Creamer c. 1936

Editor: This is "Creamer" by John Tarantino, circa 1936. It looks to be watercolor and pencil on paper. It's a very straightforward, almost clinical depiction of a simple object. What's your take? Curator: Well, on the surface, it’s a straightforward rendering, yes. But look closer at the process. The use of pencil underdrawing overlaid with watercolor…it points to a careful, almost industrial, approach to image-making. It feels like a blueprint, or an advertisement maybe? Not quite valuing "high art", but the materiality of commercial work. Editor: I hadn't thought about it like that. It seems so…domestic, that object. Does that reading connect to the social context somehow? Curator: Precisely. Consider the date – the mid-1930s. The Depression was hitting home. Was Tarantino maybe grappling with the role of craft versus mass production, even in the everyday objects around him? A simple creamer, yes, but its *making* then speaks to larger issues. How and who is producing this? Is it luxury or an affordable commodity? Editor: So, it's not just a pretty picture; it's about the means of production and what the creamer symbolizes in that context. Curator: Absolutely. It highlights the labor and materials involved in creating even a seemingly mundane item. It asks, implicitly, about value, use, and the place of objects in a struggling society. Editor: I'm now looking at the contrast between the detail in the creamer itself and the empty background... the object almost levitates off the surface as if displayed for sale! I will never see a still life the same way. Thanks! Curator: Indeed, thinking through materiality reframes our appreciation of objects and the world around us. Thank you for opening this perspective!