As a young person, one of the most difficult things for me to accept in art was very deep abstraction. I didn’t get the point of abstraction as an end in itself, whether or not I wished to deny its validity within figurative visual art. Basically, I thought, it never did it for me; I never understood what it was for. I was looking at it the wrong way round.
If we define abstract art as the rejection of figurative or representational art then it’s probably going to be quite dull. A better way to look at it perhaps is to say it’s not attempting the figurative, but rather uses shape, line & colour to realise an outcome, solve a problem or make a point. When we view something we quickly recognise, it can be comforting & because we understand it, we remain in that zone. But we need to be challenged. Always. Except for validation, what’s the use of something that tells us what we already know? Narrative art is one thing but isn’t it just as stimulating to look beneath the surface in all forms of creativity: literature, music, dance, drama? Explore the symbolism? Learn something about the world? About ourselves…? To be made to think?
Abstraction progressed all movements, that could actually enhance more figurative works, indeed I’m now able to see it as a vital point in the evolution of art history. Everyone has to find their way & some of the greatest artists have done so via abstraction. Don’t get me wrong - as usual, there are still works I dislike intensely, but that’s not helpful. What are the abstract works we like? What are the ones that give us a greater understanding of what abstraction is about? Or what the world is about? I’ve cobbled together my own small list…
Hilma af Klint (1862-1944), Sweden
The Ten Biggest, No 2 (1907)
Not only was the first abstract artist a lesser-known painter, but she was a woman. There was a time when the argument about who had painted the first abstract picture raged but Klint predated all the frontrunners & big hitters of the time. One can assume it would have been a highly lucrative first place. Unusually for the time, Sweden allowed women to study art & Klint graduated from the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Stockholm, subsequently working for the veterinary institute. She came to abstraction via theosophy. Following The Ten Biggest series, she began working with more geometric forms, but never exhibited any of her abstract pieces in her own lifetime.
Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944), Russia
Cossacks (1910-11)
Kandinsky was one of the artists keen to go down in history as the first abstract painter, claiming to have painted a lost piece that dated back to 1911. Of course he knew nothing of Klint at this point, but even so, she had done it before him. Similarly though, he too felt painting in this way brought him closer to a spiritual truth. He was interested in the way art could represent feeling through the composition of colour & line. Although the Cossacks of the title can be seen by their hats as little orange squares, the only other realistic forms might be of roads or buildings. The marching Cossacks in fact cause us to try to make sense of these other brushstrokes.
Abdülkadir Şükri Efendi (1806), ?
Hilye-I Şerif (18th Century)
Then again, was Klint the first abstract artist really? After all, different cultures had been mark-making to describe reality in visual forms for centuries. I suppose here it boils down to purpose & intent. In Islamic culture of course, realistic depictions of the prophet Mohammed, other humans & animals are for instance forbidden. Here calligraphy is used to express Mohammed’s physical form.
James McNeill Whistler (1834-1903), USA
Nocturne in Black & Gold: The Falling Rocket (1874)
Okay, it’s not 100% abstraction, which is probably why I’m so keen, but here Whistler is challenging what art & paint can do. Only the title gives us the real clue. & Whistler being Whistler, he sued art critic John Ruskin for libel when he accused the artist of effectively throwing paint at his audience. Good for Whistler I say. Although he won the case against Ruskin, it bankrupted him. Nevertheless his cross-examination is worth a read on his wiki – it ends with Whistler justifying the cost of the painting as being “for the knowledge I have gained in the work of a lifetime,” an argument artists of all kinds sadly still have to make to this day.
Albert Gleizes (1881-1953), France
Les Arbres (1910-12)
I often find myself drawn towards abstract art with a more muted palette, in the style of Cubists like Braque or Léger. Les Arbres leans towards the Cubist style but for me, it’s the title that places it in the Abstract category.
Theo van Doesburg (1883-1931), Netherlands
Composition in Gray (Rag Time) (1919)
From the Neoplasticism (or De Stijl) school of art theory, van Doesburg has created a work that does not appear to represent the title whatsoever but maybe because we are of this century, we tend to accept it. We suppose, yes we could see the possibility of the music or a dance being represented by the order & organisation of the shapes. He too concluded that abstraction was the next logical step in the development of higher thinking & perhaps spirituality within painting.
Each superfluous line, each wrongly placed line, any colour placed without veneration or care, can spoil everything—that is, the spiritual.
Barbara Kasten (1936-), USA
Scene III (2012)
Of course, after a certain point many artists working with photography have brought new possibilities & a range of different challenges to the genre. Scene III recalls Cubism as well as including the effects & ethereal qualities theatre strives for in the composition as well as the title. It shows understanding of & maximises the use of light, shade & reflection.
Ruariadh O’Connell (1983-), Scotland
The Pursuit (2019)
From Aberdeen! O’Connell reminds us of the work of Op Artist Bridget Riley in this piece in resin & jesmonite.
Tariku Shiferaw (1983), Ethiopia/USA
Cranes in the Sky (Solange) (2020)
I was very taken with this piece when I found it but this artist interview is worth more of a read than anything I’d put down in a few words:
Barbara Hepworth (1903-1975), England
Two Figures (Menhirs) (1964)
There is of course a difference between stylisation & abstraction. Whereas Henry Moore & Barbara Hepworth did create works that resembled nothing recognisable, they also abstracted human figures by deconstructing them & boiling them down to very basic shapes. Here however, we only know these are people from the title & when we know the context, we accept it. This is what I missed as a young person - the transformative magic of abstract art.
No comments:
Post a Comment