This was an old post that I wrote before my freshmen year at Wofford College and looking back at it I realize how much God’s handiwork in the sky looks like abstract art. As I look outside the window in Madison, I am reminded of how much time and effort he puts into everything he does.
Before writing this post, I read an article about abstract art discussing Piet Mondrian views on art. Mondrian was involved in the De Stijl art movement, an art style focused on isolating a single visual style that would appropriate for all aspects of modern life. The style resulted in implementing geometric blocks of primary colors and vertical and horizontal lines. Mondrian’s art theories greatly affected his abstract art style & his quote about abstract art stuck out to me when looking at this painting, Mondrian said
“The emotion of beauty is always obscured by the appearance of the object. Therefore the object must be eliminated from the picture.”
When I first look at this painting, I see splatters of ink. There seems to be an incident where ink has spilled all over the canvas. Reminiscent of the incident of an ink pen breaking in my pocket and ruining a pair of jeans I had when I was a kid. As I try to make sense of this painting, I run into problems. My eyes scan the painting, and the big splatter of blue paint could be a break of ocean water from the wave, ( the other expanse of blue). Then I run into the problem of what the black circle is surrounding the blue splatter. While the other colors seem random & in no particular order, the black lines seem to be purposeful.
I was drawn to this painting because Blue is my favorite color. Blue is associated with calmness, but I think this painting shows a different side of the color blue. This painting shows the strength of blue, like an ocean, calm but has the possibility to be destructive & explode. Chris could have planted the brown to show that the water had taken over all of the land except for two small parts. Reflecting back on the Mondrian quote earlier mentioned, by Chris not becoming fully immersing in painting the object “perfectly” he is able to express the real message.
As a kid, the few times painting with my dad in his art studio is one of my fondest memories. My art career was relatively short, but my art style was eerily “similar” to his, or at least that was my goal (This was never accomplished). Our childhoods greatly affect how we experience the world and how we express our creativity. Chris’s father painted houses as a career and Chris would come paint the houses. I am not well versed in the art of painting houses, but I can confidently say that abstraction & creativity are not norms for painting houses in the South. A homeowner would be furious if their house ever looked like this painting with splotches & random colors on it. The homeowner would probably hear complaints from his neighbors, Southern hospitality. I am always curious on how my grandfather’s occupation with purposeful & little abstract painting affected how Chris looks at painting.
At first glance, I swore that the brown in this painting was an abstract dog playing in a puddle surrounded by a green landscape. After a little reflection though, I take back that assumption for two reasons. First, I believe that as humans when we see anything, we try to make sense of it. Whenever anyone sees abstract art, they try to put it in a category, try to understand it, instead of just experiencing it. My second reason for taking back the dog assumption is because, quite simply, my dad does not like pets enough to do an abstract painting of one.
Similar to the last painting, there are a mixture of colors clashing together. But even more than that, there are “random” red splotches everywhere on the painting. What convinced Chris to put red splotches on a painting that most would assume does not need any red? Why put more or less red splotches on an abstract painting? Its amazing to see all the creative art expression of Chris, because has hundreds of these small paintings on paper.