Skip to main content

Christopher Wool, 'Minor Mishap', 2001

 


Christopher Wool's Minor Mishap is a huge, abstract work (274.3 x 182.9cm) made up of only two colours, yet it joins a long lineage of Abstract Expressionist producers, which harks all the way back to 1950s New York. Wool's recent, impressive performance on the art market further proves that this movement has not really waned in popularity with collectors, and continues to be a source of artistic inspiration globally. 

The messiness, harshness and perhaps even violence of Wool's work may reference de Kooning, whilst the simplicity yet vibrancy of colours recalls Rothko's abstract canvases - admittedly, however, Rothko's linearity is most definitely abandoned by Wool. The artist's ink application, meanwhile, can be connected to the art of splash painting, perfected by Pollock and to a lesser extent, Krasner. However, this twenty-first century work is not a complete copy of that style, for Wool is working with silkscreen on linen, where the ink seeps into the fabric. It is therefore a slower, more controlled process than splash painting, witnessed in the bleeding oranges of Wool's work, particularly towards the lower end, as gravity takes control and the orange collects in thick, heavy, downward-moving globules, threatening to push beyond the support completely. Wool does not imitate Pollock and other Abstract Expressionists, but he updates painterly forms and suggests an alternative to splash painting in the modern age. 

Created in 2001, this was a period in Wool's career where he did choose to name works, before he started to settle for the Untitled approach more recently. The alliteration of Minor Mishap makes the title instantly memorable and perhaps even the repeated 'M' sound reflects the merging together of colour, almost mimicking the spilling of ink which Wool illustrates. There is a certain comedy to his title as well: it is only a 'minor' issue that the ink has spilled over the pristine white support. Most importantly, however, the choice of title references the ambiguities of abstract painting generally, and the key paragone at the heart of automatic works, fluctuating between accident and intention. 

Certainly, the artist's abilities (or the movement of the ink itself) threaten to break out of the confines of the linen support, despite the work's all-encompassing size. Its dimensions give a freshness to the ink and added vibrancy, as if the orange might drip down onto an unsuspecting viewer. However, the question remains as to what Wool is exactly trying to convey. There is a certain sense of violence to the work as mentioned, despite the smoothness of his processes. The orange percolates into the support, disrupting its pristine background. Yet, there is also excitement, particularly evident in the smaller splashes, out of control pinpricks of colour. Perhaps this reflects the uncontrollable nature of Wool's practice, the untameable nature of automatic painting. Or perhaps, Glen O'Brien was more accurate in 2012 when he compared Minor Mishap to an acheiropoietic image, one created miraculously not by human hand: 'If you can see Mother Theresa's face in a raisin, then you could see an agonised Christ in this dark orange drip of silkscreen ink. You could see a lot of things'. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mark Rothko, 'Light Red over Black', 1957

  My eye is not drawn to the painting itself but the title of the painting, 'Light Red Over Black'. We would automatically think that the black is on top of a red background, but Rothko has flipped this around, subverting the title just like he subverting the meaning of what it was to be an artist and what Art actually was. During this time, art was going through rapid changes, with abstract expressionism coming into full force (Rothko, Pollock). But Rothko showed that all this change was for the good, even if for him, it was short lived.  The colour red in this painting is searing and the black struggles to fully cover this velvety border, especially at the bottom of the canvas. Unlike the black squares which have a hazy quality to their edges, the red is clear and impregnable. It is hard to figure out what this represents - the Tate has suggested a window perhaps, but if it is a window then what are we looking out into? Perhaps it is night, or perhaps the viewer is catching ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Egon Schiele, 'Dead Mother', 1910

  My eye is drawn to the hand. Those long, bony fingers are so characteristic of Schiele but here they are particularly skeletal and deathly – the veins seem to have been injected with poison. And they are a warning right in the foreground of the painting that keeps the viewer at bay as an outsider to this incredibly intimate relationship between mother and child, and sets the tone of death and mortality which hangs over the whole image. The mother cradles her child in a womb-like shroud, alluding to childbirth and the death of the mother explained in the title. She seems desperate to feel that bodily connection with her child, highlighted by the emphasis on her craned neck as she tries to connect to the baby. There is a clear link between the mother’s bent neck and the child’s bent neck, again emphasising their longing to be with each other. However, the darkness around the child is almost like ropes, with flecks of white in the painting making it look as though the darkness is wo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Hans Holbein, 'Portrait of A Lady with Squirrel', 1526-8

  An unidentified figure looks away from the viewer, but this is not a portrait of disengagement. The surrounding symbols intrigue us, potentially indicating mood, atmosphere, status and significance. As a work with no inscription, no verbal device, the painting remains as tight-lipped as the woman depicted. Instead, art historians have turned to the study of signs to decipher meaning.  The inclusion of animals in portraiture was far from unusual at this point in history - this painting has often been compared to Leonardo's Lady with an Ermine and Holbein himself includes animals in his own works, such as the depiction of Henry VIII's chief falconer proudly displaying his occupation to the viewer. In this case, it was first proposed that the squirrel balanced on the arm of the sitter was perhaps a household pet. More recently, its surreptitious chewing of a nut has been linked to the coat of arms of the Lovell family. Thus the squirrel becomes imbued with additional heraldic c...
Post a Comment
Read more