This is quite an accomplishment, isn’t it. You’re looking at rectilinear forms, four rectangles and two squares. From the verbal description, you’d expect a static image. But it’s far from static. You can’t help seeing these blue things moving. And what about the vertical divide, is that in the middle?
The suggestion of movement in the composition comes, to a great extent, from the little blue rectangle in the lower left corner. It appears to be a fragment of the kind of square we see clearly stated on the right side of the painting. The fact that there are two identical blue squares sets up an expectation in our minds that what we’re seeing in the lower left is one of that kind. It’s uncanny, how powerful that little blue rectangle is. I would say, it makes the painting. It sets everything in motion.
The other blue rectangle is that long thing in the middle. It’s in the middle, right? Wait, we can’t be sure, looks like the middle, but maybe not. The large red rectangle appears to be just a smidge narrower than its light counterpart on the right, because a saturated color area will look smaller than a light area. But, at the same time, red is a dominant color. The illusoriness of the red half and the question of the mid-line are rubbed in our faces by this blue thin rectangle in the middle. Where’s-the-middle becomes an issue. What’s static, what moves?
This painting by Maria Palacios appears to be simple, but is anything but. Look at it. It won’t let you go.
All contents copyright (C) 2010 Katherine Hilden. All rights reserved.
artamaze by Katherine Hilden 