Communication with Nature 

Editor: So, this is "Communication with Nature" by Arthur Saron Sarnoff. It’s… dreamy. It looks like an outdoor portrait. The texture of the paint is quite apparent. How do you interpret this work? Curator: Well, what jumps out at me is the application of paint itself. Look how Sarnoff builds the scene with visible, almost repetitive strokes. This wasn't necessarily about depicting a perfect natural scene but rather calling attention to the means of its creation. Is he highlighting his labor, or something deeper? Editor: So you're saying the *act* of painting becomes the focus, more so than the landscape itself? It’s interesting you focus on the “labor” in the work – I see that, now. Curator: Exactly! And think about the materials: paint, canvas. Consider their origins, their cost, and how they might have been perceived in Sarnoff’s time. How did the availability and expense of these materials influence artistic choices? Editor: I hadn’t considered the economic aspect. It's easy to just see the image but not the industry behind it. How do you think the plein-air aspect fits into that material context? Curator: The 'plein-air' suggests a direct relationship with nature, but it’s also a deliberate choice about *where* labor is performed. Painting outdoors creates a spectacle—the artist engaging in visible work. The final image conceals much of the effort that it took. The labor conditions for that kind of painter and image. Editor: That definitely gives me a new lens through which to view plein-air paintings. It is not just romantic, but about labor too. Curator: Precisely. The “communication” implied by the title extends beyond the figures within the painting; it involves the artist, the materials, the process, and us, the viewers, caught within a network of production and consumption. Editor: I'll definitely look at impressionist landscape painting differently now. Thanks for opening my eyes to the work behind the image.