Portret van Ernst August van Hannover en Fama met een eenhoorn en een leeuw 1779

Editor: This is "Portret van Ernst August van Hannover en Fama met een eenhoorn en een leeuw," made in 1779 by Daniel Nikolaus Chodowiecki. It’s a print – an engraving, to be exact. It strikes me as quite formal and symbolic; I’m curious, what do you see when you look at this work? Curator: I see a fascinating interplay between image, production, and function. It's not simply a portrait; it's a print designed for an almanac. Consider the labor involved in engraving and the relatively low cost of a print that allows for dissemination on a wide scale. The choice of materials dictates its accessibility, contrasting sharply with an oil painting which is obviously more individualized and elitist. How does the engraving process itself—the cutting and inking—shape our understanding of the sitter's identity? Editor: So, you're suggesting the *making* of the art impacts how we interpret it? Curator: Precisely. This wasn't just about representation; it's about reproduction and the context of consumption. It's an almanac image! What purpose would the symbolism, like the unicorn and lion, have for someone using it to mark time or plan events? Are they mere decorative elements or embedded with the cultural currency of Hanover’s status? Editor: That's a great point. It highlights that prints, as more accessible art, could serve practical purposes and disseminate symbolic meaning. I never thought of art like that. It moves me away from looking only at individual skill and genius. Curator: And that is how material concerns enrich our engagement with art history. Recognizing the economic and cultural factors of artistic production allows a critical approach to both the symbolism and dissemination of any particular artist’s imagery. Editor: I agree. This piece isn't just a portrait, but part of a bigger social and economic picture! Curator: Indeed. That’s materiality.