Landscape n.d.

Editor: This is George Inness's *Landscape*, it’s undated but created with watercolor on paper. It has this serene, almost hazy atmosphere, a peaceful vista. What strikes you about it? Curator: Beyond the immediate tranquility, I see a dialogue with the Hudson River School and its emphasis on capturing the American landscape. But Inness diverges; there's an intimacy here, a softening of the patriarchal idea of dominating the landscape, moving away from the rhetoric of manifest destiny and ownership that drove much of that earlier imagery. Do you notice how the figures within the landscape are almost imperceptible? Editor: They are tiny! It almost blends into the scenery... like they are a part of it rather than imposing on it. Curator: Exactly. And the fact that it is plein-air and watercolor connects it to ideas of immediacy and ephemerality which became linked to impressionism, but also to feminist practices of ‘unimportant’ subjects – challenging the grand narratives. Can you see a commentary on industrialization reflected through this subtle re-engagement with nature? Editor: That's a great point, because you don’t really *see* the industrial revolution here. Just these subtle hints. Curator: Perhaps Inness uses that absence to remind us of its looming presence, urging viewers to reconsider their relationship with the environment and those traditionally marginalized from its resources. Think about land ownership during that time period, race and access… It makes the painting less about picturesque scenery and more about an implicit critique of power structures. Editor: I see what you mean, framing the landscape as an engagement with both environmental and social concerns adds so much depth to my initial reading! Curator: Right? Thinking of it this way invites us to question what landscapes conceal.