Bishop Hill: Seal c. 1939

Curator: What we have here is Wellington Blewett's "Bishop Hill: Seal", a drawing and watercolor from around 1939. I am interested to hear your impression, and particularly how you see its use of materiality, before I respond in detail. Editor: Well, it's fascinating! It's so unassuming and ordinary, and I initially think of the seal as more like commercial art or a historical document. It's watercolor and drawing so delicate... How does it even fit within the scope of "art" then? Curator: An excellent question, and a critical one for understanding the piece. Rather than focusing on whether it fits some preconceived notion of art, consider the means of production here. Blewett has meticulously rendered a tool, a *seal,* used for legitimizing documents, stamping authority and control – perhaps even commercial control, in the colony. Notice the choice of materials: wood, metal, likely ink – all connected to labor, bureaucracy, and material exchange. What does that suggest to you? Editor: Hmmm... so, it is challenging the hierarchy between "fine art" and the everyday object. Is it really emphasizing that art can come from anywhere? Also the idea of labor. So it's related to what, like who makes the seal, how is it used, what sort of transactions does it perform? Curator: Precisely! Blewett invites us to reconsider the value we assign to materials, processes, and even systems of power. Consider also the Bishop Hill Colony, a utopian society. What contradictions might be present between the ideals and the means employed? Editor: I guess this isn't just some quaint picture; it's making a statement about materials and process. And it makes me think, "What other supposedly mundane things hold layers of meaning?" Curator: That is the perfect question to be asking. I wonder what we would find were we to look at, say, the history of paintbrushes.