Pitcher 1937

Editor: Here we have C.W. Perky’s "Pitcher," executed in 1937, seemingly using watercolor and drawing techniques. I am immediately drawn to the quotidian subject, but it's rendered with such care and attention to detail that it feels monumental. How do you interpret this work? Curator: Let’s consider what is depicted: a common household object. What does the artist’s careful depiction of a pitcher tell us about the values of the time, or perhaps the artist’s values? Is Perky elevating craft, by emphasizing its material presence through paint? Or perhaps documenting an object soon to be replaced by mass-produced goods? Editor: That's interesting. The blue floral design seems almost folksy against the muted tones. Is there something to say about its craftsmanship? Curator: Precisely. This floral design could indicate the handmade nature of the object depicted. But remember, painting itself is a form of labor. This raises questions about the hierarchy between “fine art,” as represented by painting, and "craft," inherent in the pitcher itself. Is Perky challenging that divide? Consider also the labor involved in watercolor painting - a demanding medium, and what is usually regarded as "lesser art". Editor: I never thought about it that way, seeing the painting and the pitcher as intertwined in a dance of labor and value. Curator: Indeed. The consumption of art itself, its exchange value, is related to the labor embedded in its creation, and, potentially, the depiction of an object’s value as well. Editor: This makes me think about the social status of both the artwork and the craft objects... Thanks so much! Curator: My pleasure! This piece reminds us to look beyond aesthetic value and see art as deeply embedded in the social and material world.