Seated tiger 1786

Editor: Here we have Katsu Gyokushu’s “Seated Tiger” from 1786, rendered in ink and tempera. The tiger itself has a very lifelike presence, almost piercing. How would you interpret this work, thinking about the choices of material? Curator: I find it fascinating to consider how the materials – ink and tempera – directly affect the reception of this "realistic" image. Gyokushu wasn't simply depicting a tiger; he was participating in, and perpetuating, a specific kind of commodity. Can you think of what labor was necessary to make the painting materials available? Editor: Right, the process of making the ink and preparing the tempera would involve different specialized labor, shaping how it was consumed as an artwork. Curator: Precisely. Tempera's earth pigments link it to landscape itself; the ink reflects its own making. The calligraphy and seals become markers of the painting's journey as a valued object. This interplay reminds us that even ‘naturalistic’ images are deeply rooted in production and social exchanges. Think about its acquisition: by whom, and from where? These layers impact the symbolism we often ascribe to a tiger, independent of the act of artistic production. Editor: So, instead of seeing just a portrait of a tiger, we should consider it as an artwork enmeshed within historical means of artistic production and the economy in the late 18th century? Curator: Exactly. It’s less about inherent symbolism and more about what the making and exchange of such an object represents within its cultural moment. I'd love to know who first owned it. Editor: This perspective definitely gives me a new way to approach art history. I will be more thoughtful of where all these paintings and their materials originate from. Curator: It provides us with concrete understanding of its existence, hopefully challenging romantic visions about creation and its impact on the market value of works like “Seated Tiger.”