Twee studies van een vrouwenhoofd met een muts met oorijzers c. 1883 - 1885

Editor: This drawing, "Twee studies van een vrouwenhoofd met een muts met oorijzers," by George Hendrik Breitner, dating from around 1883 to 1885, is done in pencil. It looks like a page torn straight from a sketchbook, and the rapid lines give it a feeling of immediacy. What strikes you about it? Curator: What I see are traces of labour, both physical and societal. This wasn't a commissioned portrait for some elite family. Breitner’s choice of materials – readily available pencil and paper – points to an accessibility and democratisation of art-making. Editor: Democratisation? In what sense? Curator: Well, consider the subject matter alongside the medium. This woman, adorned in what seems like traditional Dutch headwear, likely represents a common working-class figure. Breitner’s attention to the textures and forms of her headwear – the "oorijzers" – invites consideration of the social significance embedded within these objects, hinting at regional identities and perhaps even economic status indicated by material or craft. Editor: That's interesting. So you're focusing on what the materials and subject reveal about the lives of ordinary people. Do you think his artistic choices suggest an implicit critique of the art world or the status quo? Curator: Perhaps. It certainly moves away from idealized representation, favoring a raw, unfiltered glimpse into everyday existence. It invites the viewer to contemplate the processes by which art is made and what kinds of labor it elevates, while asking: Who is seen? Who is not? Whose stories are deemed worthy of artistic attention, and how? Editor: I never considered approaching the drawing in that way. It highlights the socio-economic elements behind artistic choices. Curator: Indeed. Every artistic choice, even the seeming simplicity of a pencil sketch, carries a complex weight of social implications.