Landschap met herderin en kind op paard c. 1666 - 1745

Editor: Here we have Georg Heinrich Schifflin's "Landschap met herderin en kind op paard", made sometime between 1666 and 1745. It’s a print, an etching, maybe with some engraving too. It's so detailed! The lines are incredibly fine, and the composition— that circular frame— it almost feels like looking through a spyglass. What stands out to you? Curator: The means of production immediately grab my attention. Etching, engraving - these aren't just techniques; they represent a whole system of labor. Who was involved? Who made the plates, who printed them, and for whom were these images intended? Consider the economics: Prints allowed for wider distribution of imagery. What sort of exchange was happening in society that generated demand for this image and this material? Editor: That's a good point. I was just thinking about how beautiful it is, but I guess the beauty is tied to all this... production. The paper it's printed on, too. Was that a luxury? Curator: Exactly! Think about the social implications of accessing this imagery versus paintings accessible only to a privileged class. And that “landscape” itself – it isn’t just an idealized vision. It is produced and cultivated – and is inextricably bound to economics. See how those classical ruins seem to be juxtaposed alongside signs of agricultural labor. Do you think this imagery is simply picturesque or can the making of art and cultivating of landscape mutually comment on modes of production? Editor: I see what you mean. It's not just a pretty picture; it shows the physical work of people transforming the land. And the printmaking process itself, replicating that image, it's a type of labour too! I never really considered the social impact of printmaking itself. Curator: Reflecting on materiality is key. Editor: Definitely changes my perspective. I will remember to consider the material processes, economy, and labor that went into even a seemingly straightforward pastoral scene.