The Game “Hide and Seek” in Painting July 2004
Amidst the swirl of ongoing debate and argument over what a painting is and should do, it is easily forgotten that a painting acts as both mirror and window. Regardless of its shape, size or pedigree the painted surface declares itself as a deliberate act of the artist, a view and or reflection of the artists’ world, the end result of premeditated intent. It is both a window on the world of visual things and a mirror glimpse of the elusive or invisible things that are less clearly discerned. As a result, the painting as image becomes the mediating surface for the age-old game of ‘hide and seek’. That the painted surface shows figurative and or more abstracted elements is an aside for it is a surface simultaneously revealing and concealing many layers of content, meaning and form. These layers are always alternately hidden and found by the viewer as if they were chasing a ghost in a house of mirrors and windows.
A painting offers the promise of revelation for the viewer; it cannot be otherwise…revelation is implicit in the paintings imaging function. The British painter Bridget Riley declares emphatically about paintings; “Well, they’re so alive! They are like people, with all those things. They show every possible characteristic without excluding contradictions. Some are more retiring, some are more extrovert, and they have moods. They’re not static things, they don’t come across as a fixed entity. A painting will reveal itself as a personality does, slowly over many visits”1. Theoretical discourse has shown that a paintings object-hood transcends time and place thereby in a sense negating any one truth that can be postulated by artists, critics or historians. ‘Simply, the object by virtue of its existence never ceases to generate, like a text, multiple dialogs with an endless stream of viewers. Deciphering meaning, content, and form are posited with the viewer. Indeed, the work may overturn past suppositions and allow the painters life to be read through the work’2. There is no right or wrong way in this process.
The reason for this occurrence lies in the strategy employed by the artist to achieve his/her pictorial ambitions. The method used to manipulate marks, colours and shapes to a calculated end results inevitably, unwittingly or not in a game of hide and seek. The painter initiates the game by establishing the frame/field for working and subsequently, viewing. It is inescapable that something be ‘concealed’ in order for something to be ‘revealed’ during the process of painting. Whether the artist is working in a 2D or 3D format, it is not possible to include ‘something’ without ‘excluding’ something. The question remains for each work. What is here? What is not here? What should I seek? What can I find?
A painting is deemed complete by the painter when he/she judges it to be visually so. The finished work may or may not be read as intended by the painter, nevertheless with careful observation it can be read according to established art historical conventions. Even the most difficult work can be approached and de-coded providing the viewer has some level of awareness of pictorial language within a prescribed artistic paradigm. Adolph Gottlieb and Mark Rothko declared, “All genuine art forms utilize images that can be readily apprehended by anyone acquainted with the global language of art…we use images that are directly communicable to all who accept art as the language of the spirit”3. This being so, the viewer should approach new paintings with an attitude of humility and openness, remembering that time and close attention are required in order to grasp meaning and see the fundamentals that are at work in each painting. The painter has revealed ‘something’, whilst simultaneously concealing ‘something’, setting the ground-play for the game.
Beyond a simple appreciation of a paintings’ formal composition, skillful use of colour or direct appearance of beauty, the work should also be apprehended by grasping its multiple, constituent parts which are all engaged simultaneously in a dialogue of parts making a whole. The viewer should push beyond the initial visual response and seek the paintings deeper treasures. No one, gives up the pursuit of success and corresponding reward after 1 minute, but rather, actively, relentlessly, over time, pursues the goal until it is achieved. Paintings are hidden treasure troves full of promise because they are objects that transcend time. One can obtain from their continued contemplation great understanding and assurance. If patience and persistence are brought to bear, the painted object begins to slowly reveal that which is hidden and conceal that which may have seemed all too apparently evident. It is hoped that these new paintings will greatly enrich the viewers experience and understanding of the painting game, ‘hide and seek’!
William M Boot & Ko Seok In
1 Robert Kudielka, Bridget Riley: Dialogues On Art, The Art Of The Past: talking to Neil MacGregor, Thames & Hudson, London, 1995, p20.
2 Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text, translated by Stephen Heath, London, 1977, pp155-64.
