Cap c. 1936

Editor: Here we have Jessie M. Benge's "Cap," created around 1936, a drawing done with watercolor on paper. The delicacy of the lace trim is what first caught my eye. What's your interpretation of this piece? Curator: What strikes me is how this drawing offers a lens onto the usually obscured processes of fashion. This isn't just about the end product of a fancy hat, but about design and, more importantly, the labor inherent in such elaborate embellishment. Editor: Elaborate, yes. Do you see it as celebrating or critiquing that labor? Curator: I think it holds both. The careful rendering of each stitch suggests an appreciation for the skill involved, yet the context of the 1930s makes me consider the economics of adornment. Was this handmade? How did the materials influence the aesthetic? The choice of watercolor suggests a desire for precision, reflecting the designer's careful intentions. Editor: So, you're suggesting that the materials and process themselves are crucial to understanding the artwork's message? Curator: Precisely. Even the 'humble' choice of watercolor on paper moves this away from the pretension that one might expect from a fashion plate. It opens a conversation about access, production and who exactly had the resources to make such things and where. What do you make of the limited color palette? Editor: Interesting question. It looks deliberate and evokes an ethereal quality in what otherwise would appear stuffy. It now occurs to me that, what seemed 'stuffy' before is possibly commentary on what could easily become another commodity of desire. Curator: Yes, the restrained color usage also prevents this image from becoming entirely consumed by fashion's excess. Focusing instead on the labor and material. I now see that it subtly comments on the objectification that takes place through fashion. Thank you for helping me explore that tension more fully. Editor: Thanks for opening my eyes to seeing the 'labor' in the making. That perspective never occurred to me before.