pile, while I see the dull black speaker and microphone of the mobile radio set just barely noticeable against the dull black tender itself. I note the anachronism (this is a "period" locomotive, oh-so-authentic).
And Will Thompson might have said, "Oh, yes, you know that in that microphone model, the push-to talk button often got stuck because of a design flaw in the cable clamp."
In communication theory, we are aware that the information actually received by the recipient comes from the actual facts in he context of the properties of transmitter and the properties of the receiver (and I don't just mean the apparatus).
And context is so important. A long time friend and colleague of mine has always been interested in police radio communication, and so was quite familiar with a lot of law enforcement practices when he and I first hung out together (in the late 1950's). He was going with a girl who had moved to Ohio from another state, and she needed to get an Ohio operator's license.*
*What is usually called a "driver's license", even though that is only actually its name in about two states. In most states it is actually called a Driver License.
Scoping out the deal for her, he went to the nearest Highway Patrol office, a small one, and said to the desk officer, "Excuse me, but when do you give OL tests (using the normal Patrol jargon for the Operator's License)?"
"Excuse me?" said the officer. My friend repeated his question in the same way. "I'm not following you, sir" said the officer. My friend said, "I'd like to know when you give the Operator's License test."
"Oh, sure." said the officer. "I think they have recently changed the schedule. Let me find out."
Turning to the door to another room, he said, "Hey, Harry - when do they give the OL tests here now?"
Best regards,
Doug