Rooftops, St. Cloud 

Curator: What strikes me immediately is the visible labor in its production, almost like a sketch capturing a specific moment and location, what do you make of it? Editor: This is "Rooftops, St. Cloud", likely by Thomas Pollock Anshutz. It's watercolor and/or oil painting, and shows rooftops of buildings. The colors are muted and there is a nice section of a green tree. It feels a little claustrophobic because there is not much open sky. What do you see in this piece? Curator: Well, the composition is built from raw, almost rudimentary, materials. Notice the dominance of earthy pigments, the roughly applied watercolor... The focus isn't on refined artistry, but on the evidence of the act of making. It makes one wonder about its socioeconomic dimensions and artistic labor, doesn't it? Editor: You mean because the artwork features these everyday scenes made from commonplace supplies? How does that play out socioeconomically? Curator: Exactly. It prompts us to think about the production of art and who had access to creating these scenes, how they were created and circulated. Look closely at the different surfaces—the brick, the foliage. Think of where those raw materials came from, what kind of labor was used to produce them? It all contributes to the final image, and therefore contributes to its meaning. Editor: So, the value isn’t just in the rooftops depicted, but also in understanding where the paints came from, the bricks used for buildings, and how these everyday materials reflect the labor and social structures of that time? Curator: Precisely. The finished artwork, ostensibly about the ‘rooftops’, has much more to reveal to us through a consideration of its parts and their origins. The brushstrokes, too, almost give a glimpse into Anshutz's production. What did we discover looking at it this way? Editor: That shifting the focus onto materiality can really re-frame a painting; what appears mundane contains so much social and economic context.