Versailles 

Editor: Here we have "Versailles," a photograph by Eugène Atget. It feels so…stark. The architecture is imposing, but the emptiness around it creates a sense of loneliness. What catches your eye when you look at it? Curator: The most striking thing is the emphasis on the labor involved. Look at the scale of Versailles, even in this fragment. The quarrying of the stone, the transportation, the carving – an immense expenditure of human effort is embedded in the image. Editor: Right, I didn't think about that. The craftsmanship of the building versus the medium of photography…it's interesting to see them juxtaposed. Does Atget's process factor in here? Curator: Absolutely. He used a simple, large-format camera. His deliberate lack of artistic manipulation foregrounds the subject, allowing the sheer materiality of the palace and grounds to dominate. The process highlights the system that would call for such architecture and all the social implications tied to its commission and construction. Editor: So, it's almost like he’s using the photo to ask questions about labor, power, and wealth by simply recording this…monument. Curator: Precisely! Consider the vast amounts of material consumed. Where did the stone come from? Who paid for it? Who built it? The photograph, by stripping away artistic flourishes, forces us to confront those questions head-on. Editor: That’s a really different perspective from the usual art historical analysis. I've always seen Versailles as a symbol of royal power. Curator: And it is! But that power is only realized through material extraction and labor. The image allows us to consider the costs associated with its grandeur. Editor: That gives me a lot to think about! I'll never look at a photo of Versailles the same way again. Thanks! Curator: My pleasure! Remembering to consider art and architecture through the lens of material and labor really transforms our perception.