Kelkglas met een lachende man met berkenmeier 1743

Curator: Editor: So, this is "Kelkglas met een lachende man met berkenmeier," or a goblet with a smiling man, created anonymously around 1743. It's engraving on glass. What immediately strikes me is the humor and the everyday nature of it—like a snapshot of daily life immortalized in a fragile object. What do you see in it? Curator: It’s fascinating to consider the labor involved in creating such an object. This wasn’t just a glassmaker; it was someone skilled in engraving too. It points to a hierarchy of artisanal production. Someone meticulously etched this design onto the glass, presumably for a wealthy patron. What do you think that tells us about the consumption of art objects at that time? Editor: Well, the fact that it’s on a goblet suggests it was intended for use, for pleasure, not just for display. Maybe it reflects a growing middle class who could afford these luxury goods depicting ordinary people? Curator: Precisely. It challenges our traditional notions of ‘high art.’ It uses genre painting, usually reserved for canvas, and applies it to a functional, everyday object. How does thinking about its function and the labour behind it change how you see the ‘art’? Editor: It makes it less precious, in a way. It connects it to the world of craft and labour, rather than some rarefied sphere of artistic genius. It is also amazing that is anonymous. Curator: Exactly! The value wasn’t solely placed on the ‘artist’ but on the skill, the material, and its function. So much for us to still think about nowadays! Editor: I hadn't considered the economic side of art objects, particularly labor and social status implications of this goblet. Thank you for sharing! Curator: And thank you for making me consider the utility of this type of “art,” Editor.