Temple Gold Medal Nude 1924

Curator: This is William Glackens' "Temple Gold Medal Nude," painted in 1924. What catches your eye first? Editor: Immediately, it’s that hazy, dreamlike quality. Like the memory of a body rather than a photographic likeness. I’m almost reminded of Renoir... the warmth and softness. Curator: Yes, Glackens certainly shared that love for the human form. It is as though we have walked in on the end of a rather lovely, intimate encounter between artist and model. She appears to be caught in a private moment of reflection. Editor: Absolutely. Considering the social mores of the time, exhibiting a nude like this would've been a bold statement, pushing the boundaries of acceptable subject matter, in order to challenge the male gaze inherent in classical art traditions. Curator: A daring departure, perhaps? The Impressionists often showed women in domestic or social scenes. There is an undeniable painterly quality; brushstrokes and their materiality being part of the point... which lends this figurative composition that abstraction too. Editor: Precisely. And note that despite the inherent power dynamics in the nude genre, there's an interesting softness in how she’s depicted. It hints at a certain sensitivity towards her personhood that defies those power imbalances, but in 1924 would there still be arguments for exploitation, in an arena that may not allow much recourse to this power play? Curator: Absolutely a critical factor. And a sign, maybe, of what the 1920's in America are, at least for some: change is here, even if slowly. We see that expressed here, in the context of intimacy, as much as representation. Editor: I hadn't considered it from that angle, but the sense of privacy is key here, I feel, in opening that possibility of the painter taking a step, with however tiny feet, away from "tradition". This is fascinating work on power. Curator: Well, yes, it brings up all sorts of reflections!