Ved Capucinerklostret i Rom 1911

Curator: “Ved Capucinerklostret i Rom,” or "At the Capuchin Monastery in Rome," painted by Edvard Petersen in 1911. Looking at the way Petersen uses oil paint on canvas here, what strikes you most about the materiality and its production? Editor: The scene is filled with everyday life, but it has this incredibly soft focus, almost like a faded photograph. How would you interpret the artist’s technique here? Curator: Focusing on Petersen’s plein-air technique is important here, as is the production and application of his materials. Look closely - the underpainting seems crucial to achieving this overall muted, almost sepia-toned effect. The rapid strokes suggest he worked directly *in situ*. It challenges the conventions of academic art that prized finish above all. Where did the artist obtain materials, how were they prepared, and who bought the finished picture, all would have framed the scene’s creation. What do you notice about the way labour is depicted here? Editor: I see laborers resting; but you are right, the application of paint becomes almost performative. Like, *he's* a laborer, actively making a scene of other laborers resting. The visible brushstrokes are a record of his working process. So, labor is both subject and medium. I didn't think about that at first. How would this have been received? Curator: Given its impressionistic leaning and painterly strokes, possibly debated! Someone viewing a depiction of a monastery marketplace would naturally focus on commerce rather than brushwork. Perhaps patrons desired works which embraced or diverted expectations around the value of both labour, that of the figures within the frame, or Petersen at the easel! Now do we perceive "labor" differently having had this chat? Editor: Absolutely. I had a lot to learn! Curator: Same here, the layering enriches both the picture and discussion.