More Thoughts on Ernst

Thanks for familiarizing us with another of Mee's influences, Jorge. I can see why Ernst's work might overlap with Mee's interests: it combines forms and bends limits, but at the same time it feels thematically coherent. A book excerpt available here mentions that Ernst's work is impressive, and lends credit to the movements he's associated with, partly because it uses its apparent randomness and doesn't just succumb to it. Check out this quotation:

"For all their independence from traditional artistic techniques and the imitation of nature, it is surprising how much stylistic unity these works evince. Thanks to his stylistic syntax Ernst created recognizable links between the works, which form a coherent sequence . . . Indeed, the effect of every Max Ernst image depends largely on the fact that it sets its own limits." (Werner Spies)

This "stylistic syntax" is, I think, a helpful thing to note in Mee's work as well. Despite grabbing bits and pieces from other people's work, myths, voices, and figures, Mee has an artistic style of his own. He chooses, arranges, juxtaposes, edits, punctuates, formats -- he consciously creates something out of the things he edits.

Spies sees in Ernst's work a "tension between a creative furore that nothing could contain and an extremely rigorous method based on almost incredible demands." It's probably easier than it should be to forget the incredible challenge of balancing that tension - reigning in the openness and playfulness that invites collage to exist while at the same time making particular choices and decisions so as to achieve a sense of unity and a certain level of accessibility.

Although I don't know enough about Ernst's work, or about Rauschenberg's place in art history and its various movements, to draw any reliable conclusions, my initial glances at their catalogues/bios make me think that maybe Ernst's work bridges together simplicity (or discipline) and creativity in a slightly more modest, more sophisticated way. Rauschenberg seems to rely on creativity a great deal in order to make themes apparent; although he stretches boundaries and plays with perspective in, for example, his American flag works, he nonetheless seems to place a great emphasis on the existing symbols/icons/themes associated with the flag. In other words, Rauschenberg seems to bend or alter existing things and therefore place his own spin on them. Ernst, in comparison, at least in the one or two things I've seen and based on the descriptions I've read, sounds like he has more interest in taking things that don't necessarily have existing associations and giving them a context. The article I linked above suggests that he purposely chooses "neutral" images, or sources, and combines them in unexpected ways in order to create all new symbols, themes, creations.

Mee's work isn't devoid of existing themes or associations (just look at the cultural attitudes in the "HOWL" section of "First Love" and at the familiarity the audience is expected to have with them), but it does seem to combine things more often in a subtle way than an extravagent one so that existing associations aren't necessarily obvious or important to the final product.

Of course, I have little substantial evidence to back up these musings; it's just interesting to think about what would interest Mee about different sorts of artists, whether or not these two in particular embody any two poles or form any reliable gradient.