Ms Marvel 

Editor: This is Stanley Artgerm Lau’s, Ms Marvel. We don’t have a date on it, and the medium listed is acrylic paint. It’s such a vivid image, there’s so much dynamism… how should we interpret it? Curator: Well, first consider the material conditions and process here. We see a hyper-real figuration achieved through acrylics, a medium heavily industrialized. This is not some lone artist toiling away but, instead, reflects a certain kind of mass production and consumption of imagery, no? What are the means through which we’re even encountering this? Editor: True! It’s digital isn’t it, existing as a digital file first and foremost? Does the use of acrylic—with its historical associations of craft—intersect with that? Curator: Precisely. Acrylic offers reproducibility and fast drying times suited for mass production, so think about who consumes images like this, how and why. What are they really buying into, considering the material support of something that ultimately seems intangible? Editor: The fantasy! They are purchasing entry into that fictional world, its associated narratives, or, maybe, their own projected empowerment. Does the accessibility of digital acrylics democratize artistic creation or contribute to homogenizing it? Curator: Another good question! Its proliferation shapes our visual landscape, influencing artistic styles and raising complex questions about originality versus access and participation. But it can work both ways: perhaps the character offers a narrative that empowers different possibilities outside a dominant or typical tradition. Editor: So the art exists as both the object itself and the values behind its production and consumption? Thanks, this has shifted how I’m thinking. Curator: Yes. Hopefully, this discussion about materials gives you a broader vision on the networks shaping cultural meaning.