In broken aesthetics, traces of repair show the relationship between people and objects, and the passage of time. This reminds me of the debate in heritage restoration about whether to restore the old to look new or to keep the marks of time. For example, many ancient Chinese Buddhist statues are not repainted with bright colors（their original colors), but keep the color shaped by time.

This is a good question. It reminds me that certain objects not only have functions but also carry other meanings, for example, a sweater made by a family member, or Chinese bronze vessels that represent a hierarchical system. When preserving or repairing objects that have a clear relationship with people, what is being repaired may also be the relationship behind them.

Weakening of relational ties that the text describes in discussions of repair and care may be because the form of labor has changed. In the past, people fabricated objects by hand and had a direct and physical relationship with them. In modern production, machines replace manual labor, and people mainly use their brains. As a result, the relationship between people and the objects they produce becomes weaker than before. This may require reading further literature to fully understand.

As another article in this week’s reading suggests, the nature and condition of things, such as their fragility and state of breakdown, are often only noticed once everyday life and object has already been damaged. Only when people recognize this fragility and the state of breakdown can reflection and repair take place.