Hitching Post c. 1937

Curator: Well, this certainly evokes a strong reaction. There's a tension between the detailed execution and what it represents. Editor: Precisely. Let's delve into what we are seeing here. This is a drawing entitled "Hitching Post" by Richard Correll, created around 1937, rendered with pencil and charcoal on paper. The image portrays a figure atop what appears to be a stone base, a loop extending from its outstretched hand. It’s… striking, isn’t it? Curator: It is. The sharp, almost photographic style clashes violently with the obviously caricatured depiction. It feels clinical, almost like a product rendering, yet the object itself carries loaded meaning from the Jim Crow era. We can see in the use of charcoal a kind of roughness that brings out the tension in the image itself. Editor: Indeed. Considering the socio-political climate of the 1930s, where such lawn ornaments were disturbingly commonplace, it's impossible to separate the artwork from the history of racial caricatures and oppression in the United States. How do we reconcile the intent, given that context? Curator: I think that’s the unsettling brilliance of the piece. The very act of documenting such an object through drawing raises questions about its normalization. Was Correll making a simple record, or was he consciously engaging with the object's loaded meaning? I wonder about the means of production of the source, and how easily accessible and abundant it was to the culture around the artist at the time. Editor: It highlights how these objects permeated the culture, becoming part of the visual landscape and, disturbingly, accepted as commonplace. I am curious to understand how pieces like this were commissioned or consumed in this period. Was it to highlight awareness and discourse, or was it, sadly, created and distributed through channels aligned with the views this artwork may be presenting, or challenging? Curator: Exactly, we are dealing with layers of appropriation, production and labor here. There are clearly issues with the way labor in the south was conducted in that time, even to make something as appalling as a figure for display. Editor: Yes, I concur that Correll's image is very troubling on several layers. By engaging with such controversial cultural icons through a portrait style, his art necessitates discussion, interpretation, and critical consideration from his viewers. Curator: Absolutely. It prompts us to examine the disturbing visual language of that period and consider the role art plays in perpetuating – or challenging – such imagery.