The struggle between painting as subject and painting as object.
Wednesday, April 8th, 2009Over the last couple years I’ve become increasingly interested by the struggle between painting as subject and painting as object. As subject, a painting exists as the artist’s pigmented record of whatever he or she was observing. As object, the painting lives of its own accord, through paint and canvas and frame and the presence they create. There is a continuum, and all painting lies somewhere between the poles of object and subject.
I think this struggle arose as a part of Modernism and abstraction in particular. Abstraction is well entwined with thoughts of painting as object, quite likely a reaction to photography (which replaced painting as the dominant way to capture a subject). Because of the camera, painting, quite literally, required a rewrite of its philosophy to remain relevant.
At any rate, paintings that feature this struggle – the struggle between subject and object – are among those I find most interesting. As a practitioner and apologist for Realism, I am quickly bored by realism that doesn’t include abstract qualities. It is abstraction that contributes to the strength of the composition and creates a push-pull between the surface of the painting and the depth of field portrayed by the subject. That push-pull creates a tension that helps keep a painting fresh – the eye doesn’t tire of looking at it.
You can find great use of this tension in the work of Robert Kuester. A realist in the tradition of the Southwestern Landscape – his paintings have a tremendous sense of light. Through accurate color and value relationships, he has created a powerful sense of place. Take a Look at “Sunset on the Jemez“. This is an amazing painting. Look closely at his brushwork, look for the abstract qualities of the paint itself. He doesn’t hide those brushstrokes. He takes that loaded brush and lays that paint right on his canvas – powerful stuff.






