 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
March |
|
|
|
Claire Seidl March 28th Claire Seidl�s art has been featured on these pages a number of times in the past. Our last review of her exhibition at the Kristin Fredrickson gallery included her photography and painting. In September we published a conversation with her in which she contrasted and compared painting with photography and discussed her approach to each medium. Her current exhibition at Rosenberg + Kaufman Fine Art also features painting and photography which makes perfect sense given this gallery�s dedication to both art forms. However, even more so then her last exhibition, this show presents a seamless integration between two mediums. One of the first obvious similarities is the forms which is strong enough to nearly render the choice of medium beside the point. Compare Clothesline (Quilts) with Window Pane and notice how the Seidl makes use of the grid in each. In the photograph this is accomplished with recognizable imagery broken out into high contrasts of light and shadow. But in her hands, how recognizable is that imagery? If you look carefully you do see the elements that comprise the title but the comprehensive effect is an abstract grid defined in a warm blacks and whites. This is plenty enough to create drama and interest for the piece so that a narrative provided by recognizable objects is unnecessary. With Window Pane the title implies a narrative but a grid sensibility is the primary focus. In both pieces focus is blurred; in the photograph by virtue of the light and shadows and in the painting by the manipulation of the paint handling. The binding factor for the two pieces, indeed, between the two mediums in her work, is that Seidl approaches the same content through differing approaches. In other words, medium itself is beside the point. However a commonality in her overall approach to art-making is the meticulous attention she gives to the materials. This is true whether layering paint and color on canvas or working with print paper in the darkroom. Now, what about the differences? Start with color, which the paintings possess but the photographs do not. Color establishes the first and cleanest delineation between the two types of work. While it might be interesting to see how the photographs translate to color it is not only unnecessary but might constitute an unfair competitive advantage. Recognizable imagery after all is such a compelling force and color would only push it that much harder. Yet, the variable warm contrasts of blacks, whites and middle ranges are so rich as to compensate the lack of hues. Texture is the next dividing line which the paintings possess out right; something that has always been handled extremely well in Seidl�s painting. Through the texture you become aware of the history of each piece and the struggle involved in their creation. Texture is present in the photographs too but is virtual, or might be described as �found� in the varied qualities of light and shadow. Another interesting aspect to this work is how the concepts of realism and abstraction are often reversed. A good example of this is a comparison of the photograph Sparklers to the painting Array. The sparklers in the photograph create textures composed of captured light slicing diagonally across the picture plane. In Array the texture is created in layers of modulated color that is at once subtle (within itself) and overt within the context of the other forms. Now here is the odd twist: the texture in the photograph is implicit but in the painting is tangible. On the other hand the forms in the photograph are recognizable as the motion of sparklers through a period of time, but in the painting are indefinable. The constant is that the guiding esthetic remains constant. The point is that the so called definitions and/or limitations of each medium are transcended in the interest of expressing Seidl�s sensibility which cuts right to the content of the art. This exhibition is very well presented in allowing a comfortable, indeed engaging, interplay between photography and painting. Also both mediums present a wide variety of approach while always preserving a solid sense of style. This comes as no surprise given that Claire Seidl has always been an artist to follow wherever her art will take her. The last word is that this is one of the best abstract art shows of the season (if not the best) and a must see for anyone with an interest in painting, photography and abstract art. April 2, 2004 This exhibition offers a curious conceptual mix of sensuality and reduction. The sensual is obvious in the lush flat color that envelopes the backgrounds as well as in the gesture that defines the forms. A closer look reveals that the color is not so completely flat. Gonzalez obviously spends some time building up his surfaces so that the background hues seem to pulse with quiet motion. It�s not as apparent in the reproductions because the effect is subtly restrained. The forms provide dynamic engagement as bits of knocked off gesture. The reductive qualities are just as obvious and for the same reasons mentioned above. Although the background color seems to be in motion it is nevertheless monochromatic. The forms are small isolated, indeed lonely, scraps of gesture that depend on contrast to distinguish themselves. In this way each painting stands alone as a quiet little world unto itself that invites a meditative experience. However, the show makes a comprehensive statement in how all of the work relates to each other. Start with the proportions, which Gonzalez varies a great deal from the very small as in Untitled # 09 to the long vertical pieces to the horizontal diptyches that are made up of two squares. Next is the color which offers an array of bright and lush hues. The forms vary from piece to piece but primarily consist of ribbon-like paint strokes. In this is found an oblique suggestion of the paintings of James Nare; both as subject matter and for execution. The subject matter for this work is an interesting mix. Given the forms, color and how they are painted, these pieces embrace a quality of naiveté that provides accessibility. But it is the sweetness of the color that especially engenders the invitation of intimacy. At the same time they possess a surrealist esthetic. Look at Untitled # 06 and notice how the central form floats out in front of the blue background. But it�s more then just gesture on flat surface because the ribbon of yellow also includes a three dimensional aspect that further enhances the separation. Put it all together and Gonzalez creates a curious contradiction in his work. On one hand the color and the innocence of the forms beckons you in. But on the other, the cool isolation keeps you at arms length. Ultimately the content of Gonzalez�s art is inseparable from painting itself and is tied to a competition between figure and ground. The ground is given the advantage of proportion and color; while the forms, though diminutive, are dynamic and focused. Although each competes for your attention, figure and ground also compliment each other. This provides a key to understanding their meaning as a complex and subtle relationship between rivalry and contrast. Then there is the quality of mystery they establish by creating their candy sweet little worlds of seclusion. What might they be referencing beyond themselves innocence lost but remembered? From this angle the contrast is one of joy and sadness. In the end these paintings provide a lot of territory from which to draw allusions. The final word is how well this show was presented (as can be gathered from the installation views). These are paintings that require a healthy measure of breathing space. Given the sensitivity with which the surfaces and are constructed and the forms placed, crowding them up too close would have been counter productive. The show was sparse enough to allow a full reading of each individual piece while also allowing the exhibition to make a comprehensive statement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| |
||||||||||||
Copyright 2003, Abstract Art Online. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
