Green Big Sur 1995

Editor: We're looking at "Green Big Sur," a 1995 painting by Eyvind Earle, created with acrylics. I find its stylized, almost geometric rendering of nature both calming and a little unsettling. What strikes you most about this landscape? Curator: What I notice immediately is how Earle reframes landscape painting, especially within the context of American art history. Traditional landscape paintings, particularly from the Hudson River School, often celebrated nature's sublime grandeur, reinforcing ideas of manifest destiny and American exceptionalism. Earle, working much later, simplifies and almost abstracts the scene. What does this say about our changing relationship to the environment? Editor: So you’re suggesting it's not just about pretty scenery but a commentary on our environmental perspective? Curator: Exactly. Think about the controlled palette, the near-absence of human presence, and the flattening of perspective. It feels deliberate, almost like a designed landscape rather than a wild one. This aligns with a growing awareness in the late 20th century of human impact on nature. Is it a celebration, or a warning? I think the ambiguity is key. Editor: I see what you mean. The neatness feels… unnatural in a way, given that it’s a supposedly natural scene. Do you think that neatness influenced later artists' view of landscape art? Curator: I believe it did. Earle, through his distinctive artistic approach, pushed the boundaries of landscape art. It challenged the traditional, romantic view and, by the late 20th century, offered a new, critical lens through which to consider our place in nature, impacting how artists approached depicting nature and its relation with culture and the public from then on. Editor: That's given me a lot to think about. I initially just saw a pretty picture! Curator: Precisely! Art is rarely just "pretty." It often holds a mirror to our society, reflecting our evolving values and anxieties.