The Death of Kikos 1934

Editor: This is Martiros Sarian's "The Death of Kikos," created in 1934. It's a pen and ink drawing with what looks like an expressionistic landscape, rendered in shades of grey. There's a small gathering of figures near a tree, giving off a somber, narrative feel. What strikes you when you look at it? Curator: The limited materials Sarian employed, just pen and ink, are precisely what command my attention. How the stark contrast between black and white conveys a sense of the vast, unforgiving landscape, and speaks to the socio-economic conditions impacting artistic production at the time. He's not relying on opulent paints or large-scale canvases here. Instead, consider the *process* of drawing and the implied labor involved. What is gained, and what is lost, through this material choice? Editor: So you're saying the choice of materials is a commentary itself? Curator: Precisely. Think about what Sarian *doesn't* include. Where does that scarcity of materials arise? Is this a deliberate decision based on aesthetic preferences, or does it speak to something larger about the artistic landscape and resource allocation of his time? Even the 'expressionistic' tag can be reframed: isn’t this emotionality equally a *product* of the tangible limitations and the sheer force required to realize the image through repetitive strokes? Editor: That’s a different way of thinking about expressionism. I was so focused on the figures. Curator: Don't dismiss them entirely! How does Sarian render the figures? How might their posture or apparent lack of detail relate to a specific kind of labor— agricultural, perhaps? Is he commenting on the societal view of that labour with the very material composition of this piece? Editor: I never thought about it that way before, about art as a product reflecting material realities. Thank you! Curator: Indeed. Examining materiality brings socio-political dimensions to the forefront and pushes us to question received understandings of artistic expression and skill.