Shenandoah 1970

Editor: So this is Ronnie Landfield’s "Shenandoah," created in 1970. It seems to be oil and watercolor on canvas, and right away I'm drawn to how the blues contrast against the more earth-toned stripes. What strikes you most about this piece? Curator: Well, for me, it's the *how* it was made, rather than *what* it depicts. Consider the layering. The almost textile quality achieved through washes of watercolor alongside the impasto-like application of oil. It makes me think about the labour involved in creating it and challenges any clear divide between 'painting' and other, traditionally lesser, crafts. Does the title give us a clue? Editor: Shenandoah is a place, a valley. So perhaps that suggests a landscape, filtered through abstraction? But what about that production process… are you saying Landfield’s choices around medium were a comment on artistic hierarchies at the time? Curator: Precisely! This was 1970. Artists were actively dismantling traditional definitions of art. Landfield, by combining 'high' and 'low' mediums, is essentially democratizing the artistic process, rejecting elitism. It moves beyond simple representation of landscape toward a critical engagement with material culture. It begs the question - who decides what's worthy of being called art, and what power structures are involved? Editor: I never thought about watercolor versus oil that way, but that tension makes the painting much more interesting. Thanks for pointing that out! Curator: Indeed. Looking at the artistic labor as part of the subject can deepen our engagement with an artwork and our understanding of its historical moment.