Mug for Table Use c. 1940

Curator: Let's delve into Carl Buergerniss's "Mug for Table Use," circa 1940. It’s rendered delicately in watercolor and drawing. The simplicity is what strikes me immediately. Editor: My eye goes straight to the raw materiality. I can almost feel the texture of the clay; its utilitarian form speaks volumes about its purpose and, in a way, honors labor and consumption. There’s nothing pretentious here. Curator: Absolutely. Consider this, though. Even an everyday object can become a potent symbol within art history. The mug can be interpreted in light of design principles that influenced the Bauhaus movement and even broader socialist objectives related to democratic access to objects and forms. It reflects, too, gendered notions of domesticity and perhaps a certain aesthetic of the working class during this period. Editor: That’s a rich analysis, but the way it is made fascinates me even more: look at how Buergerniss uses watercolor washes to capture light, the shadows suggesting the careful handiwork of the potter shaping this object. I think of all of the other laborers involved from mining of clay to distribution networks. Curator: Fair enough, but the medium is also critical, a drawing rendered with delicate precision: the mug as a sort of memento, hinting perhaps at the values ascribed to humble household items in times of war or scarcity, or as quiet pushback against prevalent values associated with wealth, celebrity and display at that time. We must keep such wider intersectional perspectives in mind, don’t you agree? Editor: I agree. And maybe it speaks to something larger, about how objects embody social history, or about the artistry of production. The maker leaves their touch on it in so many subtle ways. It’s a convergence, wouldn’t you say? Curator: It's a fantastic reminder of how domestic life can inform—and reflect—identity. Editor: And, perhaps, of our connections to materiality, utility and labor through even the simplest, everyday objects.