Return from Calvary 1877

Editor: So, here we have James Ensor's "Return from Calvary" from 1877, an oil painting. It’s…rough, almost unfinished. The figures are vaguely formed. What jumps out at me is the dense application of the oil paint itself, almost like he was fighting with the materials. What do you see in this piece, focusing on his process? Curator: Indeed, the impasto technique is striking here. Look closely at how the paint handling renders textures-- fabrics, skin, and even air seem palpable. Ensor, even this early on, seems less concerned with academic polish and more with a direct engagement with the materiality of his medium. I wonder, what kind of pigments do you think he was using here? How accessible would those have been at the time? Editor: That's a great question. I'd have to guess earth tones given the period, but also potentially expensive reds for the robes...meaning someone somewhere was making money from this religious artwork. It feels a bit... transactional? Curator: Precisely! It prompts us to consider the economy surrounding artistic production: the sourcing of materials, the labor involved in grinding pigments, the patronage system that supported (or constrained) artists like Ensor. It’s also vital to remember that oil paint itself was an industrial product, its accessibility shaped by technological advances and global trade networks. How does the scale of this work – likely small - effect your view? Editor: Knowing it's small shifts the entire piece. The drama seems less…epic. Instead, I see an artist wrestling with these grand historical themes using modest means. The materiality itself subverts the bombast. Curator: Exactly. He is making a painting about suffering using material sourced potentially from exploiting laborers; the materiality provides its own commentary on the actual realities. That adds layers of interpretation to this piece, doesn’t it? Editor: Absolutely. Focusing on the materials really gives you a new perspective.