Meeting Participants
Gina Dominque Hersey
Dr Robyn Ferrell
Date, time, location & Format
21 Jan 2025 @ 6PM EST, Online via Zoom
Discussion notes (researcher)
Robyn and I had a productive meeting re: my thesis Chapter 4 recent updates. During it I took the following notes on the feedback she gave me specific to the pairs of juxtaposed paintings:
~ In general the generalities don’t work, but the details and the specifics do work. They give the text life.
~ One that is not working is my Reading and Picasso's Woman Reading ... the contrasts do not work... stay clear of discussing his misogyny. (It's a chapter if not an entire thesis topic...lol.) Make this much better or delete it.
~ My response to and comparison with Newman’s Vir Heroicus analysis is resolved. It is good because it uses a diagram, and the art historical details (or references) work.
~ My Rabbit Hole and Dali's Alice in Wonderland image is successful because it’s one of the most resolved in regards to the comparison btw the two. It is because the details work, and I make it relevant to 21st C abstraction, or how I understand 21st century abstract painting compared to 20th C painting.
~ My double portrait and the Arshile Gorky painting juxtaposition is strong… again, the details work, and the comparison 20th C. To 21st C. difference and Theories- Leave this one as is...
~ My Angel with Green Helmet & deKooning's Angels work because of the small details of (like the green helmet...), and beacause the two work together in the conclusion.
~ My Fishbone Tool and Guston's Raoul's Tool is Robyn's favorite because of the fishbone tool analysis diagram. Due to the thoroughness and detailed analysis, she thinks is works the best of all. She says it is the most successful due to how I have made use of the method, and because at the end of the discussion, the 2 works come together… must do this with each one.
(I will add sentence or two about Guston’s 'Fat Pink' and my relating to it due to baby doll plastic flesh.)
~ My Channeled Soul w/ Rothenberg’s Untitled- the comparison is successful (add about the feeling of being undressed)… elaborate in other paintings about the painting trance…
Agreed action points (to be completed after the meeting)
Robyn will email me her notes.
I will continue to revise and finish the remaining incomplete painting analyses.
Once this is done, I will add the page numbers to the contents page and Image List, I will submit my 1st draft to eDoc "Submission Planning".
I hope to do this by the end of January.
Robyn and I will meet again after she reads my submission, perhaps at the end of February.
Robyn’s follow-up notes
(Specifics on Ch. 4 Discussion & Analysis painting comparisons...)
Hi Gina,
These notes are very loose - haven't added to them since the meeting in the interests of getting them to you quickly:
1. Picasso- The political critique of his Walter painting is too simple a comparison with your work. What would it mean for an abstract painting to ‘overtly sexualise objectify and depersonalise her?’ Doesn’t all painting risk objectifying?
In terms of comparison with your work, I don’t think it’s enough to take the high moral ground with Picasso!
Let’s think through the point you are really making about your practice here and what it gains from his work. Maybe develop the final paragraph in this direction?
2. Spread- Clumsy comparison; ‘I also lead spiritually rich life etc’ runs the risk of banalising this crucial aspect of your work and hers.
The 'hand you’re dealt' is a much stronger metaphorical attribution- suggest you expand it and delete earlier.
3. Georgia O’Keefe- Place this comparison earlier- important discussion of Kandinsky
Defend the assertion that O'Keefe and you are printing in the manner of your time.
4. Gorky- Interesting –say more about ‘the cultural differences between 20th & 21st century abstraction’... There is a general proposition here about the place and time of painting that could be developed
5. Barnet Newman- Interesting. What about the sublime? What part does it play in abstraction?
6. Angel- Very good discussion! Gets into the detail in a valuable way
7. Kahlo- The biographical parallels are too quick. Discussion develops well however
8. Rabbit- Very effective- one of the most resolved of the comparisons
9. Mitchell- ‘Nature’ is not a meaning - too general. As is the praise from Laurie. Be more specific?
10. Fishbone- Really working here- the serendipity of fishbone tool
Excellent development of shared ideas that also makes sense of contingent links
11. Channeled soul
This is a more resolved discussion, too, that elaborates method and subject in an inspiring way
12. To Be- What does it mean to share a palette? Important idea to develop
(Tenet not tenant)
13. G7- Great development of advice to painters- Good clue to your method-put this earlier?
14. Nature of Art- Again, interesting -say more about what you perceive as the nature of art in specific terms
15. Embrace- Not enough to say it ‘supports the post-post modern etc’ -detail missing.
Hope this, and what we said in the meeting, helps with the revision.
best,
Robyn
