Wall Hopper c. 1940

Editor: So, this is LeRoy Griffith’s "Wall Hopper," circa 1940. It's a watercolor, a beautifully rendered drawing, almost photorealistic, of what looks like a vintage grinder mounted on a wooden plank. I find the rusticated quality incredibly tactile, inviting closer inspection. What do you see in this piece? Curator: I see more than just a depiction of a tool; I see a powerful comment on labor and domesticity in 1940s America. Consider the title: “Wall Hopper”. The object is literally mounted for use, but metaphorically suggests barriers needing to be overcome. Where do you see its link to identity, gender, or race? Editor: Well, the fact that it's a hand-operated grinder suggests a certain reliance on manual labor, maybe pre-industrial ways of living kept alive in some rural communities. I’m less clear on the specific connections you’re pointing to. Can you expand on that? Curator: Think about who would have been using this tool, primarily. Most likely women within the domestic sphere. Griffith presents this object with great care, and endows it with significance and dignity. Are we looking at celebrating the labor or showing the labor? Is the painting challenging assumptions around who is supposed to perform work and why? Editor: That makes sense. It's elevating an everyday object, traditionally associated with women's work, to the level of art. I hadn't considered that the choice of subject itself was making a statement. Curator: Exactly. And how does its seeming mundanity serve to challenge prevailing patriarchal views in art of the era, in your view? Editor: The placement on a plank makes me feel the physical installation, and how the work makes something traditionally hidden more accessible. Thanks, I think I’m beginning to see more. Curator: Likewise. I see that you, the editor, brought this historical image to the surface, too, where its accessibility might inspire more discussion about accessibility of arts itself!