Archimage #2 1976

Curator: Looking at Lorser Feitelson's "Archimage #2," created in 1976, I'm immediately struck by its intensity. Editor: Yes, the colours definitely jump out. It has a peculiar sense of depth and an almost overwhelming optical quality. What does it say to you? Curator: To me, the paired, curving shapes suggest a sense of duality. We see repetition throughout history where verticality carries deep metaphorical importance; consider pillars as a symbol of society’s structures, but this doesn’t seem celebratory... perhaps those very structures are being eroded. What do you feel about the symbolic choices here? Editor: I agree with you on the symbolism of the form. There's an unsettling quality to it—a narrowing, a sense of being funnelled. This piece emerged in the mid-70s, a period marked by both social upheaval and the burgeoning of postmodern thought that questioned grand narratives of power. It feels indicative of the eroding power of societal foundations that held the previous generations together in what some understood to be truth, justice, and “The American Way.” Curator: That's a powerful interpretation. The work certainly invites speculation about power and decline. Colour field painting moved from the angst of the abstract expressionists and into the new optimism of mid-century America, but this doesn't seem to match the period where it was created. Editor: Precisely. By 1976, disillusionment had set in. And in regards to visual and optical expectations, Feitelson creates something between two polar opposite styles that are deeply connected, Pop and Op Art. The cultural continuity from 1960s cultural hopes had taken an entirely new shape by 1976. Curator: What began as promise became the establishment of today's challenges—or, perhaps, simply cast old ones in starker light. Feitelson leaves us much to consider. Editor: Indeed, a provocative snapshot of a society in transition, reminding us that progress is never linear, but a constant negotiation between hope and experience.