as object of (article use)

[Alexey86]

1) This could be sculpture as object of a salacious curiosity, a kind of gory relic; but the dead, half-squinting eyes, the pale lips and open cavity of the mouth incite as much tenderness as horror.
(The Guardian - Arts
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/oct/19/national-gallery-sacred-made-real)

2) Rosamund Pike enters the fray as object of desire and a useful getaway driver, which is good news.
(The Independent)

3) Taking a set of relevant technologies as object of investigation raises the question on the participants' level of knowledge.
(Energy, Sustainability and Society)

Questions:
1. Why is there no article before object?
2. Why is there no article before sculpture in (1)?

 

[Tdol]

Maybe it's my age or something, but I would use articles.

 

[jutfrank]

Can we do one at a time?

1) Re: 1—It is quite typical of some kinds of academic writing not to use an article in this way. In my view, we do this when we want to present the referent (the thing/idea the following noun refers to) in a more abstract way. It becomes less of a discrete, itemised concept—less 'real', if you like— and more ideational. That's why it's common in texts discussing abstract ideas and relations, such as art criticism. This also explains why it's common in such as-phrases where one thing is seen in relation to another.

2) This is a much easier question—thanks. The word sculpture refers to the art form, not to any specific sculpted object. Actually, you can understand the omission of the article here in essentially the same way as outlined above—when we say a sculpture, we're thinking of a real, objective thing (i.e. it exists in time and space, and has properties of mass, size, shape, etc.). But when we talk of sculpture as an art form, we're referring to a far more generalised concept that is not 'real' in the same way. 'Sculpture' isn't something directly amenable to the senses like a real object (a sculpture) is. It's really just an association of related concepts.

 

[Alexey86]

The word sculpture refers to the art form, not to any specific sculpted object.

Isn't the part after the semicolon referring to a specific sculpture?

 

[GoesStation]

Isn't the part after the semicolon referring to a specific sculpture?

Yes, but the word "sculpture" is in the first part, before the semicolon. It refers to sculpture in general.

 

[jutfrank]

Isn't the part after the semicolon referring to a specific sculpture?

GS has already answered, but yes.

The writer is referring to the subject as both a sculpture and sculpture simultaneously. That is because all sculptures (count) are by definition examples of sculpture (non-count). This shows how generalised concepts become specific concepts when realised in the world. I should be very careful with the language I use here, because words like 'specific' can be easily misunderstood (this has happened at least twice before between us—I've previously suggested we use the word 'particular' for this). Anyway, I trust you understand what I'm saying—a physical object is something that is real in a concrete sense, in that you can see it, touch it, etc. Art form is non-physical and exists in a different domain. A particular work of art such as a sculpture exists in both domains at once.