Doll c. 1940

Editor: This watercolor drawing, titled "Doll," created around 1940 by Elmer R. Kottcamp, strikes me with its blend of realism and the almost unsettling stillness of the figure. What historical elements stand out to you in this piece? Curator: Considering the 1940s context, it is interesting. World War II undoubtedly affected artistic production and focus; while Kottcamp may not explicitly reference war, this piece could engage with themes of innocence. The doll's attire is striking – what looks to be handmade and distinct from everyday, ready-to-wear clothing, what do you see in that? Editor: I agree. It feels somewhat dreamlike and antiquated at the same time. I notice the careful attention to detail in the pattern of the doll’s gown versus the almost perfunctory painting of the skin, and wonder about that contrast. Is it an indication of the subject's, or perhaps the artist's, perception of what matters, what deserves detail? Curator: Possibly, yes. Socially, dolls became popular teaching aids and toys in a growing middle-class, acting as miniature avatars to transmit values to young girls on the role of femininity, motherhood, etc. This artist may be consciously using that role in the depiction here, but this doll is decidedly without child – therefore, it might suggest more ambivalent questions? Is it trying to explore societal constructs by literally animating a ‘doll?’ Editor: It's definitely a portrait that complicates things. Seeing it within that framework, considering gender roles and wartime, suddenly reveals a richness I initially missed. Curator: Right, placing artworks within their social and political environments really encourages alternative ideas of what we can say this art “means” when seen only on the surface. I will keep that in mind, going forward.