Crane and pitcher 1945

Editor: Here we have Picasso’s “Crane and Pitcher” from 1945, rendered in oil paint. The bold colours and fragmented shapes give it a slightly unsettling feeling, but also intriguing. What strikes you most about this still life? Curator: I am most interested in Picasso's engagement with readily available materials during a period of wartime scarcity. This piece highlights a tension: a painter known for high art turns to simple objects. Oil paint itself becomes a significant player – its availability, its cost, and its manipulation become crucial to the reading of this painting, don't you think? Editor: That's fascinating! I hadn't considered the context of scarcity. So, you’re saying the very materials themselves contribute meaning? Curator: Absolutely. Consider the flattened perspective and simplified forms. Are they merely stylistic choices, or could they reflect the constraints imposed by limited resources? Think of how rationing might impact artistic production. And the labor – how long did it take him to apply each layer? Editor: I see what you mean. It challenges the romantic idea of the artist working solely from inspiration. There’s a material reality shaping the artwork. Curator: Precisely! The ‘everydayness’ of the subject matter – a simple crane, a pitcher – further underscores this materialist perspective. These weren't luxury items; they were commonplace. Why these objects and what was he intending to transmit in their simple forms? Editor: So, by looking at the materials and the means of production, we gain a richer understanding of Picasso's intent, and even a snapshot of the social landscape of the time? Curator: Exactly. It shifts our focus from simply admiring the aesthetic to considering the artwork as a product of its material circumstances, asking broader questions about art's place in society. Editor: That gives me a completely new perspective on approaching art! Thank you.