Sint-bernard before 1888

Editor: Here we have "Sint-bernard," a gelatin silver print that exists as still-life photography. I'm curious – looking at this dog’s portrait from before 1888, I feel like I’m peering into a gentle soul. But what really stands out to you when you look at it? Curator: Well, it's funny you say "gentle soul," because to me, that’s exactly what pre-industrial photography tried so hard to convince us of – that beneath the beast lies a tender heart. And here's where my brain likes to take a walk. Do you think that early photography tried to capture an idealized version of nature and humanity? That "realism" was more of a sales pitch for a tamed and domesticated world? Editor: Hmm, so you’re suggesting that instead of being a straightforward depiction, it's more like a carefully constructed PR campaign? Curator: Exactly! The tones, that very intentional soft focus…it whispers, "Trust me. Things are manageable here.” Early portraiture, in any form, be it paint or photography, aimed to flatter, didn't it? Did people really look this refined and…well, noble, all the time? What about the slobber, the shedding? The dog in question only seems noble. What do you think the empty text next to the animal's photo wants to convince us of? Editor: I’m not sure but something along the lines of "he’s just a really big sweetie at heart”. I see your point – that tension between what's shown and what’s hidden really reframes how I see this now! I came to see one individual dog. Now I’m contemplating a societal project! Curator: Fantastic! It makes us pause, think about representation, doesn't it?