Skystudie 1872

Editor: Here we have P.C. Skovgaard's "Skystudie" from 1872, rendered delicately in pencil on paper. It’s amazing how much the artist was able to suggest with what appears to be, on initial glance, a sparse arrangement of graphite marks. What's your take on it? Curator: I see a focus on the very act of production itself. Consider the availability of materials like paper and pencils in 19th-century Denmark, the specific grades of graphite Skovgaard might have used, and even the labor involved in creating these studies. This wasn't just about capturing an image; it was about a material engagement with the world. Editor: A material engagement? How so? Curator: Well, think about what drawing meant at that time. Was it preparatory work for a painting, therefore lower in the artistic hierarchy? Or was it a valuable artistic practice in its own right? Skovgaard’s choice to produce these “studies” rather than “finished” works allows us to consider the social context that defines artistic value. Editor: That's interesting, I hadn't thought about the social implications of a "study". It also speaks to the kind of time Skovgaard had on his hands. Curator: Exactly! Who has the time and resources to dedicate themselves to these fleeting observations? It's about understanding the means of production, distribution, and ultimately, the consumption of art. The finished artwork holds value, but consider the discarded works that do not! Editor: So, in understanding the materials and processes, we are better positioned to consider societal values and hierarchies concerning art. I have learned much about materiality in relation to process. Curator: Yes, examining Skovgaard’s artistic journey by highlighting process makes us ask deeper questions about who benefits from these forms of artistic practice, the values these activities convey and to whom, as well as their legacy and relevance in an interconnected modern world.