Portret van Jan van Leeuwen 1922

Curator: Let's turn our attention to Willy Sluiter's 1922 "Portret van Jan van Leeuwen," a drawing currently housed here at the Rijksmuseum. It’s… striking, isn’t it? Almost feels like I've just walked into a courtroom scene. Editor: Yes, the caricature hits you immediately. Simple, almost crude lines define the character, but it speaks volumes about the artist's intent. One can sense Sluiter's engagement with early modernist approaches. The use of such economical mark-making implies this isn’t a commission but an individual exploration. What kind of paper did he employ? Its absorbency no doubt influenced the thickness of the charcoal line. Curator: Thinking about the material impact and rapid process, it reads like a quick study from life or perhaps a recollection, but yes, most probably charcoal given the rough strokes. It possesses a candid, sketchbook feel, as if it's capturing not just physical likeness but some fleeting essence of Jan van Leeuwen. I’m immediately wondering what that essence is, who the sitter might be outside this image. Editor: I'd like to examine further if the very production of this work, its inherent efficiency, says something about its function in the social climate. Portraiture has been used to cement status and power; however, with the reduction of artistic effort, is it rather some kind of critique on such practice, if unintentional? Consider how it positions “Jan van Leeuwen" in a new light through economical artistic interventions. Curator: Precisely. Is it mocking him? Or, maybe more sympathetically, it reflects a shifting paradigm of social dynamics after the first World War –a turning away from elaborate formal portraits towards more simplified depictions. Also, it's quite brave. The subject is shown in such unflattering rawness. This sketch offers something a photographic portrait wouldn’t, though it comes very close to photography's immediacy. It almost strips Van Leeuwen down, as if confronting an existential core beyond social posturing. Editor: A fine interpretation. But again, it brings me back to this piece as artifact. How was charcoal received back in those times? Was it a common choice of media or something used specifically in informal contexts? Even its perceived low value impacts our reading of it. It moves away from an individual appreciation and opens questions surrounding cultural implications and consumption within portrait practices. Curator: It’s like peering behind the curtains of conventional representation – showing how individual quirks shine when formal decorum gets tossed to the side. We see a human beyond social roles! Editor: I see the piece more in context as a social product rather than only from a sentimental view, and this opens up greater interpretations of the world surrounding Sluiter and his Van Leeuwen. Thank you!