I know I promised a review of ACME's abstraction show with images and all, and I will not disappoint. So much to do! Non Identical Abstraction, featuring Alexis Harding, Robert Linsley, Michael Murphy and Sasha Peirce, is up until Feb. 6, so there is still time. I think that it is one of the better shows they have had in a while.
The objective of looking at abstraction from various angles along side the work of Robert Linsley was well done by Jan Tumlir.
While personally attracted to Linsley's paintings for their map like qualities, they left something to be desired in a minimalist approach to abstract painting. These islands of singular color floating on a pristine background were poetic with zen like elements. I imagine the artist dreaming up each solitary shape, or seeing them (like islands on a map, which I have been recently obsessed with separating) and fixating on their every turn. Hanging the smaller works above was an interesting perspective to their set apart nature.
The paintings of Alexis Harding were undeniably seductive. I dont know if it was the garish use of the pinkest pink or the visceral gravity of paint, which she used to its own devices. One would have to have experimented quick a lot with mediums and drying times to get this look down. It was, illusionistically, like a silk curtain falling down.
Beautiful detail and retro color palette:
Here is a closer look:
Finally, the tapestry like works of Sasha Pierce were insane.
Talk about making paint be something that it is not. These works had that "how in the heck did she do that?" and "I think I would go insane doing that" factor, which always makes for interesting conversation. The works didnt seems like much from a far. I wasnt even sure what I was looking at when I checked it out ahead of time on the website. But they are crazy detailed. She must have used a syringe to apply the paint in multicolored strands like the finest silk thread. Does the use of oil paint make these abstraction? Or is it really still just pattern. The textile element could not be denied, and the pattern not variant enough to seem like decidedly composed. Still, I was mesmerized. I stood in front of them for a few minutes debating with a random stranger whether or not it was indeed paint. The smudges and drips of paint off the edge is really the only indicator. I might have smelled and touched them to verify, but that is poor form, unless you are in a studio with permission from the artist. I eventually won the debate with random lady because she left her glasses at home.
Finally, the tapestry like works of Sasha Pierce were insane.
Talk about making paint be something that it is not. These works had that "how in the heck did she do that?" and "I think I would go insane doing that" factor, which always makes for interesting conversation. The works didnt seems like much from a far. I wasnt even sure what I was looking at when I checked it out ahead of time on the website. But they are crazy detailed. She must have used a syringe to apply the paint in multicolored strands like the finest silk thread. Does the use of oil paint make these abstraction? Or is it really still just pattern. The textile element could not be denied, and the pattern not variant enough to seem like decidedly composed. Still, I was mesmerized. I stood in front of them for a few minutes debating with a random stranger whether or not it was indeed paint. The smudges and drips of paint off the edge is really the only indicator. I might have smelled and touched them to verify, but that is poor form, unless you are in a studio with permission from the artist. I eventually won the debate with random lady because she left her glasses at home.The evidence:
Beautiful detail and retro color palette:
No comments:
Post a Comment