Munkehoved 1726 - 1748

Curator: This diminutive oil painting, “Munkehoved,” dating roughly from 1726 to 1748, catches the eye. It's currently held at the SMK, the Statens Museum for Kunst. What grabs your attention? Editor: It’s… surprisingly earthy, despite the subject matter and ornate frame. It’s oil paint, of course, but there’s something about the way the light catches on what I think is a monk’s simple garb that seems so grounded. I am wondering, what story about materiality and labour could be unpacked? Curator: Indeed, it’s fascinating how the mundane combines with the elevated. The rough texture of the pigment juxtaposed against the implied labor within that simple robe makes us consider the social dynamics that inform its production and viewing. How does understanding the creation of pigments, and even the canvas itself, shift our reading of the "genre-painting?" Editor: I see what you mean. Thinking about the pigment, for instance, makes me think of global trade routes. Were those materials locally sourced? And did the monk's robes represent the labor of religious orders? Is it possible to explore this painting as part of a circuit of resources, commerce, or maybe colonialism? Curator: Precisely! By examining these connections, we break down the false boundary between 'high' art and the everyday. Considering its reception further enriches this approach, since examining a painting in relation to markets can expose hierarchies around production or access. Considering Baroque portraiture tradition, is this maybe a counterpoint? Editor: So, viewing this painting through a materialist lens demystifies the artwork, placing it within networks of power and production. Thanks, this will enrich how I consider artworks in the future. Curator: And by considering it in this manner, we honour the labor embedded within it, moving beyond simple appreciation and stepping into genuine understanding.