Mist in the mountains. Caucasus. 1878

Editor: Here we have "Mist in the Mountains. Caucasus," painted in 1878 by Lev Lagorio, using oil and tempera, apparently *en plein air*. The overwhelming softness of the colors is pretty, and creates a sense of peace... but also a feeling of remoteness. What draws your eye when you look at it? Curator: Considering the materials—oil paint, tempera, and the likely use of commercially produced canvases—we can start to unpack how Lagorio negotiated both tradition and the growing industrialization of art production in the late 19th century. Think about the pigment itself: where did the materials come from? Editor: So, the colours weren’t locally sourced then? I had imagined him grinding pigments himself... Curator: Maybe some were! But the consistency suggests mass-produced paints. Look at the even application; it's more about conveying a certain mood associated with the Caucasus, than truthfully depicting it. This romanticized view was very much "in demand". Consider his target audience. Who was buying landscapes like this? What did they expect to see? Editor: Wealthy collectors maybe? Urban dwellers wanting a window onto nature? Something…untamed? Curator: Exactly! And Lagorio is carefully constructing that experience for them, mediating it through his artistic labor and commercially available materials. His plein-air technique adds authenticity, yes, but that authenticity itself becomes a commodity. Editor: So, it’s about showing us the mountains but also selling us…nature-as-an-idea, manufactured and mediated by the artist? Curator: Precisely. We have moved beyond merely evaluating aesthetics to appreciate how materials, labor, and market forces shaped this particular view of the Caucasus. Editor: It really changes how you see the painting – moving beyond the initial “pretty picture” response and considering how it all came together, materially. Thanks!