Pero zoogt de geketende Cimon in de gevangenis 1683 - 1733

Editor: This etching, "Pero suckles the imprisoned Cimon" by Bernard Picart, made between 1683 and 1733, has such a striking image of quiet intimacy amidst despair. It's so moving! How do you interpret this depiction? Curator: Well, the subject is drawn from Roman history – specifically Valerius Maximus. We see a daughter, Pero, secretly breastfeeding her imprisoned and condemned father, Cimon, who was sentenced to death by starvation. How do you think an audience in the 17th or 18th century would have reacted to this scene? Editor: I imagine they would see it as an incredible act of filial piety and female strength, going against societal expectations for the love of family. Curator: Precisely. The story circulated particularly widely in the 17th and 18th centuries because it reinforced values surrounding charity and self-sacrifice. Images such as these encouraged discourse and action on public assistance and charitable behavior. Consider how frequently themes of piety appeared across varying levels of society – it played a role in shaping social identities. Editor: That’s fascinating. It’s almost like the artwork served as propaganda, reminding people of their societal obligations? Curator: It goes beyond simple propaganda. It engaged viewers on an emotional level, prompting them to consider their own values. Also, bear in mind, engravings like these often circulated widely, thus broadening the impact beyond an elite audience. Editor: I see what you mean, it’s about establishing moral frameworks within a culture. I didn’t initially consider how an image, produced as an etching, becomes a political tool beyond purely aesthetic experience. Curator: Exactly, art rarely exists in a vacuum, does it? Understanding that political dimension makes it richer and more complex.