Envy 1900

Editor: So, this is "Envy," a pen and ink drawing by Louis Rhead, made around 1900. It’s incredibly detailed and narrative, almost like an illustration from a history book. There’s a real sense of social division depicted here. What jumps out to you? Curator: The stark contrast in material realities is fascinating. Rhead emphasizes the labor required to uphold this social structure. Note the sedan chair itself - the raw materials, the construction, and the human labor of those carrying it. What about the men seated outside the "Green Dragon"? How does their reality differ? Editor: They seem almost oblivious to the luxury passing by, engrossed in their drinks. Do you think the medium contributes to your reading? Curator: Absolutely. The deliberate choice of pen and ink—traditionally associated with illustration and printmaking—democratizes the image, making it accessible to a wider audience through reproduction. Rhead isn't crafting a precious painting for an elite collector, but disseminating a social commentary. Editor: That’s a really interesting point. The material of production allows wider access, democratizing the message. Curator: Exactly. Consider, too, how the mass production of goods was shaping class dynamics at the turn of the century, mirroring anxieties about wealth and status seen in Rhead’s composition. Can the lower classes ever attain such extravagance or can they merely long for it? Editor: I didn't initially connect the materials and process to the social message so clearly. Now I'm seeing the drawing as actively participating in the anxieties of the time, rather than simply depicting them. Thanks for drawing my attention to this relationship. Curator: Precisely! Thinking about materials and modes of production helps us unravel how art embodies—and shapes—our understanding of society. It provides a means of interrogating how the very stuff of art conveys meaning.