3 Adolph Gottlieb and Mark Rothko, “The Portrait and the Modern Artist”, radio broadcast WNYC, Oct 13, 1943.
Amidst the swirl of ongoing debate and argument over what a painting is and should do, it is easily forgotten that a painting acts as both mirror and window. Regardless of its shape, size or pedigree the painted surface declares itself as a deliberate act of the artist, a view and or reflection of the artists’ world, the end result of premeditated intent. It is both a window on the world of visual things and a mirror glimpse of the elusive or invisible things that are less clearly discerned. As a result, the painting as image becomes the mediating surface for the age-old game of ‘hide and seek’. That the painted surface shows figurative and or more abstracted elements is an aside for it is a surface simultaneously revealing and concealing many layers of content, meaning and form. These layers are always alternately hidden and found by the viewer as if they were chasing a ghost in a house of mirrors and windows.
A painting offers the promise of revelation for the viewer; it cannot be otherwise…revelation is implicit in the paintings imaging function. The British painter Bridget Riley declares emphatically about paintings; “Well, they’re so alive! They are like people, with all those things. They show every possible characteristic without excluding contradictions. Some are more retiring, some are more extrovert, and they have moods. They’re not static things, they don’t come across as a fixed entity. A painting will reveal itself as a personality does, slowly over many visits”1. Theoretical discourse has shown that a paintings object-hood transcends time and place thereby in a sense negating any one truth that can be postulated by artists, critics or historians. ‘Simply, the object by virtue of its existence never ceases to generate, like a text, multiple dialogs with an endless stream of viewers. Deciphering meaning, content, and form are posited with the viewer. Indeed, the work may overturn past suppositions and allow the painters life to be read through the work’2. There is no right or wrong way in this process.
The reason for this occurrence lies in the strategy employed by the artist to achieve his/her pictorial ambitions. The method used to manipulate marks, colours and shapes to a calculated end results inevitably, unwittingly or not in a game of hide and seek. The painter initiates the game by establishing the frame/field for working and subsequently, viewing. It is inescapable that something be ‘concealed’ in order for something to be ‘revealed’ during the process of painting. Whether the artist is working in a 2D or 3D format, it is not possible to include ‘something’ without ‘excluding’ something. The question remains for each work. What is here? What is not here? What should I seek? What can I find?
A painting is deemed complete by the painter when he/she judges it to be visually so. The finished work may or may not be read as intended by the painter, nevertheless with careful observation it can be read according to established art historical conventions. Even the most difficult work can be approached and de-coded providing the viewer has some level of awareness of pictorial language within a prescribed artistic paradigm. Adolph Gottlieb and Mark Rothko declared, “All genuine art forms utilize images that can be readily apprehended by anyone acquainted with the global language of art…we use images that are directly communicable to all who accept art as the language of the spirit”3. This being so, the viewer should approach new paintings with an attitude of humility and openness, remembering that time and close attention are required in order to grasp meaning and see the fundamentals that are at work in each painting. The painter has revealed ‘something’, whilst simultaneously concealing ‘something’, setting the ground-play for the game.
Beyond a simple appreciation of a paintings’ formal composition, skillful use of colour or direct appearance of beauty, the work should also be apprehended by grasping its multiple, constituent parts which are all engaged simultaneously in a dialogue of parts making a whole. The viewer should push beyond the initial visual response and seek the paintings deeper treasures. No one, gives up the pursuit of success and corresponding reward after 1 minute, but rather, actively, relentlessly, over time, pursues the goal until it is achieved. Paintings are hidden treasure troves full of promise because they are objects that transcend time. One can obtain from their continued contemplation great understanding and assurance. If patience and persistence are brought to bear, the painted object begins to slowly reveal that which is hidden and conceal that which may have seemed all too apparently evident. It is hoped that these new paintings will greatly enrich the viewers experience and understanding of the painting game, ‘hide and seek’!
William M Boot & Ko Seok In
1 Robert Kudielka, Bridget Riley: Dialogues On Art, The Art Of The Past: talking to Neil MacGregor, Thames & Hudson, London, 1995, p20.
2 Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text, translated by Stephen Heath, London, 1977, pp155-64.
3 Adolph Gottlieb and Mark Rothko, “The Portrait and the Modern Artist”, radio broadcast WNYC, Oct 13, 1943.
