The artist`s son Titus 1656

Editor: This is "The Artist's Son Titus" by Rembrandt van Rijn, made in 1656. It’s an etching, a print, and there’s a lovely quiet intimacy to it. What's your interpretation? Curator: Well, considering its historical context, this etching operates on multiple levels. Rembrandt wasn't just capturing a likeness; he was participating in a burgeoning market for printed portraits during the Dutch Golden Age. The rising middle class wanted images, not just of themselves but of prominent figures – and intimate glimpses into the lives of artists, like this glimpse of Rembrandt's son. Consider how this challenges the tradition of regal portraiture. Does this feel like courtly art? Editor: Not at all. It feels very…personal, informal. He almost looks like he's been caught off guard. Curator: Exactly. And that "caught off guard" quality is carefully constructed. By then, Rembrandt's own public image was...complicated. Bankrupt, perhaps a little scandalous. Making a print of his son serves a public function of portraying a legacy. It allows Rembrandt to show a private, vulnerable side and to control his own narrative. We also must ask to what extend is Rembrandt making an aethetic choice for the clothing his son is wearing? Editor: So, it's about more than just a father-son relationship? Curator: Absolutely. Think about the role of the artist in society at the time. He's carefully presenting himself and his family to the public in a specific way, through a medium – printmaking – that was rapidly democratizing art. Editor: I never thought about it in that way. It's like he's using the image of his son to… rehabilitate his own image? Curator: It’s a performance, and portraits—especially those distributed through print—were very much public performances. Food for thought, eh? Editor: Definitely! Thanks for the perspective.