|
In
1917, the American artist Lyonel Feininger wrote that “each individual work
serves s an expression of our most personal state of mind at that particular
moment and of the inescapable, imperative need for release by means of an
appropriate act of creation: the rhythm, form, colour and mood of a picture.”
On the other hand, Herwarth Walden wrote that “art is the gift of something
new, not the reproduction of something already in existence”.
The
above quotations from totally different sources came promptly to mind when
recently I viewed some preparatory sketches, drawings, and paintings by Dr. Paul
Henrickson at his residence in Xaghra. For the second time I a span of 21
months, we are again hosting a personal exhibition of visual art by this
American artist. Actually, the
works currently on display area retrospective of visual responses reflecting the
various experiences gained by Dr. Henrickson through his long cultural contacts
as a teacher and lecturer and through his travels and interactions with
different ethnic groups in various countries. In fact, some of these works date
as far back as 1949.
This
time, the exhibition has been collectively entitled Unveiling
the Crucifixion – a striking and captivating title especially in a
highly religious community such as ours. Our
religious upbringing and artistic heritage has provided us with a certain
prototype vision of the crucifixion. We
are accustomed to a tradition of devotional pictures where the suffering of Our
Saviour is presented in a calm organized order. Artistic compositions where
symmetry and a contemplative, dignified style display a profoundly touching
grief in a restrained way. Or else, artists tend to visualize the drama of the
crucifixion in a Rubenesque baroque idiom of vigorous, violent movement and
powerful bursting energy.
Paul
Henrickson unveils a totally different vision of the crucifixion. His concept of
the tragedy of the Golgota is interpreted differently. Perhaps it may be even
disturbing or shocking to some viewers, as this is not “the reproduction of
something already in existence.” The traditional gentle pathos and restrained
melancholy are replaced by a brutal realism. The calm dignified figure of Christ
by an aggressive, “ugly” caricature of horror.
The faces are abnormal Fauvist masks which leave a psychological impact.
The entire composition of the large painting is enveloped in a haze of
bluish and grey tints, which, together with the rhythmic movement and awkward
position of the main figure create and optical sensation and emotional
turbulence.
Even
the preparatory drawings and studies for this triptych with their
multidimensional hatching are imbued with a certain exciting, dynamic and
explosive force. The foreshortened figure of Christ on the cross seems to be
viewed from different simultaneously impossible points. Its squatting position
creates a sense of discomfort and constraint.
All
this visual experience of suffering is like the horrible reality of a nightmare.
Is Paul Henrickson concerned and pre-occupied with the suffering of the Son of
God made Man and who endured all humiliation to become the victim for the
salvation of mankind? Or does the crucifixion epitomize the harsh suffering of
all humanity? Is Paul Henrickson
unveiling the reality of a particular drama or is his crucifixion the universal
metaphor for the suffering that innocent people have to endure?
Is the Crucified Christ, like Lovis Corinth’s famous Red Christ, an
expression of the experience of personal suffering? Is the theme restricted
solely to the triptych and drawings inspired by the tragedy of the Golgota? Or
could one discern recurrent references in the forms, the dramatic colour,
rhythmic variations, and overall presentation of some other compositions?
These
questions are hypothetical and rhetorical and as such, I have no answer.
However, at this stage, as a side thought, I would like to hint that for Dr.
Henrickson, the word aesthetic
has various semantic connotations. It
does not necessarily mean something pleasant, attractive, and desirable. And I
take the liberty to quote Dr. Henrickson: “I must now be willing to include
the ugly, the smelly, the dirty, crude and vulgar…in short, the expressive.”
For
basically, Paul Henrickson is an expressive artist and his creations the outward
signs, the visual expression of inner feelings.
His watercolours seem to be the result of an impulsive urge to create.
His drawings, executed with the minimum of detail contain a certain expressive
spontaneity.
At
first glance his collages seem simply a combination of geometric elements and a
conglomeration of colours. But they
are laboriously composed bit by bit much as an architect constructs his
buildings or a composer orchestrates his sounds. And once again, the aesthetic
relationships of shapes and colour assume a deeper significance.
The same could be said of his enamels so rich and their bright
semi-transparent colours.
Paul
would object to anyone labeling his non-figurative compositions as abstract art.
He has got his own philosophy about the significance evoked in the development
and interpretation of art by the coinage of this term.
In fact, he emphasizes the fact – and I quote – “that the work is
not abstract but rather real, and the responses aesthetic responses.”
From
this point of view thee compositions are a synthesis of the artist’ s various
experiences of a lifetime. They are
the vehicles that externalize his inner self, that bridge his inner soul and the
external world.
Dr.
Henrickson ha also tried his hand at applied art. As you may have already
noticed, he is exhibiting samples of silk velvet that he ahs dyed in such a way
as to create an attractive shimmering effect.
He
has also devised and developed interesting and unconventional puzzles with
non-objective images and dye cutting intended as an effective tool in problem
solving. Dr. Henrickson is more suited and in a better position to explain the
raison d’etre of these creations and perhaps he will later refer to them
himself.
Joe
Camilleri 26/04/03
|
