Fluter c. 1940

Editor: Here we have John H. Tercuzzi's "Fluter," from around 1940, made with watercolor and charcoal. The detailed rendering makes it seem so real! What strikes me is how this ordinary, almost obsolete, object is presented with such care. How do you interpret this work? Curator: Precisely! What's intriguing here is thinking about what an iron represents, beyond its simple function. In the 1940s, the labor associated with keeping up appearances, particularly for women, was very different than now. The iron symbolizes domesticity, but also the often invisible work required to meet societal expectations. Editor: Invisible work? I see what you mean. I hadn't considered that aspect. Curator: Think about the societal pressure of presenting a wrinkle-free image, particularly during that era. Whose responsibility was that? The crispness of clothing reflects not just personal care, but also social status and conformity. The materiality – the cold, heavy iron – it all speaks to repetitive, physically demanding labor. And then, this being rendered with such care by Tercuzzi invites us to consider his relationship to this labor, this object. Is he elevating it, memorializing it, or perhaps critiquing the demands it imposed? Editor: So, it's not just a realistic still life. It prompts us to think about gender roles, class, and the value of labor? Curator: Exactly. It’s about deconstructing seemingly mundane objects to reveal broader socio-political dynamics. What does this piece suggest about how we value different forms of work today? Editor: I never thought I'd find so much to unpack from an iron! Now, I'm considering all the hidden layers behind everyday tasks. Curator: Art provides those crucial lenses. It invites us to critically engage with the world and our place within its historical narrative.