Moses ter Borch op het platteland buiten Zwolle c. 1667 - 1670

Curator: This watercolor painting, dating from about 1667 to 1670, presents Moses ter Borch in the countryside outside of Zwolle. I find it has this airy, almost dreamlike quality—how does it strike you? Editor: It reads like an advertisement, carefully constructed around labour, land and leisure. It shows him at ease near the family seat with the leisure to saunter around in fancy garments. The painting emphasizes wealth, literally representing this subject at rest with his dog who requires care, but can create nothing material on their own. Curator: Well, it certainly portrays an element of societal status, and those materials do communicate wealth, don't they? I get the sense that this image represents Moses not just as an individual, but also the persona he was trying to cultivate – refined and thoughtful. Editor: Yes, refined with the tools and toil of others. Even the materials, pigments mixed with painstaking effort, but I doubt he got his hands dirty. Curator: The painting itself is quite subtle – I love how the soft watercolors evoke the serene atmosphere. I imagine he had an affection for the pastoral scene, which might seem incongruous with what you mentioned. Editor: Not at all. It serves the same purpose, signaling a certain relationship with land and labor. This particular watercolor captures an interesting perspective; a kind of manufactured harmony. How was Zwolle known for it’s materials around that time, that may shine through the subject himself? Curator: Good point. Zwolle was emerging as a mercantile hub. I see a hint of quiet melancholy in his expression that, perhaps, betrays his thoughts on the whole production chain, or maybe a touch of existential boredom. It really comes down to the alchemy between the artist and the subject, I guess. Editor: Indeed, those materials—labor, landscape and capital. You put those under a glass and the magic disappears, doesn't it? Curator: Or perhaps a deeper kind of magic appears? Thank you for your analysis! Editor: And thank you, this was edifying.