Untitled 1951

Editor: So this piece, “Untitled” from 1951 by Richard Diebenkorn, is an oil painting. I’m immediately struck by the materiality, that ochre yellow just dominates, thick and almost textural even though it's smooth. What production choices really define Diebenkorn’s abstraction here? Curator: Considering Diebenkorn’s Abstract Expressionist context, it is about investigating process. Look at how the layers reveal an almost archaeological record of making. Do you see how areas were reworked, colors scrubbed away, or lines redrawn? What does that suggest about the value Diebenkorn placed on finality versus the act of creation? Editor: That makes me think about his choices beyond just what we see, to what he decided *not* to cover up. Leaving the underpainting, the ghost of prior ideas exposed, sort of disrupts traditional notions of "finish." Was this a common attitude at the time, or a deliberate push against conventional painting? Curator: It’s partially a product of its time and a deliberate response to it. Consider the broader context. Post-war, mass production began to dictate material consumption; this contrasts sharply with an individual artist meticulously layering paint, making visible every decision in response to societal changes toward greater consumerism. Doesn't that add another layer to your initial reading of the "Untitled" quality of the work? Editor: It definitely does. Knowing that context enriches my understanding of Diebenkorn’s production and reveals commentary through the chosen artistic process, making it as much about labor as it is about aesthetics. I never would've thought of that connection at first glance. Curator: Precisely. The "Untitled" designation and process highlight that the material is an end, as well as a mean. The beauty here emerges from an evident record of work.