The title of the painting comes from Latin and means "Man, heroic and sublime," going back, in fact, to an essay that the painter wrote, in which he asks "If we are living in a time without a legend that can be called sublime, how can we be creating sublime art?." This is, in part, his answer. According to some interpretations, the thin lines are a show of admiration for the Italian artist Giacometti and they are a representation of the human individual in all his weaknesses and glory as well. However, it is also a geometrical representation which helps divide the painting and the red background into different segments. Apparently, there is no rule to that, however, one can notice that the segment that is thus created in the middle is a perfect square.

The strive for perfection and the ultimate symmetry is perhaps even more obvious in Robert Motherwell's painting, with a clear square actually drawn with black on the entirely blue background. One could actually have a debate on whether this is a square or rather a rectangle, which would probably signify that one can follow perfection and strive to attain it, but that this is always just close enough rather than an actual reality. The blue background can suggest numerous things, but probably just induces a sensation of well-being for the viewer, a relaxation aimed to counterbalance modernist anxiety.

This is probably taken back to the title and to the artist's perceptions on the sublime. The square is an obvious perfect representation of the sublime, because of all its sides being equal, as well as its numerous lines of symmetry. The fact that the lines may suggest human kind makes an interesting connection with the existing sublime.

The fact that modern art is in fact just a limitless expression of the artist's inner beliefs and his wild imagination comes clear with Robert Morris's Untitled (Threadwaste). As we can see from this creation, the main focus of the artist is not necessarily to transmit or pass on to the audience a certain message, but...

It is now the turn of Robert Morris to show that one does not necessarily have to limit his diversity to colors and shapes, but that he can go further to include even different materials. His work leaves the two dimension space the previous two artists we have mentioned have used to enter a three dimension world, which allows even more expressivity and numerous opportunities (although, because of the extraordinary capacity to give out so much expression, the two paintings previously mentioned can also successfully qualify as three dimension works. For example, in Philip Guston's work, the rock does not necessarily seem a two dimension piece, but rather stands out in the painting on its own).
The five works of art come together to show an important characteristic of modern, abstract art: the artist's continuous affection for pure imagination exercises. Under the anguish of the 20th century uncertainties, the artist finds refuge in his work and discovers inner traits of his personality, which, otherwise, would have probably not come out.

We do not need to seek interpretations of their work, but simply enjoy the colors, shapes and attitudes that seem to spring out of anywhere for a simple aesthetic pleasure.

The main painting of reference, Arshile Gorky's Agony is suggestive in this sense, the title giving us the hint of the artist's incipient incentive. From there on, he simply seems to go all the way to achieve the inner expression of his artistic conscience and partially translate it in the form of shapes and colors, of lines and shades.

Bibliography

1. On the Internet at http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallyg/2377958983/.Last retrieved on July 22, 2008

On the Internet at http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallyg/2377958983/.Last retrieved on July 22, 2008