I will attach the two images. Also, the citation style is Chicago.
Andy Warhol's Hammer and Sickle (1976 acrylic and silkscreen ink on canvas 72 x 86 x 1 1/4 in. (182.9 x 218.4 x 3.2 cm.) The Andy Warhol Museum, Pittsburgh and Barnett Newman's Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue? (1966 75 X 48 inches Oil on Canvas) are two works that that follow the tradition of modernism. Although these two works are from two totally separate eras of modernist art, the stylistic similarities of Abstract Expressionism between the two works are uncanny. The elements of Abstract Expressionism heavily influenced both Hammer and Sickle and Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue?
Andy Warhol's pop-art portrayal of the Hammer and Sickle (the symbol of Communism and ultimately anti-expression) is a satirical play on the Communist propaganda that existed during the Cold War. By his usage of bright, bold colors and a stylized hammer and sickle he is showing us elements of abstract expressionism. Warhol has created a work that is very similar in nature to Barnett's work, very expressive and moving in nature, unfocused on trying to uncover meaning and conventionalities. Abstract expressionism is more focused on seeing the artist's art for what it is -a form of true expression.
Abstract Expressionism was the movement in American painting that flourished in the 1940's 50's and 60's, sometimes called as the "New York School" (because of its main artists primarily based in New York). "They were linked by a concern with varying degrees of abstraction used to convey strong, emotional content" (Bricker) . However, the majority of Abstract Expressionists rejected critical labels and shared; they did though, share a common sense of moral purpose and alienation from American society. They believed that art had become too much a part of the Western Cannon and that the message of true expression had been lost.
Barrett Newman himself perhaps best described the tenets that abstract expressionism followed:
"1. To us art is an adventure into an unknown world, which can be explored only by those willing to take the risks.
2. This world of imagination is fancy-free and violently opposed to common sense.
3. It is our function as artists to make the spectator see the world our way not his way.
4. We favor the simple expression of the complex thought. We are for the large shape because it has the impact of the unequivocal. We wish to reassert the picture plane. We are for flat forms because they destroy illusion and reveal truth."
5. It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it does not matter what one paints as long as it is well painted. This is the essence of academicism." (Wells-Wallace)
.
Looking at Warhol's Hammer and Sickle,
A few things that come to mind are its striking, bold and blatant use of communist imagery. Although the work could suggest a sympathetic Communist narrative, it actually portrays the opposite. Warhol's style is known as being characteristically Pop Art -the epitome of capitalism, consumerism and ultimately individual expression. This idea of individuality, and the break from stagnant, expressionless art gives way to defining this work as being Abstract Expressionist as well with its use of vibrant, striking and almost spontaneous strokes of red, black and grey.
Warhol was trying to construct this image of the Soviet Hammer and Sickle (which kills off all sense of individual freedom and expression) and warp it into a piece of art that is actually very expressive. The way the piece was created showed how innovative it was created. The bold, thick red strokes, the superimposed picture of the hammer onto the background creates a very feeling that is both outwardly expressive and satirical. It puts a spin on the non-expressive, non-artistic, stagnant realism of Soviet life.
It's very bold graphic power and the vivid contrast of red and black give Warhol's work a tremendous amount of energy and emotion, which almost makes us think of Abstract Expressionism and more specifically Newman's Color Field work, Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue?
Color Field was considered breakthrough in modernist painting's attitude to both space and overall style because it had created a daringly new and simple form of art. Color field also created new trends with its elemental conflicts of light and scale, and of void and presence meaning that where there were no images, there was color. The color is the prime feature, it is meant to create an intensity that no other classical, renaissance or romantic periods could invoke. "Among the main characteristics of Abstract Expressionist color field painting are its use of colors close in tonal value and intensity, its radically simplified compositions and the choice of very large formats" (Anfam).
The artists had essentially lifted the symbolism concrete figures depicted in earlier works. "Moreover, the primal field of color, accentuating the viewer's isolation and sense of self, may equally have reflected a need for strong emotional experience in the barrenness of the Cold War during the late 1940s and the 1950s in the USA" ("Abstract Expressionism; 3. The 1950s: climax, reaction and later work"). Simple, easy to recognize colors was the motif of most color field paintings of the time; since red was perhaps the color that was most recognized during the height of the cold was, Barnett wanted to connect the audience with an emotional response that carried a message that was up to the interpretation of the audience.
Newman's piece is a later piece of Abstract Expressionism and one of the pioneers of many of the color field works that existed all throughout the late 50's to 60's.
Newman doesn't create a narrative for us to follow, or even a cohesive image for us to understand and attach meaning to it, rather, he wants us to focus on the bold and striking colors of the piece itself and understand the ultimate expression behind it.
The use of simple vibrant colors in both Warhol and Newman's works are elements of abstract expressionism. However, colors are not the only definer of the style; both works are abstractions, meaning that they do not have "An immediately cohesive set of symbols that can be recognized" (Carmen).
Both pieces show bold, striking elements that express the raw emotion of Abstract Expressionism. Warhol's piece is a satirical spin on a well-known (and hated) symbol at the time, representing cold expressionless, planned out life; he warps it into a work of art that is largely spontaneous, vivid, captivating and to the point. Newman's piece portrays the same image in terms of these elements. Newman, much like many of his color field contemporaries, wanted to rid his art of the unnecessary rhetoric and conventions created by previous artists. The straightforwardness of his work is truly expressionism at its height. There are no recognizable images, but rather pure color that focuses our attention on the cohesiveness of the work rather than hidden imagery; the red, blue and yellow of the piece focuses our attention on the artists immediate emotions rather than diverting our attentions away from our emotions and attaching any external meaning from the art.
Bibliography
Abstract Expressionism; The 1950s: climax, reaction and later work." Oxford University Press. .
Balkan, Bricker, Abstract Expressionism. London, United Kingdom: Tate Publishing, 2005
E.A, Carmen. The Great Decade of American Abstraction; Modernist Art 1960 to 1970. Houston, Museum of Fine Arts, 1974: 1974.
David, Anfam. "Abstract Expressionism." In Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online.
Wallace-Wells, David. "Splatter-Day Saints." Newsweek 156, no. 14 (October 4, 2010): 51-53. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost.
