Plate 61. Great Horned Owl 

Editor: This is "Plate 61. Great Horned Owl" by John James Audubon, made using watercolor, pencil, and drawing techniques. There's such detail in the rendering of the feathers; you can almost feel the texture. What stands out to you in terms of the choices Audubon made? Curator: For me, it’s about Audubon’s relentless labor. Think about the physical demands of acquiring, preserving, and then painstakingly rendering these specimens, not just for aesthetic appreciation, but as a kind of inventory of American natural resources. How does this differ from, say, a purely aesthetic still life? Editor: That's an interesting point! It seems different than art for art's sake. The precision needed suggests a scientific imperative. Are you suggesting the craft and scientific dimensions are deeply entwined here? Curator: Precisely. The making becomes a crucial form of documentation and almost a tool for colonial expansion. Consider too, who would have consumed these images? What socioeconomic class would purchase such meticulously crafted depictions? Editor: So it’s about linking production methods to larger socioeconomic forces…It shifts my focus away from the pure beauty and skill involved. Were these illustrations always presented as “art,” or did that designation evolve later? Curator: A crucial question! And it highlights how value is assigned, debated, and changed. The owl is more than just a picture of an owl: it’s a commodity embedded in circuits of resource extraction, scientific advancement, and bourgeois consumption. How can that influence our contemporary understanding? Editor: It makes me rethink my initial reaction to it. The beauty is still there, but seeing the labor and the commercial context gives the piece more weight, more historical baggage, for better or worse. Curator: And that tension, between observation, execution, and commodification, is the real richness here.