Untitled [female nude seated and looking down] 1955 - 1967

Curator: Editor: This is an untitled drawing of a seated female nude by Richard Diebenkorn, created sometime between 1955 and 1967. It’s a simple pencil drawing, very sparse and linear. What do you see in this piece? Curator: For me, it's crucial to consider Diebenkorn’s methods. We have here a study in economy, right? How much information can be conveyed with the barest minimum of material investment - just paper, pencil, the artist’s labor? Editor: Right, and the drawing itself, it almost feels unfinished… the lines are very simple and unrefined, so I wonder, why present a drawing using basic techniques? Curator: Perhaps Diebenkorn wants us to consider the labor involved in both representation and objectification. Nudes are so tied to art history, typically in painting or sculpture that involves lengthy creative endeavors, a status marker, and even wealth. How does this quick sketch play with and against that tradition? Editor: Interesting, so the 'unfinished' quality almost democratizes the art-making process, right? It challenges the traditional 'high art' associated with nude paintings that take hours or days. Curator: Exactly! Think about how the immediacy of pencil on paper highlights the process. It makes you consider the artist’s hand, his movement, and the decisions he made about what to include and what to leave out. Also consider how accessible pencil and paper is as a medium! How that intersects the larger conversation around consumerism, labor, production, and artistic talent. Does that inform how we should receive his work, overall? Editor: I hadn't considered the labor aspect so directly. I see how focusing on the materials shifts the conversation from the subject of the nude itself to the means of creating it. Thank you! Curator: It’s about challenging assumptions around value, isn't it? I'm glad you could explore this dimension with me.