Moon Catcher 2013

Editor: This is Victo Ngai’s “Moon Catcher” from 2013, done in watercolor. The image features a child atop a large fish in a fantastical ocean. I'm struck by how dreamlike it is; the waves seem almost cellular. What do you see in this piece? Curator: I see a sophisticated commentary on the commercialization of dreams. The labor is obscured, yet the meticulous detail, likely mass-produced as prints, speaks to a commodified fantasy. The child “catching” the moon – what does it mean to possess something so intrinsic to the natural world? Editor: I hadn't considered the commercial aspect. I was so caught up in the fantastical imagery, but you're right – prints of this would be widely available. Curator: Precisely! Notice the artist's labor is rendered invisible in the final product. Watercolor is a notoriously difficult medium to control. However, it can be endlessly reproduced without acknowledgment. How does the 'catch' change hands once someone else acquires the image? Editor: It does make me think about how easily images are shared and consumed now, especially online, without necessarily acknowledging their origin. So you're saying the act of depicting this fantastical scene inherently raises questions about ownership and production? Curator: Indeed! And consider the materials: paper, pigment, perhaps digitally refined. Each has a history of extraction, manufacture, and distribution – global networks converging in this single image of childlike wonder, ready to be printed, consumed and ultimately, owned. It invites us to consider the relationship between art, labor, and commerce. Editor: That's fascinating! I'll definitely look at fantasy art differently now, considering not just the story, but also how it's made and distributed. Curator: And the implications for those who create such wondrous worlds. It is necessary to recognize the value in making, and the economic implications of art as both labor, and capital.