Arnold Newman 1975

Editor: This is Mike Mandel’s "Arnold Newman," a gelatin silver print from 1975. There's something kind of humorous about it...Newman's posed with the baseball and glove. How do you interpret this work? Curator: I look at the photographic materials first: the gelatin silver print, a process perfected over decades. Mass production and consumption were part of this evolution, so while the "art world" deemed painting or sculpture of higher value, photographic methods reached broader audiences. Now, why this playful image, I wonder? Editor: Well, it definitely feels like it's playing with the traditional portrait. Instead of, you know, formal wear, he’s in baseball attire and it doesn’t scream "high art." Curator: Precisely! Mandel likely is pushing against those established hierarchies within art production. Photography itself challenged painting. Its ability to reproduce images en masse changed visual culture completely. Think about who has access to portraits versus commercial photography like baseball cards or family photos. Does that difference matter in how we view Arnold Newman? Editor: So, it is partly about undermining the traditional seriousness we associate with artistic portraiture by merging it with something commonplace, through photography. The material makes the art and commentary, right? Curator: In essence, yes. It urges us to confront what is given value and who decides such things. It pushes boundaries – something seemingly whimsical may engage questions of cultural and financial capital in ways a more conventionally "artistic" approach might fail to do. It also points to a broader democratization. Editor: I didn’t see that humor as pointed critique. Thanks for shifting my perspective. Curator: It is photographs such as this, seemingly accessible on the surface, that truly show the power and democratizing capacity that art holds.