Portret van Joost van den Vondel 1836 - 1912

Editor: So, this is Isaac Weissenbruch's "Portrait of Joost van den Vondel," made sometime between 1836 and 1912. It’s a drawing, I believe pencil and etching on paper, and there's a sort of austere formality to it. What's your read on this portrait? Curator: What interests me most is understanding how the labor inherent in drawing and etching elevates or diminishes Vondel's status. We see marks, the trace of Weissenbruch’s hand. This wasn’t a quick sketch, so what choices led to these materials? How readily available were they and for what social strata? Editor: That's a good question. So the medium impacts the message. The artist chose these materials and this reproducible format. How would that have affected the reception of this image? Curator: Exactly. Consider too the economic conditions of artistic production in Weissenbruch’s time, influencing material choices. Etchings allowed for wider distribution. This piece prompts consideration of access to imagery. Was Weissenbruch thinking about democratization of the image, of disseminating Vondel's likeness, or was this merely commercial activity? The etching flattens the subject while being materially accessible. It speaks to the relationship between art, labor and the consumption of images. Editor: I didn't even consider that this was reproducible, and what implications this might have on reaching broader audiences, thus enhancing Vondel’s visibility, while still serving a material purpose of economic necessity. Curator: Precisely. It transforms a portrait from a singular object of elite consumption into a commodity, changing our relationship with the sitter himself. The choice of etching directly reflects on this, and it changes everything about the 'aura' of the subject. Editor: I see, the 'how' influencing the 'why'! Curator: Indeed, and I now see the materials with renewed consideration!