Portret van Marie Antoinette 1794

Editor: So, here we have a print from 1794 entitled *Portret van Marie Antoinette*. From what I understand it’s an engraving. I'm struck by how detailed the textures are – the lace, the fabrics... it seems to emphasize Marie Antoinette's status, or at least how she wanted to be perceived. What stands out to you? Curator: As a materialist, I look at the production. This engraving, a reproduction of a portrait, highlights a crucial shift: art becoming more widely accessible through printmaking. Consider the labour involved – the engraver meticulously recreating an image. The act of reproducing, distributing... it challenges the concept of unique artistic genius and invites us to think about consumption. This wasn’t about high art solely; it was a commercial object consumed by a burgeoning middle class, was it not? Editor: Absolutely. So the material process democratized the image but also potentially diluted its artistic value in some eyes? It becomes a commodity, really. Curator: Precisely. Think about the ink used, the paper – commodities themselves tied to global trade. This portrait, in its reproductive form, moves away from the traditional understanding of a one-of-a-kind masterpiece. It makes one ask about its message: is it propaganda, fashion, or a memorial, considering it appeared a year after her execution? Was it a way for people to remember, perhaps even mourn, a symbol of the old regime? The question here is what does mechanical reproduction do to how we understand the object itself? Editor: I hadn't thought about it like that – it really changes my perspective, thinking of it not just as a historical portrait but a mass-produced object with its own economic and social implications. Curator: It's about examining the conditions of its making and consumption, the often-invisible hands that bring an image into existence and circulation. Considering the labour of this art reveals it for what it is - another commodity for our consideration.