Understanding Canadian Abstract Art

"In turning his attention away from subject matter of common experience, the poet or artist turns it in upon the medium of his own craft." - Art Critic Clement Greenberg, 1961

How do you begin to make sense of a non-objective piece of art? Various methods have been proposed to "understand" abstract art, but when experiencing it is almost an entirely individual experience, no single method works for everyone. Some viewers may move around a piece of art and view it from different angles. Others may hope to gain clues from the title, though these can often feel unrelated to the very painting they are looking at. Looking for familiar forms or colours can also be helpful to interpret a piece of art. Jackson Pollock, an Abstract Expressionist artist, believed that a viewer would inevitably see figures within an abstract painting.

Charles Gagnon (b. 1934 in Montreal) asks the viewer to think about how abstraction can offer a commentary on art itself. His application of paint in what appears to be an almost frenetic manner is actually a considered approach, grounded in the discussions about art happening in 1960 when this work was painted. Gagnon works in oil paints, a medium historically reserved for grand masterpieces like portraits, historical narratives or still lifes, and offers an alternative way to paint. Influenced by Automatism, Abstract Expressionism and Surrealism, Gagnon's intuitive mark making explores what cannot be explained by reason or objectivity. (Read more about Automatism)

Many artists working in an abstract or non-objective style believed that the conclusion of painting would be with the avant-garde and a dissolution of what art had been up to that point. This conclusion was believed to have resulted in abstract works that explored the materiality (a medium's texture, appearance, reflectiveness etc.) of the medium they worked in.

Experiencing and making sense of an abstract work of art is different for everyone. How do you look at a painting like this?