Miss Leman c. 1808

Editor: This is Jacob Eichholtz’s "Miss Leman," created around 1808 using oil paint. The pink dress really catches my eye – it feels delicate, almost like spun sugar. How do you interpret the choice of materials in relation to the subject? Curator: I'm particularly interested in the materiality of this portrait, specifically Eichholtz's use of oil paint. The underpainting is evident; note the thinness of the paint layers. This highlights not just the sitter’s social standing, implied by the dress, but the labor involved in its production and, by extension, its consumption. Consider, how readily could an "ordinary" person in 1808 acquire or be immortalized in a painted portrait such as this? Editor: That’s a fascinating point. It makes me wonder about the relationship between the artist and the sitter. Did Eichholtz’s social position influence his approach to painting “Miss Leman?” Curator: Precisely! Eichholtz was a self-taught artist who worked as a tradesman earlier in life. This background would certainly influence his relationship with his clients, offering a different perspective on portraiture compared to someone from a more traditionally academic background. Think about the economic exchange: who commissions the portrait, and what does it signify? The very act of applying paint, a commodity, transforms labor into value, doesn't it? Editor: I never thought about the layers of material implications in something that looks so simple. I’ll definitely pay more attention to the "making of" and the resources behind art in the future. Curator: Exactly. It's by understanding the means of production, the materials and the cultural and social context, that we gain a deeper appreciation. The “Miss Leman” is not merely an image but an embodiment of labour and commodity exchange.