 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
February |
|
|
|
Ying Li Ying Li�s paintings have been profiled (February 2002) and reviewed on these pages (May 2001). The latter was a three person exhibition at the Painting Center that also included Cecily Kahn and Kate Davis. Here Li returns to the Painting Center with a commanding solo show in the large space which more than justifies the gallery�s name. As with her work in the past the primary subject matter is paint itself and the secondary subject matter is landscape. The magic is how each relates to and otherwise defines the other. Take for example Vermont Deep Fall #2 where you can just make out the separation between land and sky with a hill slanting downwards to the left. The indicators are found in the differences between the whites and grays in upper third of the canvas and the earth tones in the lower portion. But notice how one small patch of blue is included in the upper right corner. This is nothing short of brilliant for the way it anchors the cooler grayish sky colors and allows them to more fully resonate throughout that portion of the painting. Now look at the land portions and how the large yellow ochre forms in the foreground might be a close-up of the edge of a hill or the tops of trees. Between the foreground and the sky, a sense of mid and distance space is created where the band of black and gray forms angling down to the left might be a road, a river or more trees. Finally there is a subtle tangle of paint in the lower left that just suggests undefined foliage. What�s actually depicted is not so important because the visual essence of the landscape elements has been captured which is more than enough complete the painting. With regard to approach, this piece presents a mosaic sensibility where the forms are chunked out of paint instead of tiles. That duality of subject matter referenced above is magnificently at work here where the forms are intuitively built out of the act of painting even as they fashion the landscape. Which comes first? It�s impossible to say and indeed, is of little consequence, but it does have an interesting effect in defining space. Much like Cézanne (whom we�ve compared this artist to in the past), Li is able to work space in two ways. A three dimensional depth of space just barely holds its own against a more �painterly space� which flattens out evenly across the entire picture plane. Your view vacillates between the two which is another key ingredient for creating the magic. That tricky netherworld of indefinable space leads directly into understanding the content of Li�s work. You are left to engage elements of uncertainty; of not knowing exactly what is what or precisely where anything is. In this way the artist sets loose a shifting sense of time and space that is only possible through painting. The beautiful part is that, even though the experience is consistent, how it is expressed varies from painting to painting. Compare for example, Is There a Rainbow When It Snows to Montecastello Sky Series # 4. The former contains an oblique suggestion of landscape whereas the latter indicates a much stronger reference. But notice how the paint handling and landscape subject matter still intertwine and dance with each other throughout both pieces albeit in differing proportions. The paintings in this show are small to small-midsize and it�s interesting to see how much Li is able to pack into each one. There is plenty of activity, color and texture but after awhile you can�t help but wonder how the dynamics might shift if they were twice or even three times their current size. As it is, the pieces work wonderfully as diminutive visual �jewels� while also engaging the viewer with a gutsy esthetic. If larger, would these paintings evolve from art objects to expansive �atmospheres� of paint? Probably; but in the end it�s not a necessity. Rather, part of their appeal is the desire (and in part the frustration) to see them larger. That tease provides a subtle counterpoint to their jewel-like qualities. Return to Archive Directory Originally from Spain where he was born in 1903, Esteban Vincente immersed himself as a young man in the artistic culture of Paris (where he met Picasso), London and Barcelona. In 1936 he moved to New York and in 1947 became a member of the New York School. He was a contemporary of de Kooning (whom he shared a studio with at one point), Pollock and Rothko among many others. His last exhibition at this gallery, Esteban Vincente, A Memorial Retrospective, in January 2002 was reviewed on these pages. Vincente died in 2001. The paintings in this show represent a concentrated group ranging from the late 50s to the early 60s and so make for a more cohesive statement when compared with the memorial retrospective show. It�s also interesting to note how much more so this work embodies an individual style unlike the paintings in the retrospective which clearly showed the influence of de Kooning and Rothko. The two driving forces for that style are his application of color and his uniquely stylized forms. The combined color is at once bright and intense but also muted and earthy. The proportionate use of these two aspects varies from one piece to another but neither is ever completely excluded. Compare the Untitled from 1959 with Number 3 from 1961. Notice how the former more evenly blends intensely colored forms with the earth tones. In Number 3 the brightly colored shapes are concentrated and isolated in the center of the canvas by the softly muted greens and grays. From a distance the color throughout this work appears to be flattened evenly into the forms. But take a look at the details and you see with what care Vincente constructs his color through his paint handling. The forms in this work interlock each other like pieces of a puzzle to create an interesting effect on the overall space as assisted by the color. They push and pull inward and outward against each other to set visual space into motion. This also brings into play an irresolute figure/ground reversal. At the same time the forms reach for, without quite achieving, a sense of volumetric space. What prevents the completion is the near flatness of the color each contains. Another interesting thing is the collage-like quality these paintings possess (two of which are collage); again due to the overlapping and interlocking of the shapes. As to subject matter the nearest thing this body of work conjures up is a very generic sense of landscape. But the reference so barely registers as to not matter. On the other hand, these paintings compare well to Rothko�s work just prior to launching his signature style, which did more directly suggest landscape. In these paintings Vincente employs similar forms and application of color but renders imagery that is more completely abstract then what Rothko was doing in the 40s. From all this one might summarize Vicente�s content as: Form is form, color is color, texture is texture and painting is some varying combination and expression of all three. It might also be added to this rather formal take that the end result is magnificently beautiful and an absolute treat for the eyes. You can�t ask for much more then that from painting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| |
||||||||||||
Copyright 2003, Abstract Art Online. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
