Head of a Tiger 

Editor: This graphite and pencil drawing is titled “Head of a Tiger,” by James Ward. There isn't a specific date associated with it. It has a somewhat melancholic feel to me, softened by the medium. How do you interpret this work? Curator: The tiger here, even in sketch form, is an immediately recognizable symbol, isn't it? Traditionally associated with power, ferocity, even royalty. Yet, within the socio-political context of its creation, depictions like these often spoke to a more complex narrative of colonial encounter and environmental impact. Editor: Colonial encounter? How so? Curator: Think about the Romantic era; there was fascination with the exotic, but also a drive to categorize and control the natural world. Animals became symbols of conquered lands and trophies of exploration. This image could subtly critique that power dynamic. Consider how the tiger’s gaze seems almost resigned, not necessarily aggressive. Do you perceive a tension between the raw power of the animal and its depiction in a domestic medium like graphite? Editor: I see what you mean. There’s a sense of… removed power? Almost as if the tiger is an idea more than an actual, dangerous creature. Curator: Exactly! And, within the environmental context, what does it mean to capture such a creature on paper, effectively "possessing" it, as wild habitats were increasingly threatened? Does the sketch, in its seeming fragility, comment on the vulnerability of the animal itself? Editor: That adds so much more depth to what I initially saw as just a sad tiger drawing. It becomes a statement about power, colonialism, and even environmental concerns. Curator: Precisely. Art offers opportunities to look critically at these issues through symbolism and subtext. These dialogues across histories are how we construct richer, more nuanced understandings of the present.