Flatiron c. 1941

Editor: This is Sarkis Erganian’s *Flatiron*, dating from around 1941. It's a watercolor and drawing that features the image of... well, a flatiron. It's incredibly detailed. I find the textures particularly compelling. What's your take on it? Curator: The selection of an everyday object like a flatiron at this period points towards a shift in artistic focus to the mundane, aligning with a broader movement of incorporating commonplace subjects into the visual arts. How do you think the social context of the time might have influenced Erganian's decision to depict such a humble item? Editor: Hmmm, well, this was right around World War II. So maybe representing everyday objects like this could be a way to promote stability, even nostalgia for simpler times in the face of disruption. Curator: Precisely! The imagery connects to wartime culture and visual rhetoric; such imagery domesticity became a subtle form of resistance, focusing on the enduring qualities of daily life against the backdrop of global turmoil. Editor: That makes sense! The detailed realism, almost like a photograph, it feels very deliberate now, to create some sense of longing. How was it perceived publicly, though? Were such "humble" subjects considered "worthy"? Curator: Not always immediately! There was a constant tension in art institutions. On one hand, you have modernism pushing boundaries, and, on the other, realist work could appear sentimental or retrograde. So an image of such common household object in the gallery might signify an intent to bridge gaps and legitimize the experiences of working class and family values at this moment. Editor: So its public meaning depended very much on *who* saw it and *where* it was exhibited. I never considered the cultural and even political "life" that such a still-life could have. Thank you for making me aware of the larger contexts to the subject and the painter!