Kim post 5

Kim Hambright

After World War II, an art form emerged under the name of abstract expressionism. Its goal was not mimesis in any strict or loose sense of the word, but instead merely symbolic, if that. The subjects of the paintings ranged from emotions and physical objects to scenes and ideas and the artists who created them were not asked to do so by any governmental figure. Abstract and expressionist art was created to break away from the previously idealized realistic artwork and focus on the emotional instead of the actual. Abstract expressionism divided America in two. Supports of this art form saw it as revolutionary and honest: it was the strongest example of artistic freedom yet. Those opposed to the art form however, saw it as meaningless or grotesque. It did not provide a realistic representation of anything and was not meant to further the state of the country in any way, politically, socially, or esthetically. Fortunately the movement was never shut out completely, regardless of its mixed reviews, and to this day, abstract and expressionistic art are prevalent.

In Mark Rothko’s piece, Untitled (Seagram Mural), two dark red squares exist within a lighter red, rectangular background. Nothing else appears in the painting, enabling the viewer to focus on the detail Rothko put into the texture of each stroke and the outlines of each rectangular form. Clearly departing from realist or representational artwork, the painting does not inherently identify any specific object or idea. Instead, the only mood established is one of strong passion and anger, defined by the monochromatic red color scheme. The rough edges of the rectangles and the thick brush strokes Rothko uses are demonstrative of his artistic outbreak and creativity. Until Expressionism, Abstraction, Cubism, Impressionism and similar artworks emerged, artists idealized direct mimesis: perfect representation. Artwork was best when the brushstrokes were undetectable and the picture was represented as closely as possible to the way it is viewed by the human eye. Striving for artistic freedom, Rothko utilizes ideas and concepts foreign to that of dictatorial artwork, such as his lack of “subject” and unrealistic representation of the world. Some however, could argue that due to his bold choice of an all red painting and the roughness of his brushstrokes, that his painting aims to rouse up the masses and break out of the traditional “box” (or in this case rectangle) of societal norms.

In contrast to Rothko’s bold color choice, Helen Frankenthaler chose a more lyrical and whimsical approach to her piece, The Morning’s Weather. The delicate painting style of the dark grey cloud looming over the top half of the painting contrasts greatly with Rothko’s rigidly geometric design. The careful blending of colors and three-dimensional look of the clouds give the shape a delicate and delicate and beautiful aura, despite its ominous reality. The chaotic black shapes, appearing on what appears to be the ground, arguably represent people in their anxious bustling to escape the storm. There is nothing to suggest that Frankenthaler’s piece is representative of anything political, much less the state of the country, but instead merely features what the artist noticed on one particularly gloomy morning, as suggested by the title. With the wrong person interpreting the painting however, the picture can change from a simple depiction of the environment to political propaganda. One could interpret the cloud as the reigning government, and the black markings the peril of the people. In this way, the painting style could be seen as dangerous to the stability and longevity of the government, possibly sparking an uprising in the people. On the other hand, one might simply interpret the painting as a picture of the sky, portrayed in a new way, with fluid brushstrokes and an abstract, almost watery depiction of the surrounding environment.

One extremely prevalent American abstract expressionist at the time was Jackson Pollock. In one of his paintings, The Tea Cup, viewers often identify many informal and familiar shapes, except for a tea cup. The combination of bold colors and lines was an invention of abstract art and had yet to be seen in the artwork of propagandistic or government sanctioned artwork. Completely opposite from the structured government of Communism, or a totalitarian society, Pollock’s artwork spoke to the free spirit of the individual. The high energy of his piece and the brash combination of colors made his work unique, thoroughly expressing his creative freedom. The freedom of the piece however, could be seen in a negative light. Easily interpreted as “out of control,” The Tea Cup was created with little to no visible structure. It could very well instill its viewers with the ideas of political reform, and complete social freedom, possibly even glorifying anarchy as opposed to a structured government. The intentions of the artist at this point seem irrelevant. Without hearing the title of the painting, one could think of a million different ideas and beliefs, both positive and negative, to relate back to Pollock’s work.

The next example of abstract expressionism that I found was Jack Tworkov’s Figure. Similar to Rothko’s painting, Figure was created with a monochromatic color scheme; except instead of red, Tworkov painted in black and grey tones. One major aspect of abstract expressionism is the rejection or blatant disregard for the traditional realistic view, and thus depiction, of an object. In Tworkov’s case, the figure painted is almost indistinguishable. Like Pollock’s work and the work of many abstract expressionists, the subject of the painting would most likely not be identifiable without knowing the title of the artwork. Similarly, the patrons of traditional naturalistic art would not accept or discern, much less understand the figure represented in Tworkov’s piece. It is difficult for me to agree with any way in which this image could be seen as decadent or dangerous to society, though I suppose it is possible for one to view the image and see it in a demonic way (simply based on its dark colors and hostile lines.) In this way, the image could possibly be seen as a threat to the “blissfully ignorant” followers of a dictatorial society. In my opinion however, it is much more likely that a viewer would look at Tworkov’s image and appreciate his alternative view and representation of the human form.

My last example is Robert Motherwell’s Razor’s Edge. Though an etching, as opposed to a painting, this image still greatly reflects the ideals and qualifications of abstract expressionistic art. It does not “glorify” the “beautiful country” of America, as explained by Matthews, nor does it further the state in any way as dictatorial artwork was expected to. Instead, the image is completely abstract. The subject is not easily determined, with or without hearing the title of the piece. Looking at etching aesthetically, the bold contrast of colors between the red-orange background and the solid black image create an almost eerie representation of a razor. The circular image and the rectangular block attached to it seem to almost imitate the framework of a noose. The graphic imagery, both personal and subjective, could be seen as a danger to the state. The people might interpret the image to express a negative connotation of society, such as the oppression of minority groups, and again, there would be potential for an uprising. On the other hand, the vague depiction of the razor could be seen as an ingenious new artistic device, completely freeing the individual from forced or preconceived notions of everyday objects.

Art in itself is controversial. A theatre teacher of mine had a favorite saying pertaining to his choices in questionable plays, “if it’s not controversial, it’s not art.” In this way, it is obvious to us that artwork does not mean the same thing to everyone who views it. Partly determined by previous ideas and notions, one’s understanding and interpretation of a painting could drastically differ from someone else’s. In the specific context of American abstract expressionism, viewpoints on the genre range from an idea of complete political and social liberation to a waste of time. While some see abstract expressionistic art as innovative and beautiful, others see it as dangerous to the stability of the status quo, or altogether meaningless.