Coverlet c. 1936

Editor: So, this is "Coverlet," a watercolor and ink drawing from around 1936 by Ruth M. Barnes. It's incredibly delicate; the blue against the creamy background is quite striking. What elements jump out at you when you consider this drawing? Curator: The materiality of the piece is paramount. Barnes utilizes accessible media - watercolor and ink, techniques associated with craft and reproduction rather than 'high art.' I'm interested in how this choice engages with ideas of accessibility, labor, and the potential democratizing influence of artmaking, particularly in the context of the 1930s. Do you think she’s making a statement? Editor: That’s interesting. It does feel different knowing it was made with more accessible materials, but making a statement? I hadn’t considered that. What statement might that be? Curator: Well, the choice of watercolor suggests a domestic context, blurring the lines between 'art' and 'craft'. The folk-art style, too, challenges the established hierarchies within the art world. I wonder about its potential relationship to design movements during the depression; The WPA, perhaps, promoting art and craft as valuable labor. And thinking more widely, where does folk art sit as 'art' historically anyway? Editor: Ah, I see. So you are saying it isn’t *just* about the aesthetics, but it is the combination of art, materials and the culture together… Curator: Precisely! The combination of everyday materials like watercolor with what is a traditionally undervalued subject is quite compelling. Looking closely at this artwork provides insight to Barnes' wider cultural landscape. Editor: Wow, I never thought about it that way. Now, I see the artwork through completely new eyes!