September, from Twelve Months of Flowers n.d.

Editor: We’re looking at "September, from Twelve Months of Flowers," artist unlisted, date unknown, held here at the Art Institute. It’s a print combining etching, drawing and watercolor on paper. I’m immediately struck by how meticulously rendered and organized all these diverse blooms are, like a botanical inventory in an elaborate vase. What do you make of this piece? Curator: This type of image speaks volumes about the burgeoning scientific and social interests of its time. Flower prints weren't just pretty; they reflected a culture obsessed with cataloging and controlling nature. Editor: Controlling nature? Curator: Think about the context. This print was likely part of a series marketed to wealthy patrons who were deeply invested in horticulture and scientific discovery. Gardens became symbols of power, a way to showcase exotic specimens collected from around the globe. Owning a series like "Twelve Months of Flowers" was a status symbol, wasn't it? A way of demonstrating knowledge and cosmopolitanism, alongside wealth. Editor: That's interesting. So it’s less about art for art’s sake and more about social positioning through images? Curator: Precisely! And the way the flowers are arranged, so meticulously labeled…It reflects a desire to impose order on the natural world, transforming something wild and untamed into a controlled, consumable image. What do you think the use of watercolor adds? Editor: Maybe a touch of elegance, of prestige? Curator: Indeed. Watercolor adds to its commercial appeal and signifies its preciousness within a particular social strata. These flower prints offer a fascinating lens through which we can understand the complex relationship between art, science, and social status in the past. Editor: I never thought a simple floral arrangement could reveal so much!