How Kenneth Noland & Joan Mitchell Turn the Same Abstraction Into Opposite Worlds | Sotheby’s
Why It Matters
The sale links historic postwar abstraction to new artistic ventures, signaling market confidence that legacy works can fund and inspire the next generation of creators.
Key Takeaways
- •Noland’s 1958 “Target” uses concentric circles, creating centrifugal force.
- •Mitchell’s “Loom 2” translates landscape into boundless, gestural abstraction.
- •Both works stem from postwar abstraction but diverge in geometry vs nature.
- •Noland’s “one‑shot” approach demands precision; errors mean abandoning the piece.
- •Auction proceeds will fund Jennifer Gilbert’s Lumana foundation for emerging artists.
Summary
The video juxtaposes Kenneth Noland’s 1958 “Target” and Joan Mitchell’s “Loom 2,” illustrating how two postwar abstract masters turned the same visual language into opposite artistic worlds.
Noland’s monumental circle radiates outward with a hypnotic, centrifugal force, a “one‑shot” painting that tolerates no error and demands exacting control. Mitchell, by contrast, abandons strict geometry for a boundless, landscape‑derived gesture, using emerald and violet strokes that echo Monet’s light and Van Gogh’s weaver motifs.
The narrator highlights Noland’s visceral impact—standing before the work feels overwhelming—and cites his reference to Helen Frankenthaler’s staining technique. Mitchell’s piece is described as “indexical,” pulling the viewer’s eye upward through layered impasto, embodying the physical act of a seamstress stitching thread by thread.
Both paintings are being auctioned from Jennifer Gilbert’s collection, with proceeds earmarked for her Lumana foundation in Detroit, aimed at supporting emerging 21st‑century artists. The pairing underscores how divergent approaches to abstraction can coexist, informing collectors and contemporary creators alike.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...