De schijtende kunstenaar 1645

Curator: Here we have a pen and ink sketch called “The Shitting Artist” created around 1645 by Aert van Waes, currently held at the Rijksmuseum. It's an etching with engraving that presents a rather…unflattering scene. Editor: Oh, yes. My first reaction is visceral – a strong feeling of transgression. The intimacy and irreverence juxtaposed are very…arresting. It seems to me the work questions the very dignity traditionally ascribed to art and artists. Curator: The symbolic elements certainly reinforce that idea. Consider the painter's easel directly behind him – repurposed, almost mocking the elevated status of the artist's craft. And, literally, undermining any pretension! Editor: And that material reality of what’s going on – the physical act, the waste itself! This feels like a commentary on the body and its functions within the supposedly refined world of artistic production. I also wonder about the socio-economic aspect of the artist relieving himself publicly when one would have paid for using a private room. Is this work actually a socio-economic statement, a form of political protest? Curator: Possibly. One could argue it reflects the anxieties around artistic authenticity and originality. Is it "real" or a farce, the work asks through its title. There is a certain self-awareness there, as the text included, directly on the work of art itself, states, "Because he was able to bring such mastery, five hundred (guilders?) because with a brush I create (shit)?" And so, by subverting classical ideals with a bawdy and comical realism, this etching questions established norms. Editor: The choice of ink as a medium for such a subject feels deliberately provocative too, doesn't it? The artist essentially turns the tool of creation into the means of, well, "deposition," so to speak. Curator: Precisely. It certainly complicates the notion of artistic labor and skill. I can see how this piece both amuses and disturbs in equal measure. The intent perhaps, may be to have the art world recognize the absurdity of elevating "artists" to some superior moral position or to even think that money equates to art or artistry! Editor: I leave thinking about what is seen as refined labor and what is simply bodily labor. Quite an impressive statement captured in this satirical, even cynical commentary, on the creative process and status.