James Rosenquist, "Orange Field", 1964
I really love this painting by Rosenquist, mostly because like many pop artist, he took something insignificant and meaningless and gave it importance. I see this as the complete opposite of the vanitas paintings of the dutch masters, in the way that those images were composed of many objects each with its own extremely heavy symbolism, all alluding to different aspects of the human condition in that time; Rosenquists painting on the other hand is composed of one object with no meaning. This meaningless object is so large that it is not even contained within the boarders of the canvas, and in this way Orange Field alludes to its own aspect of the human condition: meaninglessness, and absurdness.
I don't think you could have gotten much further from the still lifes of the Golden Age Dutch paintings! I love your interpretation of this work, particularly in the last sentence of your response. Thanks! I love Rosenquist!
ReplyDelete