addition to many drawings with fish of various types between 1949 and 1954.

            In these still-lifes with fish, Skov quite characteristically presents the viewer with the telling details of the motif in order to make it come alive in its individuality. Sometimes, for example, the important clue designating a particular fish species is the characteristic shape and locations of the fins, the color and size of the scales of the skin, or the position and size of the eyes. Similarly with the household items that appear in these still-lifes. It is for instance easy enough to identify the individual glasses used in the Skov household from the paintings: the small cone of the Danish Aquavit glasses are typical for the lunch and dinner table, the wine glass with its short stem with a bulb, and the cylindrical, fluted water glass.

            There really is nothing extraordinary in a visual sense to be expected from any of these motifs, certainly nothing particularly pretty or charming. To the contrary actually, they are merely the normal household table fare, and the only remarkable aspect of these paintings is the rigorous cubist treatment of the subject. In this work, as in the roof-top cityscapes that he painted during the same time frame, Skov already demonstrated his confidence in resolving the visualized objects and space with complete consistency in accordance within the paradigm of the Cubist aesthetics. It was this uncompromising consistency of the Cubist expression, and the extent to which he was able and willing to apply it, that set Skov apart entirely from the previous Danish Cubists. 

            Although Skov in some of his other paintings from the same period used the Analytic-cubist technique, whereby space is created by placing planes behind one-another as a set of cards dealt on a table, this is less the case in this series of still-lifes with fish. It seems that the planes used to create the spatial effect in these paintings are fitted together at their edges and represents integrated parts of the motif, following more the Synthetic-cubist prescription. The viewer will therefore readily be able to identify the individual planes as part of specific planar objects or elements of the motif, the fish, for example, or a window, door, wall, curtain, table top, table cloth, wrapping paper or newspaper. Interestingly, this does not make them less useful in the context of space rendition, but it does preserve the illusion of their existence being justified as a part of the motif rather than resulting from a pictorial aesthetic need.

            Whichever reason for the employment of fractional planes in the painting is primary may perhaps be immaterial for anyone but the artist; however, it is clear from many of Skov’s other paintings in this period, such as the still-lifes with music instruments, that he was completely conversant also with the application of the plane-behind-a-plane rendition of spatial relationships.

 

 

130

 

 

Contents

Reference Materials

Home

Previous page

Next page

 

 

Copyright ©1993 by HETAGON PRESS,Hetagon Inc, 25652 Santo Drive, Mission Viejo, CA 92691, U.S.A.