I was Standing in Love 2017

Curator: This is David Michael Hinnebusch’s “I Was Standing in Love” from 2017. Its a painting exploding with energy. What do you make of it? Editor: Immediately, I'm struck by the sheer density of the paint. It’s like Hinnebusch built this figure up, layer upon layer. You can almost feel the physicality of the act, the repetitive movements of his wrist with the brush. Curator: I agree. It's fascinating how the chaos of the composition gives rise to form. Note the interplay of colors—the dominant blues and reds are tempered by yellows and purples creating an organized and unified viewing. What visual clues are most intriguing? Editor: Well, the materials speak volumes. It's paint, of course, probably acrylic, applied in such a visceral way that challenges our perceptions of artistic skill. You'd almost call it brute, the kind of expressive freedom often dismissed. But I like how he foregrounds the application method, drawing the viewer to the texture itself. It rejects this refined notion of "beauty" so we are drawn in, regardless. Curator: I think you make a strong point about beauty. Look at how Hinnebusch constructs a portrait within this abstract framework. There is the head, the torso, arms. They are barely there but its undeniable, the central visual thrust which is heightened by an intentional flattening of space. This adds to its emotional impact, creating a tension between representation and pure expression. Editor: Definitely, and it pushes against the tradition of the passive nude in art history, turning it on its head. What social circumstances led Hinnebusch to select materials like this? This painting rejects a "refined aesthetic" in a clear artistic rebellion of accepted visual cues and symbols. There is this deep rejection of conformity here. Curator: His work engages in an ongoing dialog with Abstract Expressionism but it carries it into the 21st century with all these modern notions of chaos. Also note the distinct mark-making techniques at play in this. It is an entirely considered work! Editor: I am compelled by this push-pull, formal yet reckless! This material interrogation really underscores the radical gesture in the work. Curator: In the end, that complexity of vision—is something viewers can grapple with on their own. Editor: Precisely, I'd say we have given the patrons much to reflect on today!