Scarf c. 1930

Editor: Here we have a striking silk scarf, created around 1930. It’s simply called “Scarf,” and it's here at the Minneapolis Institute of Art. I’m really drawn to the intense redness of the main body, it's almost overwhelming! What can you tell me about this work? Curator: It’s interesting that you mention the intensity of the red, because color is always political. Dyes in the 1930s, especially vibrant ones, carried a cost, and would be perceived differently depending on who was viewing them. Do you think everyone would experience that “overwhelming” feeling? Editor: Hmm, maybe not. Someone used to seeing brighter colors as a status symbol wouldn't see it as overwhelming; maybe it’s related to class or social background? Curator: Precisely. Also consider the geometric pattern near the ends. What do those patterns evoke? Is there any significance beyond pure decoration? Editor: The stripes seem simple enough, but also create rhythm, they aren’t symmetrical but evoke repetition… I’m not sure about significance, maybe just the aesthetics of the time? Curator: Or perhaps a connection to textile traditions from other parts of the world? Scarves were becoming increasingly popular as fashion accessories at this time, and designers were looking globally for inspiration, weren't they? Its availability also mirrors growing industrial textile production, so how might increased production impact textile traditions, their aesthetics, and what textiles symbolized to a given community or group? Editor: That's a point. It’s easy to think of fashion as isolated, but seeing it as a sign of larger political and economic forces definitely opens up new perspectives. Curator: Absolutely. Considering art objects as participants in broader cultural conversations helps us understand their place in the world. Editor: Thanks, I never thought a scarf could reveal so much about society. Curator: My pleasure. It’s all about learning to read the visual cues around us, isn’t it?