{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01727447216890595, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019193857965451055, 'mean_word_length': 5.438271604938271, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Vestigial Matters: Contemporary Archaeology and Hyperart

This article addresses things that can be described as rudimentary and vestigial; for example, an arguably out-of-place snow stake encountered in a derelict 19th-century landscape garden during an archaeological surface survey. How can one approach this stake without removing or overlooking its vestigial character? The term hyperart is introduced to develop the concept of vestigial objects. Hyperart was conceived by the Japanese artist and author Akasegawa Genpei, who defined it as ‘useless but beautifully preserved objects connected to some form of real estate’. That is, things that in one way or another have become vestigial and meaningless. An underlying link is shown between the concept hyperart and an archaeologically inspired approach to the material world. The rudimentary and detached are regarded as an integral part of the anthropogenic environment, and it is theorised that such recognition is important in depicting both past and contemporary human environments.