Portrait of Walt Whitman 1887

Editor: This is Thomas Eakins's "Portrait of Walt Whitman," painted in 1887. Looking at the textures and somber color palette, I can’t help but think of the pre-industrial methods of artmaking...it's all quite tactile, isn't it? What strikes you most about this piece? Curator: Immediately, the focus falls to the means of production. Eakins's brushstrokes, visible and deliberate, remind us of the labor involved. Oil paint, ground pigments mixed with oil – these materials are part of the physical world and reflect 19th-century technologies. Consider too, Whitman’s celebration of the working class. Do you think that connection is incidental, or perhaps integral to understanding the portrait? Editor: It definitely seems connected. I see a working class sensibility in Whitman’s unidealized depiction; his wrinkles and weathered face speak to experience and hardship. Was Eakins consciously rejecting more traditional portraiture with this kind of raw depiction? Curator: Absolutely. Traditional portraiture often masked labor, presenting an idealized and sanitized vision of the subject. Eakins, through his choice of materials and direct application, emphasizes the physicality of both his subject and his own work, disrupting that artifice. It’s almost a form of social commentary. Think about the implied value judgments of ‘high’ art versus craft too; Eakins challenges that divide, doesn’t he? Editor: Yes, the sheer materiality definitely bridges that gap. This piece makes me consider the role of the artist as a craftsman as much as an intellectual. Curator: Indeed. Reflecting on Eakins's method highlights a conscious act of creation and labor—something frequently overlooked in discussions about art and genius. Editor: It reframes how we view both Whitman and Eakins—bringing both down to earth. Thanks, I'll never look at portraits the same way!