Carousel 1980

Editor: Here we have Gene Davis' "Carousel" from 1980, done in acrylic paint. At first glance, it's all about lines. It’s deceptively simple, but I’m wondering how you see the cultural context reflected in such an abstract piece? Curator: Well, let's start with the acrylic itself. In 1980, it was already a well-established, readily available industrial material, which signifies a shift in art making. How does Davis utilize this "tool" from mass-production? He meticulously applies it in a way that feels both precise and handmade. Is it purely decorative or does this ordered pattern have any further meaning? Editor: I see that. So it’s less about *what* he’s painting and more about *how* he’s using this manufactured material. But isn’t the "how" just...stripes? What’s so radical about painting lines with acrylic? Curator: The repetitive use of simple stripes minimizes any sense of illusionistic space. Consider how it challenges the traditional hierarchy between painting and design. Think about the labor involved. Repeatedly applying those stripes across the surface – where does the 'art' reside? The artist is bringing forth a type of manual, possibly tedious, approach, reflecting the impact of mass production on both art and society. What do you make of the 'Carousel' title, given the industrial nature of the paint? Editor: That’s interesting, this gives me something new to consider. I hadn't even connected the production of materials to artmaking this way before. Thinking about it now, "Carousel" evokes a repetitive motion, mimicking a mechanized, almost factory-like process. Curator: Precisely! And that friction – between the artwork and social, industrial influences – is a powerful element within many modern abstract works, not just Davis'. Editor: This makes it easier for me to look for layers that go beyond face value in a painting and see its production as something connected with everything that is happening around the artist at that time. Thank you!