The Second Oriental Head c. 1635

Editor: Okay, so this is Rembrandt van Rijn's "The Second Oriental Head," an etching from around 1635. The detail, considering it's a print, is just stunning! It’s got a real somber feel to it. What’s your take on this piece? Curator: Somber indeed, but that’s just scratching the surface, isn’t it? For me, this is Rembrandt diving deep into the theatre of the self. It's like he's saying, "Here's a man, dressed in exotic finery. But beneath it, what stories etch themselves on his face?” Rembrandt was fascinated with rendering emotion; he probably mused: 'can you draw human emotion with a needle?' Editor: That's interesting— the theatre of the self! I hadn't thought about it that way. It felt more like a historical portrait. I suppose it looks kind of romantic too! Curator: "Romantic, maybe if you find profound honesty romantic! It is as romantic as watching the day turn into a moonlit night in which an untold love will never become known. You know, etching allowed Rembrandt to capture textures in such an inventive manner. That swirling fur headdress… what does it *feel* like to you? Editor: Like…roughness? Definitely tactile. I suppose he is also using clothing as expression here; its luxury reflects more of a mindset rather than a social statement. But what about the "Oriental" aspect? How much of that is just…fantasy? Curator: Ah, fantasy spiced with a bit of reality, I believe! Seventeenth-century Europe had a rather skewed view of the ‘Orient’, which fed both artistic license, and… a hunger to learn. But is that oriental head just exotic decor, or a stand-in for Rembrandt himself playing a role? Perhaps his friend in costume? That’s the mystery, and that's precisely what makes it so alluring, yes? Editor: So, he's almost using the costume as a mask to explore something deeper. I never really thought of Rembrandt as playful, I can now see what he's going for! Curator: Precisely, well put, with a dash of introspection and observation, always searching… Makes you wonder who *we* are behind *our* masks, doesn’t it?