The pleasure of Siena’s art arises from the tension between the overall image or the changing visual field and the individual units.
It is time that the art world recognize what Bluhm went on to do during the last three decades of his life, when he was deep into his own territory.
Elliott Green seems to be espousing that landscapes are living forms governed by rules we cannot fathom — they appear to be welcoming us, but we might be wrong.
Emily Eveleth’s paintings of doughnuts are lurid, funny, unsettling, sexy, off-putting, luscious, puffy, bawdy, and excessive.
If Philip Guston wanted everyone, including himself, to leave his studio, Franklin Evans seems to be inviting everyone in.
In Yossifor’s work, connections between the imagination and the ordinary world are made not through the pictorial, but through the paint itself.
Mason’s expansive Chelsea studio became her tuning fork — the barometer she used to check that colors and shapes were humming at the right frequency.
Isensee has gone from being a dutiful geometric abstractionist to defining his own trajectory, and gaining a verifiable freedom for himself.
I have come to think of Phillip Allen as one of the most wonderfully challenging painters around.
The literalism of 1960s Formalism has been replaced by an insistence on the factual, which leaves little room for the imagination or for speculation.
Amy Bennett gives us just enough tantalizing visual details to enthrall and mystify, without becoming heavy-handed.
Essenhigh reveals a freedom that resonates with all manner of fusion: of figure and design, of abstraction and narrative, of sentiment and humor, and more generally, of ambitious painting with a readable narrative.