About halfway through his book Face Value: The Consumer Revolution and the Colonizing of America, Cary Carson claims that the French furnishing known as a “buffet” was “almost as foreign as its name was unpronounceable” when it appeared in British America in the early eighteenth century. “Among southern inventory takers,” Carson notes, “it often came out ‘Boofott’ or ‘Beaufett’ or (was it?) ‘Bow-Fatt.’ Never mind,” he concludes. “Owning one was all that counted” (p. 143). It is hard to believe that Carson first made this witty point almost twentyfive years ago. Face Value is largely a reprint of an epic (and classic) 215-page article published in a 1994 anthology on the eighteenth century “consumer revolution.” That the new book’s argument is not at all stale is a testament both to Carson’s accessible, engaging prose, and to the enduring centrality of two debates over the meaning of consumption among scholars of early American material culture. In fact, the age of Carson’s text does nothing to inhibit its ability to converse with two newer works: Zara Anishanslin’s Portrait of a Woman in Silk: Hidden Histories of the British Atlantic World, and Jennifer Van Horn’s The Power of Objects in Eighteenth-Century America. Despite some key differences between them, these books work together to take old debates

中文翻译：

---

现场状况：实质性结论

卡里·卡森（Cary Carson）在他的书《面值：消费者革命和美国殖民化》的大约一半中声称，被称为“自助餐”的法国家具“几乎和它的名字一样难以发音”，当它早期出现在英属美洲时十八世纪。“在南方的库存接收者中，”卡森指出，“通常会出现 'Boofott' 或 'Beaufett' 或（是吗？）'Bow-Fatt。' 没关系，”他总结道。“拥有一个才是最重要的”（第 143 页）。很难相信卡森大约在二十五年前首次提出这个诙谐的观点。面值主要是对 1994 年出版的关于 18 世纪“消费者革命”的一篇史诗（和经典）215 页文章的重印。新书的论点一点也不陈旧，这证明了卡森通俗易懂、引人入胜的散文，以及美国早期物质文化学者关于消费意义的两场辩论的持久中心地位。事实上，卡森文本的时代并没有抑制它与两部新作品交谈的能力：扎拉·阿尼山斯林的丝绸女人肖像：不列颠大西洋世界的隐藏历史和詹妮弗·范霍恩的十八世纪物体的力量美国。尽管它们之间存在一些关键差异，但这些书可以共同解决旧的辩论 和詹妮弗范霍恩的《十八世纪美国物体的力量》。尽管它们之间存在一些关键差异，但这些书可以共同解决旧的辩论 和詹妮弗范霍恩的《十八世纪美国物体的力量》。尽管它们之间存在一些关键差异，但这些书可以共同解决旧的辩论