Zuid-Amerikaanse ratelslang (Crotalus durissus) 1722 - 1784

Editor: So, this is Simon Fokke's "South American Rattlesnake (Crotalus durissus)," made between 1722 and 1784. It's a print with watercolor and engraving. It’s quite striking—the snake seems so alert and dangerous. How do you interpret this work beyond just a naturalistic depiction? Curator: It’s interesting that you highlight the snake’s alertness, because I see this image as deeply embedded in the history of colonialism and scientific exploration. Consider that Fokke, though Dutch, is depicting a South American rattlesnake. How much of this image reflects actual observation, and how much is filtered through a European lens, categorizing and "taming" the exotic "Other"? Editor: That's a perspective I hadn't considered. So, it's less about pure science and more about power dynamics? Curator: Precisely. The act of depicting nature, especially from colonized lands, was a way of claiming knowledge and control. Natural history illustrations often served to justify colonial expansion, turning living beings into specimens, trophies even. Who gets to define "natural," and for what purpose? Editor: It almost feels like the artist is displaying dominance over nature with this image, by displaying its features. Curator: Exactly! Even the style—this straddling of Rococo and naturalism—tells a story. Rococo, with its decorative flourishes, subtly transforms a potentially frightening creature into an aesthetic object, something to be admired, studied, and, importantly, owned, at least visually. Editor: This conversation has opened my eyes. I'll definitely view natural history illustrations with more critical awareness moving forward. Curator: That's the hope – to look at images not just for what they show, but for what they conceal about the complex interplay of power, knowledge, and representation.