John F. Kennedy 1967

Editor: Here we have Jamie Wyeth’s “John F. Kennedy,” created in 1967, an oil painting portraying the former president. It’s interesting how the artist captured a sense of introspection, the president seems to be in deep thought. What's your take on this piece? Curator: As a materialist, I see more than just a portrait. The oil paint itself, a product of industrial processes, has a history, from its pigments to its binding agents. The way Wyeth manipulates this material reflects a specific mode of artistic labor. Think of the cost of this material during the '60s and who would have access to it. Who did it serve? Editor: That's a compelling point! I hadn’t considered the social implications of accessing such materials. It leads to questions of power, doesn't it? Curator: Precisely. Also consider that this was created a few years after Kennedy's death. Why choose paint to depict a figure whose image was so widely disseminated through television and print? What commentary, if any, is made by favoring one form of media over another? How did it change the reception? Editor: It feels almost like a conscious slowing down of the image, compared to the instantaneity of TV. Was it a deliberate artistic statement, pushing against the new forms of media and mass consumption? Curator: Maybe. Or perhaps it speaks to the enduring power and commodity that a portrait can hold within certain circles of power and influence. We might consider the socio-economic class typically commissioning these portraits at this time and which political class. Was it truly meant for a broader, populist audience? Editor: I never would have considered that. So much to consider about something seemingly as simple as an oil portrait! Curator: Material speaks volumes, even in silence. The way we look at materials unveils narratives of labor, economics, and social dynamics. Editor: Exactly! Now I can appreciate this painting as an embodiment of larger socioeconomic themes. Thank you!