Gezicht op het Huis ter Nieuburch in Rijswijk met de tuinen 1697

Editor: Here we have Pieter Schenk's "View of Huis ter Nieuburch in Rijswijk with Gardens," created in 1697. It's a print, an etching to be exact. I'm struck by the sheer labor involved in creating this level of detail through etching. What stands out to you? Curator: It's interesting you point that out because the meticulousness of the etching process reflects the broader societal context. Think about the division of labor during the Dutch Golden Age. An etching like this was not just an aesthetic object; it was a commodity, produced through specific material conditions and consumed by a particular class. We must consider who owned the printing press, who supplied the materials and who bought these images, because without this analysis the image is mute.. Editor: So, beyond just the aesthetics of the gardens themselves, you’re drawn to the economics and labour involved in its creation and consumption? How does the process inform its meaning? Curator: Precisely! Consider the copper plate—where did that material originate? Who mined it, who transported it? The print facilitated wider circulation and promoted the image of opulence which legitimized power structures through trade relations, because a large estate such as this signifies wealth and access to resources. The physical etching embodies that colonial power. It’s about consumption, the display of wealth, the very *material* underpinnings of 17th-century Dutch society. Does that connection between the image and real-world practices become more tangible to you? Editor: It does! The gardens suddenly seem less like a beautiful vista and more like a product of complex, globalized resource chains. I never thought about an artwork as a piece of global trade! Curator: It's essential to move past purely aesthetic readings and to situate art within a framework of material production and consumption, especially regarding landscape..