Large Column 1933

Editor: Anton Prinner's "Large Column" from 1933, made using mixed media, stands quite tall, and I'm immediately drawn to its bold geometric forms. It feels very architectural. What social or political meanings might be embedded within this abstract form? Curator: That's a fantastic question! This work really speaks to the social upheaval of the early 20th century. Given its creation in 1933, amid the rise of authoritarian regimes, we can view its Cubist and Constructivist elements as a response to, and perhaps a rejection of, traditional representational art favored by those regimes. What does its "geometric" abstraction mean at a time when individual freedoms were threatened? Editor: So the very act of creating non-representational art was a statement in itself? I notice that the colours, the blacks and blues, are quite somber compared to the reds and white. Is that intentional, perhaps? Curator: Absolutely. The use of stark, geometric forms, avoiding romanticism, and emotional, painterly gestures can be interpreted as a way to reflect a world becoming increasingly industrialized and dehumanized. The somber colours layered with vivid tones could symbolize that clash of ideals: freedom fighting against oppression. The rigid forms can be a metaphor for the constricting forces acting on society, but what about the openness that the golden triangle displays? Editor: That makes a lot of sense when considering it within its historical context. The use of geometric abstraction becomes more meaningful. I thought the mixed media aspect may just be formal or stylistic, but understanding how abstraction fights oppression really makes me consider materiality's importance. Curator: Exactly! It allows us to understand how art can participate in social movements, becoming a means of both resistance and reimagining the world. I see now how important abstraction may be in helping dismantle hierarchies.