Illustration # 22 

Editor: Looking at Maria Bozoky's "Illustration #22", a work on paper using watercolor and ink, I am struck by how dreamlike it feels. The figure of the king seems almost to be dissolving into the landscape. How do you interpret the materials used in this work? Curator: The rough handling of watercolor and the raw immediacy of the ink line are crucial here. Bozoky isn't aiming for illusion. Rather, the visible process, the layering and bleeding of the materials, calls attention to the act of *making*. Consider, too, the cheapness, the accessibility of ink and watercolor compared to oil. It disrupts the hierarchy between traditional "high" art materials and those associated with sketching or illustration. Editor: So the very choice of these everyday materials is significant? Curator: Precisely. Ink and watercolor also allow for a quicker, more direct process, potentially sidestepping the laborious process of creating work through more traditional methods. Is Bozoky making a comment on artistic labor and value itself? The frenetic mark-making also evokes the idea of unconscious or automatic processes. Editor: It's fascinating to consider how the materials contribute to the meaning beyond just being tools for depiction. It changes my perspective. Curator: The painting gestures to classical themes - note the King - then subverts those with cheap materials and expressive mark-making. How can we think about consumption in connection with art that has limited durability because it's made from cheap materials? Editor: I see that now. I initially saw the painting’s visual themes but missed these social and material themes, that make this work more intriguing. Thank you for pointing this out! Curator: Understanding the material conditions and processes involved can unlock a deeper appreciation for art's connection to the broader world, and it invites us to rethink aesthetic values.