Monsignor (Study) 1984

Editor: So this is Doug Ohlson's "Monsignor (Study)" from 1984, created using acrylic paint. It's a small square of bold geometric shapes and muted colors. What strikes me is the almost crude application of paint, especially in that thick red rectangle at the top. What catches your eye? Curator: I'm immediately drawn to the materiality itself. Notice the weave of the canvas showing through the thinner layers, juxtaposed with those impasto areas you mentioned. The very process of layering and contrasting different applications of the acrylic is crucial here. It is less about any symbolic meaning, but more about the artistic labor and the physicality of painting. Editor: That makes sense. It’s like Ohlson is showing us the 'how' as much as the 'what'. Does the title, “Monsignor”, suggest a religious or cultural context that influences this materiality? Curator: That's interesting to consider. The title pushes us to consider systems of power, both in the art world and perhaps within religious institutions. Are we meant to see a connection between the rigid structures within the church and the hard-edged forms of the painting? Maybe it's about the process of deconstruction of established systems through abstraction. How does the almost aggressive paint application challenge these established norms? Editor: So you're saying the tension between the rough application and the clean geometry might reflect a critique of institutional structures? Curator: Precisely! The consumption of the paint itself, how lavishly he’s used the red versus how thinly the yellow has been applied, becomes significant. It’s not just about color; it’s about value and access. What are your thoughts? Editor: I never thought about the thickness of the paint relating to value, but that gives me a lot to consider! Thanks. Curator: Likewise! Seeing this piece through your eyes allows me to consider new relationships between materiality and meaning.