We, The Jury 

Editor: This is "We, The Jury" by Lucia Heffernan, a painting which I find absolutely hilarious. There’s just so much going on with all the animals dressed up as people sitting in what appears to be a courtroom! What strikes you about it? Curator: What I find immediately fascinating is its engagement with ideas of justice and social participation. Given that Heffernan’s style has been labeled ‘surrealist’, how can that reading challenge our conventional interpretation of law? The animal jury creates a playful but perhaps subversive critique of legal institutions. How does the anthropomorphism, specifically the assigning of human-like behaviours and dress, impact this commentary? Editor: It's interesting to consider it as subversive. At first glance, the animals in their little outfits just made me laugh. I guess the monkey on his phone, and the sloth wearing headphones, is more of a statement about people avoiding the tedious bits. Curator: Indeed. It reminds me of Honoré Daumier's satirical lithographs of 19th-century French courts, mocking the bourgeoisie and legal system. The humor provides accessibility, softening the potentially critical edge, yet it begs us to ask: who *does* participate in the justice system, and who benefits? This brings a complex reading of the painting: while using comedic tones, the imagery offers implicit critique about absent mindedness to democracy. Editor: Oh, wow, I see what you mean! So it's not just a funny painting; it also speaks to wider questions about how society works and how people are – or are not – engaged. Curator: Precisely. Perhaps humor serves as the sugar that helps the medicine go down. What appears 'naive' and jovial could encourage the viewer to question deeper political dynamics around law. Editor: I'll definitely look at paintings differently now; thank you for your insights! Curator: My pleasure! Exploring such questions about imagery allows us to perceive art’s impact beyond a simple visual image and pushes a discussion on ethics.