Willem Witsen c. 1915

Editor: Here we have a gelatin silver print, a portrait of "Willem Witsen", dating from around 1915. I find the texture fascinating. What stands out to you when you look at this photograph? Curator: The material production interests me the most. Think about the social context of photography in 1915. This gelatin silver process, largely industrialized by then, was making portraiture increasingly accessible, although certainly not universally. The rising middle class had the aspiration to commission a photography to immortalize their image and social position. Consider the rise of photographic studios during that period and how industrial development led to its commodification. Editor: That's a fascinating point about accessibility. The availability of materials played a role in who was photographed. Curator: Exactly! Also, examine Witsen’s attire. His suit and tie aren’t merely details; they signify bourgeois respectability. How would you contextualize that, considering his likely socio-economic class at the time? Editor: So, the materials – both photographic and sartorial – are not neutral. They point to the intersection of technology, labor, and social aspiration. What does the “gelatin” in the process reference in that respect? Curator: That’s a good question! The gelatin comes from animal collagen, generally discarded bones and skin. The art's very construction therefore implicated systems of abattoirs and processing of other material needs from clothing, housing to nutrition that would normally be outside a concept of “fine art”. And that’s precisely why this should be considered fine art and a document simultaneously. Editor: I had not thought of it that way, this brings an entire new dimension to the piece. Thank you! Curator: A pleasure, you clearly grasp the profound materiality beneath the photographic surface.