Abstract Expressionism
given by John Haugse at the Solo Studio & Gallery for the opening of paintings by Georgette Jones on April 2, 2010.

In order to talk about Georgette’s paintings, which I would technically classified as “non-objective painting”, I have to start by talking a little bit about its origin. It evolved from a small group of painters in New York City toward the late forties early fifties who developed a style of painting (you could say, an attitude toward painting) which they eventually called Abstract Expressionism.

These included painters like Robert Motherwell, Jackson Pollack and most importantly, William de Kooning. Of course to be more correct, these men were looking very closely at Matisse, Matta and a host of other French painters who were also experimenting with abstraction in painting. We “steal” from one another because that’s how art is learned. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Eventually, of course one hopes that one’s own voice appears amidst the many.

Matisse learned from the classical painters, de Kooning learned from Matisse and Georgette Jones is learning from de Kooning. That’s how it works.

de Kooning’s paintings are particularly important in the story of Abstract Art because he found a way to legitimize the use of random shapes and colors by using a recognizable image within the painting. He used the human figure.

The figure interests us more than any other image because, it’s us. de Kooning knew that people would identify with their self image no matter what else was going on in a painting and he reasoned that this would give the viewer a beginning point of entry. A place to begin to understand.

It’s also possible that he used the image to give himself a place to begin. He hasn’t written about this so we don’t know. But it seems likely. You might say, it kept him from getting lost in this new and unfamiliar territory.

Critics and art historians often describe de Kooning’s early work in sociologic terms, but the truth is much more mundane and practical than that, at least from the standpoint of the actual work in the studio. Of course we are all products of our time and as such no artist can avoid expressing some aspects of his or her environment. But in a practical sense and for the purpose of talking about art, these things are constant. 1. The challenge in making a good painting is not a sociological or psychological one, it’s an aesthetic one. 2. Artistic decisions are always based on the principals of composition, color, texture and form.

The Abstract Expressionist’s used a painting process that was frantic and physical and explosive. More like a dancer with a paint brush, than the traditional process which tends to be more methodical and measured. This more athletic style requires an entirely different set of skills. There’s nothing mysterious about it. You can see the process in the final result. In fact Abstract Expressionists made that one of their primary goals: To show the process.

As a result of this, there is a raw, unfinished quality which uses the process as part of the painting idea and thus it becomes part of the viewing experience. I should also add that it becomes part of the painting process as well. There is a great difference between these two techniques (abstract expressionism and all paintings popular at the time). The one removes all evidence of the process while the other integrates the effects into the painting.

Eventually this became known also as The Action School of painting, for obvious reasons. For example, watching Georgette paint is a bit like watching someone in an altered state or just drinking too much coffee. It’s mesmerizing to watch and seductive to the painter and that’s because it looks like so much fun. And frankly, it is. But excitement and fun should not be confused with “easy”.

Because no matter how exciting the process might be for the artist, the painting must in the end, conform to the fundamentals of painting or it won’t last beyond the momentary pleasure of its production.

A successful painting, on the other hand will renew over time, like reading a good book over and over as the years pass. A successful work of art changes and grows as you change and grow. And that’s the point of art. Art should stay with us and grow with us.

As the action school developed and abstract expressionism became more common place, these artists eventually did away with the image altogether and it evolved into what has become known as the non-objective school of painting. Also referred to as “action painting” abstract expressionism”, non-figurative art, non representational art and other equally vague, typically unspecific labels common to the study of art. Need I mention, “ it’s an art not a science” the one time that phrase is actually true.

This gave birth in the fifties to artists like Mark Rothko, Clifford Still, Franz Kline and the new generation of painters who are still learning from these great masters. Painters like Georgette Jones. And all of this exciting stuff without using a recognizable image.