Head study for ‘The Enchanted Garden’ 1916

Curator: John William Waterhouse painted this oil study, entitled "Head study for ‘The Enchanted Garden’" in 1916. What are your first impressions? Editor: There’s something both gentle and melancholy in her gaze. Her red hair glows softly beneath that white cap, framing a face filled with introspection, maybe even resignation. It speaks to a quiet, perhaps suppressed, narrative. Curator: Absolutely. The composition itself draws the eye upwards. See how Waterhouse used the slightly blurred details of the figure’s dress to deliberately bring our focus to her face and her expression, as if we are drawn in to her inner consciousness? Editor: I do, and knowing Waterhouse's recurring themes, I immediately start questioning the narrative of female agency, or lack thereof, inherent in his aesthetic choices. Was she merely a model, an object of the male gaze, or does this study hint at a more complex interior life of a woman, who is restricted by social and political roles? Curator: Perhaps the beauty lies in the ambiguity of her gaze. What’s technically impressive, I find, is Waterhouse's manipulation of light and shadow. Notice how he uses short, visible brushstrokes to give her skin a luminous, almost ethereal quality, with the very muted hues in the garments. It reminds one of the classic Italian ‘chiaroscuro’ style, a conscious and effective reference. Editor: Right. It feels somewhat reductive to only consider these formal strategies as ends in themselves, devoid of socio-political implications. The artistic choices reflect societal norms. We can’t discuss paintings of women in the early 20th century, with the rise of suffrage movements, without interrogating power dynamics in play. How much did his art, by creating a ‘safe distance’, serve a conservative role of romantic escapism? Curator: An important counterpoint, indeed. What is striking about Waterhouse’s study, though, is the immediacy, and the raw emotion captured, beyond time, and regardless of historical context. Editor: It’s a worthwhile endeavor, if slightly futile, to excavate these nuances, in search of answers that might still elude us. But if we ask the questions, then it opens this conversation, right? Curator: Exactly.