Attention after 1698

Editor: So, this is Eduardus Jacobus's "Attention," a drawing made after 1698, mixing chalk, graphite, and ink on paper. There's something very classical about the figure, but the inscription underneath gives it a unique twist. What strikes you when you look at it? Curator: Immediately, I'm drawn to the way Jacobus merges the tradition of classical drawing with proto-scientific observation. It speaks volumes about the era's changing relationship with knowledge. How does the pursuit of objectivity influence artistic expression? Editor: So it's not just about capturing beauty but also dissecting a human expression? Curator: Precisely! It anticipates the Enlightenment's project of categorizing and understanding the human experience. But who gets to define and depict this experience? Is this an objective study, or a reflection of power structures that privilege certain bodies and expressions? What happens to the expressions of those deemed outside the norm? Editor: That’s a perspective I hadn't considered. I was focusing on the almost clinical description below. Curator: The text is crucial. It presents attention as a set of physical reactions, a mechanistic process. However, that presumed objectivity can also obscure the individual behind the expression. It also implies a controlled and learned attention. What kind of social dynamics do you think this enforced "attention" reflects? Editor: It’s fascinating how the artist is not just showing, but also telling us what 'attention' should look like. Now I see it pointing towards issues of control and the performance of attention. Curator: Exactly! By examining "Attention," we start questioning not only how we see art but how we understand and perform our own identities within a system. It becomes less about the face on the paper, and more about the structures shaping it.