I really welcome Tim Ingold's paper because intellectual debates about the meaning and significance of material culture or general attempts to theorize material forms are comparatively rare as opposed to the mass of literature discussing particular categories of things. In the paper he systematically sets out to oppose a concept of materiality (apparently worthless) to the study of materials which, in contrast, he suggests, may lead to many new insights and understandings. I do not find this supposed opposition all that helpful. Indeed I believe that it may have a conservative and reactionary effect in relation to studies of material culture which is no doubt contrary to Ingold's intentions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Christopher Tilley (2007) studied this question.