Interieur van de Grote of Andreaskerk te Hattem 1851

Editor: So, here we have Johannes Bosboom’s "Interieur van de Grote of Andreaskerk te Hattem," made in 1851, using ink, watercolor, and charcoal on paper. It's striking how he's captured the vastness of the church with such delicate materials. What captures your attention in this piece? Curator: I'm immediately drawn to the evidence of process – the layering of ink and watercolor, the visible charcoal under-drawing. It points to the labor involved in its creation. These choices of relatively inexpensive materials like paper, charcoal and ink tell us something, too. It wasn't made with precious materials like expensive oil paint or marble. How does this inform our reading of the work? Editor: That’s interesting. I hadn’t considered the choice of materials so deeply. Does it perhaps speak to the accessibility of art at the time or maybe to a shift in artistic values? Curator: Precisely. Bosboom was working in a period where the relationship between art and labor was being questioned. Churches were still prominent centers of European society. So how might he be reflecting both on religious institutions and broader economic changes within Dutch society? Editor: Thinking about the labour, the ink and watercolor medium allows for faster execution compared to oil, enabling potentially more commissions and works made. The quick execution of materials suggests both efficient production and his perception of art labor! Curator: Good point! Also note that Bosboom emphasizes a 'realism' approach – what are the politics of representing everyday subjects? This could challenge traditional notions of "high art." What do you take away from considering it this way? Editor: I never thought about art as a product of labour so concretely, but it's fascinating how focusing on the materials and means of production can open up entirely new avenues of interpretation. Thanks! Curator: My pleasure! I'm glad we could think critically together!