The Question Of Space

[Christopher Raven]

I have read little about Robert's audacious use of compositional space, some of his earlier work in particular I have found fascinating in this regard.


Christine Maunder Project 3


Death With Jane And The Black Coat Project 2


Self Portrait At Foot Of Stairs Project 10


Nicky NPP

Many times have I heard it said by sellers 'could be trimmed to view better', and know of owners who felt it best to lop off a substantial part of the painting. My first reaction being that of 'sacrilege!', secondly, the thought that a lot of money had been thrown in the bin.
   Why did Robert arrange the composition in such a way? To emphasize the subject in a cunning way - less is more. To allow the painting to breathe. To make other statements - I feel the Christine Maunder figure is placed to accentuate exclusion.
   Or.....

[GRIMLEY]

With regards to the Christine Maunder painting I seem to remember a post in another thread suggesting that the "space" contained a figure or figures only barely visible in the original painting, how true this is I don’t know but I'm sure someone will. Maybe it was a Lenkiewicz equivalent of laying on your back and spotting faces in the clouds?

[eder]

I know this is unconnected with the thread started here, but I have a question regarding the image shown 'Death with Jane and the Black Coat'. I recently saw this painting offered for sale on the website of Eleys Auctions in Lincs. and on their site the image was reversed. Also it was advertised with the title
'Monica, The Painters Coat and Skeleton'. Can anyone confirm which is correct?

Thanks

Eder

[Christopher Raven]

Well GRIMLEY and eder, you are on the ball here, I did mention the Christine Maunder painting in a previous thread (Hidden Elements) and may add something about that later. Regarding the image 'Death with Jane and The Black Coat' I reversed the picture by mistake (sorry!). The title was my best guess from the project list (based on the subject matter /size/ original price). I can see there is no 'Monica, The Painter's Coat and Skeleton' listed, although there is 'Monica And Death', so I am not too sure about this at the moment.
  Thanks for keeping me on my toes.

[Francis]

placed to accentuate exclusion.
Or.....

Or isolation. The space distances the figure in the painting from the viewer. Onr thing that hasn't been discussed much in relation to Robert's paintings but which he himself set great store by was the atmosphere, the mood of the painting. Sometimes this could be a certain pathos or melancholic mood but equally it could be a sense of uncertainty or even menacing atmosphere.
I'm pretty sure that Self-Portrait at the foot of the stairs isn't Project 10 (Self Portrait) by the way. I think it may be Jealousy.

[member555]

I'm pretty sure that Self-Portrait at the foot of the stairs isn't Project 10 (Self Portrait) by the way. I think it may be Jealousy.

Could be, but Sotheby's (18 Sept 2003, lot 148) stated: Signed three times and inscribed "Project: ' Self Portrait' -Relationship Series."

Maybe, just maybe, there's a need for sorting out the paintings versus the Projects ...

[member555]

Regarding the image 'Death with Jane and The Black Coat' I reversed the picture by mistake (sorry!). The title was my best guess from the project list (based on the subject matter /size/ original price). I can see there is no 'Monica, The Painter's Coat and Skeleton' listed, although there is 'Monica And Death', so I am not too sure about this at the moment.

Some trivia regarding this painting:

The long-time owners of this painting sold it back to the original gallery after more than a decade. The reason was that the owners feared that their child might be frightened by the skeleton in the painting. The gallery had it photographed and labelled it "Monica Death & The Painters Coat". That title then followed it to Eleys Auctions.

Project 2 lists  4 possible alternatives (no paintings with Monica, but several with Monca):
#12. Death and Monca in a room in Lower Compton. £38
#38. Monca and Death. £32
#56. Death with Jane and the Black Coat. £75
#69. Monca and Death. £65

None of the above are, to my knowledge, otherwise identified to painting.

The original listed prices for the paintings in Project 2 appear to be based both on canvas size and motive and other factors. Still, comparing this painting (122 cm x 91.5 cm) with other known ones (i.e., #67. Francesca and Diogenes. £90; 76 cm x 99 cm), it appears that the price should be the highest of the four alternatives, i.e., #56. Death with Jane and the Black Coat. £75. The subject also fits well.

Conclusion: the identification of this painting with Project 2, #56: "Death with Jane and the Black Coat" seems consistent with available evidence.

9.999 paintings to go ... ;-)

[Christopher Raven]

Excellent summary detective 555. The other major factor that swayed my opinion was that the sitter was not recognizable to me as Monica (Monca?) Quirk. Who was Jane?
 Francis, your insight was most welcome. Perhaps others will share their views.
 

[Francis]

Could be, but Sotheby's (18 Sept 2003, lot 148) stated: Signed three times and inscribed "Project: ' Self Portrait' -Relationship Series."

I'm aware of that, 555 but 1) Robert often misattributed his paintings if signed and inscribed later and 2) he often recycled paintings in different projects. This painting just looks earlier than Project 10 for which no list ever has come to light. It may have been exhibited in that Project but was it originally painted for it?

Conclusion: the identification of this painting with Project 2, #56: "Death with Jane and the Black Coat" seems consistent with available evidence.

It's also consistent with the fact that, as Chris has now pointed out, it doesn't remotely look like Monica...

[member555]

Francis, you're quite right that the self portrait at the foot of the stairs is in a style typical of Projects well before Self Portrait. I fully agree that it is likely that it was painted for one of the earlier Projects, or rather at the time of the earlier Projects. Then Robert used it for Project 10 and inscribed it as such. As you know well, there are countless examples of paintings being re-used in another Project and even some apparently listed in 3 Projects (like Go Away - nearer! Project 9: Orgasm, Project 15: Death,
Project 16: Sexual behaviour).

In my view, if Robert included a work in a Project, then we can gain nothing by excluding it from that Project. If a painting was used to illustrate his ideas behind several Projects, the painting beongs to all those Projects. So the self portrait at the foot of the stairs belongs to Project 10, whether painted at that time or not. So many paintings were used in Projects years, even many years, after they were painted, that the Project number is no indication of when a work was produced. I know that you are fully aware of this, of course. My point is that paintings can belong to one, two, three or more Projects, that this is meaningful, and I see no problem with it.

The paintings with the subject occupying the lower part seem to have been produced during a few years only. Some can be dated: Marie von Grunewald was painted 1976. The painter with Courbet's self-portrait is for Project 6, 1974/1975. Some should provide clues for where they were painted, like the self portrait at the bottom of the stairs (a supposedly recognizable place), and the lovely pair from what looks like a loft corner:

Any clues to where, or when, these were painted?