Doorgestreepte annotaties c. 1888s

Editor: So, here we have "Doorgestreepte Annotaties," or "Crossed-Out Annotations," a sketchbook page by Willem Witsen, dating back to the 1880s, using blue ink on paper. It’s… minimalist, almost stark, with these bold, almost aggressive vertical strokes dominating the left side. I wonder, what can we unpack from such a seemingly simple piece? Curator: Well, it’s crucial to consider the sketchbook itself as a social space. The 'personal sketchbook' label can be misleading. Whose gaze was Witsen anticipating? Was this destruction of initial markings a performance for himself, or a projected audience? The socio-political climate of the late 19th century, with its rising artistic avant-garde movements, greatly impacted even the most private acts of creation. Do you think that might relate? Editor: That’s interesting; the idea that a sketchbook, supposedly private, might still be shaped by external forces. Perhaps Witsen was reacting against something, some established artistic norm, even within his own process? Curator: Exactly. The very act of obliterating earlier marks could be a powerful statement of rejecting conventional modes of representation. What’s compelling is not what's depicted, but the artistic gesture of denial and potential artistic liberation. He creates a tension. Editor: So, it’s the performance of destroying something that becomes the art? Almost a rebellious statement using, well, not much at all. That subverts my initial reading of stark simplicity. I guess, knowing that makes this sketchbook page pretty loaded. Curator: Precisely. And that's why historical context is so vital. Understanding the artistic and social tensions allows us to appreciate what this drawing, with blue ink, represents within the wider scope of Impressionism and its rejection of tradition. Editor: I see that now. It really transforms how you look at the artwork; understanding its potential implications during the time that it was made.