Child's Dress c. 1937

Editor: This is Sara Garfinkel’s “Child’s Dress,” made around 1937 with coloured pencils on paper. It’s so delicate and… well, pink! It almost looks like a blueprint or a fashion design. What strikes you about it? Curator: This isn't just a drawing; it’s a record of labor, a suggestion of a social structure. Look at the medium: coloured pencils. Paper. These materials were readily available, inexpensive. It makes you wonder about the economics of garment creation at this time. Was it mass-produced or homemade? Editor: I hadn’t thought about that! I was focused on the aesthetic qualities, the detail in the little embroidered designs on the skirt. Curator: But those details, they speak volumes. Think about the handiwork, whether it's replicated by machine or made with human labor. This dress itself—it's presented divorced from its intended wearer, a product for consideration. Is it art? Or is it an instructional guide? Where do we draw that line? Editor: So you're saying it’s less about the dress itself and more about what the dress represents in terms of production? Curator: Exactly! And also, what does it mean to depict something so obviously designed for use, for adornment, with humble, easily obtainable art supplies? The creation of art becomes democratized, a tangible practice divorced from the elite. The materials inform its narrative just as much as the final visual. Editor: I see your point! I guess I was stuck on just seeing it as pretty. I’ll definitely look at materials differently now. Curator: I think there’s value in that perspective, and now you have another lens to view the object and how the narrative expands when thinking about Garfinkel’s choice of materials and labour.