Untitled 

Editor: This piece is an untitled matter-painting by Zdzislaw Beksinski, created with oil paint, and what strikes me is the immense scale combined with the decaying details. The texture created by the impasto gives it an almost tactile sense of ruin. How would you interpret this work from a formalist perspective? Curator: The formal properties command attention, certainly. Note the artist’s calculated arrangement of the visual elements. Consider the stark contrast in texture: the smoothness of the atmospheric rendering against the heavily worked impasto in the ruins and foreground. Ask yourself what meanings these formal oppositions produce? Editor: It’s true, the contrast creates tension. The smoothness almost feels like an artificial serenity layered on top of the chaotic texture. The rounded forms in the 'buildings' too contrast sharply with the flatness of the lower ground. Do you see the forms of these 'buildings' as purely abstract or do they hold representational value too? Curator: The forms themselves can be analysed through the lens of geometry and perspective. Consider the implications of the vertical thrust, versus the implied horizontality of the landscape, then evaluate what those might signify in terms of power or fragility, and the semiotic relations inherent within. Is there one predominant element, or a dispersal? Editor: I see what you mean. The dominance of verticality and the decay both create conflicting signals of ambition and futility, or perhaps warning about what's coming? So, focusing on these contrasts opens up new interpretative pathways that rely solely on the artwork itself. I understand the formalist approach so much better now, seeing the image in terms of those qualities first. Curator: Indeed. Formalism encourages us to consider art’s internal structure and the effects it generates, divorced from external context and personal affectations. Hopefully this encourages more precise observation.