Representation and Reality

Piet Mondrian, "Irises," oil,ca.1910

The 20th century was the century when art departed from reality. The end of the Victorian era and the coming of a century of war paralleled the rise of abstraction, expressionism, and all of the other -isms that followed. It was as if aesthetic and intellectual life shattered. Artists on the cutting edge abandoned representation of the world for pure paint and form without subject. The examples are many, from Piet Mondrian to Jackson Pollock. And in the mid-20th century abstract art was seemingly triumphant. After all, why would anyone

Piet Modrian, "Tableau I," oil on panel, 1921

paint or draw an object or person when photography could give you the same image? Instead, let us explore the depths of the human experience and psyche. Or lets explore the physicality of paint or relationships among colors or even how light mixes colors.

Representation and realism are not synonymous. Consider that Pablo Picasso is considered a titan of abstract art as the inventor of Cubism. Cubist works are representations of the world in an abstracted way. That is, there are recognizable, if distorted, things like hands and noses in cubist works. Realism seeks to show us the actual particulars of a thing or person. Abstraction can show us a different view or altered reality of a thing or person. Realism was also an art movement that sought to show things truthfully and without superimposed narrative or supernatural elements.

Anyway, during the last half of the 20th century representations of the real world continued to captivate us despite the rise of abstract -isms.

Realistic artwork continues to be popular, and varies from the truly photographic Photorealism, as in the work Ralph Goings and others to several different sorts of "realism." Some realist artists became famous, if not beloved by their contemporary critics. An excellent example is Andrew Wyeth. His work continues popular throughout the decades despite being dismissed by art critics.  Another is Edward Hopper, whose work is representative of the real world, but is not actually realism. There are numerous others.

Edward Hopper, "Early Sunday Morning," oil on canvas. 1930

Simply because a picture shows what seems to be "real" it is almost certain that it does not. Even the most realistic or hyper-realistic painting is a thing made of pigment spread on a two dimensional surface and intended to show a three dimensional subject. To cite a well-known example, Edward Hopper painted realistic city scenes often devoid of people. His use of the shapes of the city--mostly rectilinear--with slanting light gives his "Early Sunday Morning" echoes of deep pathos and loneliness. Although he was reticent about his work, Mr. Hopper once said that perhaps he was painting loneliness but he also said once that all he really wanted to do was paint light on a wall. Regardless, his compositions carry strong abstract qualities.

Hoff, "Paint Palace," oil on panel, 2016

For those of us interested in one another and in the human condition, it seems only logical that realistic art would be popular. The range of subject matter, inclusion of implied or depicted narrative, thoughtful composition, and an appropriate palette of colors are among the many variations within contemporary realism.

My own work, especially cityscapes, is a kind of contemporary realism. A good example is Paint Palace, which is a view of the old Pearl Paint building in New York, a venerable art supplies business that folded some years ago. Instead of the usual full frontal view of the facade I chose to show only a piece of the gaudy red and white Victorian building, fronted by an old New York lamp post. While the cityscape is realistic, it is clearly only paint, with a strong interest in how the paint was applied and less interest in architectural realism. The echoing arches from the lamp post to the doors on the building and arches on lower windows were only some of the shapes that made painting this small oil a lot of fun. It sold long ago.