Fatema, post 5

Fatema Kermalli

American Abstract Expressionist art was able to produce a wide range of responses due to the fact that it was, indeed, abstract. As such, the interpretations of different people for the same piece of artwork could differ, depending on what type of previous knowledge and experience and prejudices each one brought to the viewing itself.

Also playing a role was the time period. In essence, the debate which raged regarding the art during the time of the Cold War is the same debate that raged in that time and rages still today regarding other forms of media. It is a debate about the concept of patriotism itself, and whether one can be questioning and “American” at the same time. Such debates often spring up around wars, when the nation is seen as being pitted against another force and the need for strength through unity becomes even more apparent.

On one side are those who say that questioning itself is democratic; it pushes the county forward towards positive change. Such was the interpretation by some of modern art; it was different, and thus an excellent example of American freedom… the freedom to challenge norms and express oneself. The style of Abstract Expressionism itself was “…the perfect contrast to ‘the regimented, traditional, and narrow; nature of ‘socialist realism’” (Cockcroft 151), and that fact of its allowed existence in the states would be the “perfect contrast” to censorship in the Soviet Union.

On the other hand were those who looked at modern art and saw disloyalty to American traditions and values… “visual evidence of disloyalty” (Mathews 168). It was unrecognizable. To them, the fact that it was different did not make it valuable; rather, it was almost seen as evidence of “foreign” intervention into American society. It was unpatriotic. And during the time of the Cold War, all of this equated to being Communistic. Also it is possible that the style of art itself was disconcerting to some people. “Complex, cosmopolitan, and ever-changing, it was intrinsically at odds with the need for certitude and control” (171), both of which many people may have already felt a lack of due to the Cold War itself. Their insecurity and lack of real stability perhaps translated into a need for the stability in that which they could control. The appearance of steadiness, even in art, may have been remotely appeasing.

Note: All images were found by searching for “American Abstract Expressionist” in the ARTstor Image Gallery (other websites are given here due to terms considerations).

http://www.artsconnected.org/toolkit/images/grace_hartigan.jpg

Billboard, by Grace Hartigan; 1957.

This image, created with a wide variety of shapes and colors, lacks the presence of many definable forms. The arrangement and feeling is rather chaotic; parts of the image seem to overlap each other instead of being placed into a specific form. The colors themselves are also quite “loud”; they grab the audience’s attention. The art is, in this sense, quite an active force as compared to many realistic paintings were championed in comparison at the time. Once again, stability here comes into play. With the lack of a quality of “definiteness” in the world around them (due to the perceived dangers of the Cold War itself and the constant perceived threat of Communism in America), predictable art-with dull colors and constant form-would have been valued. On the other hand, pieces such as this one which defy the norm, though threatening to some, would have been a sign of hope for others… a reason to believe in the permanence of democratic freedoms in America. Both groups, though totally different in outcome, were in this sense evaluating the same piece of art in relation to the same background: the threat of Communism and the Cold War.

http://www.beatmuseum.org/pollock/images/cathedrl.jpg

Cathedral, by Jackson Pollock; 1947

This painting, primarily black, white, and grey/blue, also conveys a sense of great commotion. It is easy to get lost within the work of art, so numerous are the layers of color and so intricate the overlap between paint strokes. There is a complete lack of definable form. Because of this, besides evaluating the response of the audience based on the time period, it seems natural to apply the idea of a “hierarchy of taste” to Pollock’s work as well. The piece has the ability to frustrate, as Mathews puts it, “…viewers whose very bafflement reminded them that esthetically they had not yet arrived after all…” (171). Their inability to understand the work of Jackson Pollock due to its lack of traditional form and style may have been extremely disconcerting. The confusion/wonder created in the viewers could technically go either way; towards intrigue and approval for the freedom expressed therein, or towards anger and resentment, and the connection between the work itself and an outer threat (because people fear the unknown).

http://www.jackson-pollock.com/autumnrhythm-1950.jpg

Autumn Rhythm, by Jackson Pollock; 1950

This painting is quite similar in form, color, and tone to the image Cathedral discussed above. These types of images are explained to be the visual expression of “…private visions, insights, and most especially the subconscious… metaphors and symbols that would somehow possess universal meaning” (Mathews 170). Thus, really experiencing the pieces would entail finding a connection between one’s inner being and the artwork, or finding the self within the artwork. This is an act of questioning, which brings us back to the political debate discussed above regarding patriotism. How far do one’s freedoms go when the country is perceived to be in danger? Which aspect of the country is most important? The varied responses issue from varied priorities and ways of understanding the surrounding world. The deep thought encouraged by such artwork as this was welcomed by some. At the same time, the “confusion” with which it was presented caused some mistrust.

http://www.tate.org.uk/tateetc/issue8/images/makinghorse_becca.jpg

Becca, by David Smith; 1965

As opposed to the confusing nature of the other artworks we have looked at so far, this piece is really much less chaotic and more simply hard to understand for the general population. It is very geometric… simple, yet still with overlapping features. Unlike the other artworks, there is form, but it is not easily recognizable or comparable. It is not symmetric. The pieces do not snugly fit together. Instead, they are intentionally staggered and “imperfectly” arranged. To those who termed such work communistic, these tendencies are evidence of the intention to “destabilize” the American people. It is an inner threat that must not be allowed to pervade the stable society of the United States (as it had been used against government in the past: “Dondero argued that modernism had been used against the Czarist government…” (Mathews 162).)

http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/images/ma/images/ma1995.234.r(2).jpg

The Flesh Eaters, William Baziotes; 1952

Just like the last piece discussed (by Smith), this work of art is not really chaotic; the tone is rather peaceful due to the lack of harsh lines and colors (the colors are more dull than some of the other pieces, and they tend to blend into one another). Yet the lack of really easily definable forms once more offers a place for Communist concerns to nest. While some simply may have seen this as allowing for the democratic individual interpretation and understanding of art, others (such as Dondero), saw a threat in the change that was occurring in art during a time when stability was greatly desired and valued. The new was also connected to that which was foreign, and as it was a time of war, “American” things (such as traditional realist works of art), held a higher place in society, and the foreign was looked down upon… by some.