Spur c. 1940

Editor: This is "Spur," a drawing made around 1940 by Harry Mann Waddell. It's a very detailed, realistic rendering, but the isolated composition gives it this strange sense of detached observation. What should viewers make of an image like this? Curator: It's intriguing how Waddell presents a functional object like a spur as an almost scientific specimen, devoid of context. Drawings like this, especially those created during this period, often speak volumes about prevailing cultural values. Consider the rise of museums during this era, emphasizing object classification and public education. How does this drawing participate in this public role of art? Editor: I see what you mean. The focus shifts from the rider or the horse to this single tool... Curator: Exactly. It elevates the everyday object. Waddell compels the viewer to scrutinize the design, the craftsmanship, even the potential impact. Does removing it from its context somehow change or enhance its meaning? How do you think its reception would differ in, say, a historical society versus an art museum? Editor: In a historical society, it might be examined for its specific design and use. Here, its more about its symbolism. It can prompt us to question the romanticized vision of the American West and consider ideas around control. Curator: Precisely. The politics of imagery are central here. It can serve as a lens through which we consider labor, animal rights, even Western expansion itself. Did anything surprise you about the artwork after our conversation? Editor: It’s become far more loaded than it initially seemed! I initially saw just a detailed drawing. Now, I understand the drawing as being placed in social and cultural dynamics and narratives. Thanks so much for your insights!