Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Lack of Proof is Frustrating


I could stare at some of Joan Mitchell’s abstract paintings for years and not understand its true meaning. If she never titled any of her paintings, I am certain that I would remain clueless as to what her true intent was when painting her “masterpieces.” Mitchell, who was born in Chicago, Illinois, and studied art and its history for most of her younger life, remains a mystery to me. Although she studied intensely at the Art Institute of Chicago, Columbia University, Hans Hofmann’s, and Smith’s College in order to ensure a solid education behind her passion for art, her paintings often appear meaningless and just plain confusing. It was a shock to find out on her website, www.joanmitchellfoundation.org, that she was actually influenced by Van Gogh. I never would’ve compared her paintings to his in a million years. She was known as a loyal, “American artist,” and wanted to portray the life of an American. Mitchell created vibrant paintings depicting the death of a sunflower, winter life living by a harbor, and she also had various untitled paintings that seem to have a life of their own. Although Mitchell studied at some of the best art universities in the nation, was influenced by other masters in art, and blends colors and designs that truly represent vibrancy, emotion, and life, I am still not convinced that some of her untitled and even titled paintings, are nothing more than blots and lines of paint on a canvas.

While I browsed a selection of Mitchell’s paintings, I came across a specific one, “The Marlin,” that was painted in 1960. Although it is one of her older paintings, it was one that intrigued me most because she uses a lot of bright blues and reds that almost seem as if they are in conflict with one another. If, in fact, Mitchell actually had an idea of what she was doing when painting “The Marlin,” it seems to me that this painting is not filled with happiness and content. The brush strokes alone seem to be filled with anger, resentment, and even danger of some sort. By just looking at the painting, I would never connect it with a “marlin.” However, once I read the title, the blue strokes became sort of an ocean. And the intense red strokes seem to be the marlin’s blood. Instantly I thought that maybe Mitchell was depicting a natural scene of life and death, because she was very into representing these processes in her other work. However, as I took a second glance, I noticed that the grey figures in the painting could possibly represent other fish along with the marlin. Thus, this could also represent the food-chain and the brutal process of death that comes with it. After a little research, I found out that the painting was supposed to represent a marlin trying to escape from a fisherman’s hook while it was already caught. Thus, the red strokes represent the marlin’s blood, while the blue strokes represent the water splashing as the marlin desperately tries to escape(http://americanart.si.edu/collections/).

What is so frustrating for me is the fact that if Mitchell removed the title, “The Marlin,” from her painting, I would never have guessed what the painting meant. What if I changed the title to, “Battlezone,” and claimed that the grey figures were that of soldiers, and the blood were that of their own as the run away from gun shots and bombings, which could be represented by the blue strokes? How could one deny that interpretation? What if I went further and labeled the painting, “Fireworks,” with all of the colors representing a beautiful Fourth of July display. How could one disprove this interpretation? They cannot if they had never seen Mitchell’s painting and title beforehand. This is what frustrates me most. Although the whole point of abstract art is to allow the viewer to interpret in as many ways as there are possible, it takes credit away from the artist. There is no way to prove that Mitchell really wanted to paint the scene of marlin catching, and not a battle scene, or even just random strokes on a piece of paper. It is her word against ours. In fact, Mitchell has defended her work in the past: “the freedom in my work is quite controlled. I don't close my eyes and hope for the best” (http://americanart.si.edu/collections).

-Kara Livingston

No comments:

Post a Comment