The Golden Rooms, paperback cover 1960

Editor: This is Robert Maguire's cover painting for "The Golden Rooms," done in 1960. It appears to be oil paint on some kind of board. There's a definite pulp sensibility – it’s evocative, but kind of shocking at the same time. I’m wondering, how does a work like this fit into the broader art world? Curator: Let’s think about it from a materialist perspective. As a paperback cover, its primary function was tied to consumption. The means of production are key. This wasn’t created as high art, right? It was commissioned commercial work, likely produced under tight deadlines, designed to be visually arresting on a shelf, encouraging purchase. Editor: Right, the aim was to sell books. But what about the "art" part? Doesn't the fact that it’s an oil painting elevate it somehow? Curator: I'd say it complicates things more than elevates. The choice of oil, usually associated with fine art, signals an intention beyond pure utility. Is Maguire using the material’s prestige to make the product seem more valuable? Think about the cultural capital embedded in the use of “painting” rather than, say, a mass-produced illustration technique at the time. Editor: So, the medium itself contributes to how we read the work? Is it trying to be both lowbrow and highbrow simultaneously? Curator: Exactly. And it pushes us to challenge the divide. The use of oil paint, the genre tropes of erotic art, the focus on figures and landscape, and its social role as advertising – all these elements and how they come together through Maguire’s labor defines the artwork's complex meaning. This labor would have likely been vastly underpaid. How does that knowledge inform our reading? Editor: I never thought about a paperback cover having such layers of meaning tied to materials and production! I guess that blurs the lines between what’s “art” and what’s simply made. Curator: Indeed! The materiality and context give insight into the creation, consumption, and even hierarchies embedded in art production itself.