Untitled n.d.

Editor: This print, called “Untitled,” is held at the Art Institute of Chicago and its date is unknown. It seems to combine different printmaking techniques like etching and lithography to depict a procession of sorts. The figures look a bit… cartoonish. What strikes you about the composition? Curator: Indeed. Immediately, I’m drawn to the stark contrast between the detailed foreground figures and the barely-there background. Note how the artist manipulates line weight and density to create depth, effectively flattening the pictorial space even as it attempts to recede. Editor: It’s like the background figures are ghosts or afterthoughts! Does this contrast contribute to the overall meaning, in your view? Curator: Meaning, as such, is a secondary consideration to formal construction. Instead, consider how the precise, almost academic rendering of the bull contrasts with the looser, more playful handling of the surrounding figures. The bull is the anchor, while everything else dances around it. Also, the figures are intentionally de-formed in comparison with the formal figure. The distribution of tonal value suggests dynamism. Where do you think your eye goes next? Editor: Definitely to the baby figure riding the horse behind the bull! It creates a sort of mirroring effect and maybe a suggestion of parody with the image as a whole? Curator: Precisely. These calculated juxtapositions of form and style disrupt any easy reading. Is the artist celebrating or satirizing academic convention? This tension is what holds the work together. Editor: I see it now, the intentional disruption and then the almost unsettling use of negative space. It makes you work for any meaning you might pull out of it. Curator: Yes, it allows viewers the space to do so while focusing on technique and form. A testament to the artist's intentional deployment of dissonance.