Cap and Ball Revolver c. 1937

Editor: This is "Cap and Ball Revolver," a colored pencil drawing by LeRoy Robinson, dating from around 1937. There's something very tactile about it. I can almost feel the smooth wood and cold metal. What do you make of it? Curator: Well, right away, I notice the interplay between representation and reality. This isn't just a drawing of a weapon; it's a drawing *made* with specific materials and through a certain labor process. What social circumstances might have led Robinson to create a replica rather than possessing the object itself? The drawing medium contrasts with the actual pistol's materiality. It begs the question: What did it *mean* to painstakingly render these weapons, knowing he likely couldn't afford them himself? Editor: That’s an interesting point – the accessibility of art materials versus the guns themselves. Do you think the choice of medium speaks to something about access to resources? Curator: Absolutely! Think about the economics of the time, the socio-economic landscape that likely relegated the artist to using what was at hand – relatively inexpensive colored pencils – to depict objects that signified power and, arguably, unattainable aspirations. This also plays into the blurring of high art versus "folk art," considering this artist may have existed outside the traditional art world structures. Editor: So, the drawing itself becomes a statement about class and aspiration. Curator: Precisely. The very act of creation and the materials used are intrinsically linked to socio-economic conditions and reflect upon ideas surrounding production, desire and power. Editor: This has really changed how I view the piece. It’s not just a rendering of a gun. Curator: Exactly. By examining the materiality and mode of production, the drawing transforms from simple representation to a reflection on labor and consumerism within a specific historical context.