Study of a Kid 1796

Curator: Aw, look at that little goat. He seems rather... puzzled. Editor: And caught so fleetingly. This is James Ward's "Study of a Kid" from 1796. It appears to be done in pencil, maybe with some watercolour, on toned paper. Curator: It’s like he just happened to have the tools handy and this baby goat strolled by, posing obligingly. Do you think he captured its…essence? Like the tentative nature of a young creature still figuring things out. Editor: Tentative, yes, but look at the visible layers of work here. Ward wasn’t just capturing an essence. It looks to me that the choice of materials-- humble, readily available—reflects something about agricultural labor at the time. Working pastoral lands, rendering what could be, at least materially speaking, one's lunch... Curator: Okay, but look at the texture he creates just with a few pencil strokes and strategic daubs of white. The soft fuzz of its fur, the bony angles beneath. You sense the life force. You could also point out how this also allowed a certain social class access to images... it wouldn't have been quite as exclusive. Editor: Fair point. It is very soft. But to your comment: these drawings still entered a market, whether prints made from them, or the original studies to patrons. These choices create the market itself. I mean, the work evokes this idyll—perhaps to obscure that this idyllic scene could feed a market. Curator: And do you think Ward intended any of this consciously? It feels more like instinct to me. This simple beauty… almost unconscious, really. I find myself wondering if I could capture a thing so sweetly. Editor: Regardless, it still tells us something about his practice, the context, the available modes of art-making that both fed and sprung from a changing English society. So cute it distracts! I love that even seemingly minor artworks contain worlds of implications, as does that fluffy tail. Curator: Ha! I think I might actually prefer looking at life this way—through small, soft lenses.