Donald Kuspit, catalogue essay, Mystic Realms,
June Kelly Gallery, 2004
Sandra Lerner: Mystic Realms
Sandra Lerner’s paintings are inspired by “M”
theory—and Mark Rothko. The “M” is the three-dimensional
membrane on which our universe supposedly grows, according to
string theory. One of its developers, the physicist Ed Witten,
asserts that “M” means “mystery, matrix or
magic.” One can read this to mean that the membrane is
the ultimate mystery, or, as the title of one of Lerner’s
paintings says, the Utimate Reality, that is, the reality out
of which our more ordinary contingent reality develops. For
it is the membrane covering a multi-dimensional space—the
so-called “bulk”—in which there are parallel
universes. In other words, the membrane is the matrix that magically
generates—or, as I prefer to say, mystically, for it is
beyond conventional understanding—every possible universe.
What has this got to do with Rothko? Rothko famously declared in 1943 that
he and Adolph Gottlieb “wish to reassert the picture plane,” because
“flat forms...destroy illusion and reveal truth.” Rothko’s
flat planes are membranes floating in infinite space, each with a certain material
density—a colorful bulk, as it were—of its own. The picture plane is, in effect,
one membrane in the process of differentiating into—generating, spawning—many
universes. They are parallel planes, so to speak, that meet in the infinity
of the original (originating) membrane, as their discreet yet subtly intermingling
colors suggest. From Lerner’s point of view, Rothko’s ingenious,
oddly labored flatness reveals “M” truth. His paintings are abstract
allegories of membrane theory. They afford, however unwittingly, insight into
“timeless” truth, to use Rothko’s own word, as distinct from
the temporal illusions available to sight. Rothko’s membranes confirm
the romantic view that the artist’s unconscious “anticipates”
ideas that come into their own in science.
Now the artistically original thing that Lerner does is to geometrically
delimit Rothko’s planes into isolated individualistic
units, bringing them into sharp focus (without disturbing their
inner expressionistic life), and nail them down on the more
“universal” membrane of the picture plane, also
delimited—by the painting’s edge, reflected in a
ghostly inner edge. Rothko’s planes tend to be open, formless,
and improvised, rather than closed, fixed, and planned. Lerner
not only stablizes them, but they stand out in relief from the
larger picture plane—technically, they are papier collés
(literally rice paper) brought to painterly life—making
their membrane character explicit. Like “M” theory,
Rothko’s paintings are about the creative process as such;
Lerner’s paintings bring it to its inevitable and logical
conclusion: the steady emergence of definite, crystal-clear
form—epitomized by Lerner’s luminous temple-like
structure—from indefinite formless energy. This centralized—and
self-centering—sacred space symbolizes the autonomous
universe or finished realm that develops within and emerges
from the membrane-matrix. It also embodies the architectonic
self-containment of each painting, suggesting their “self”-referential
character: they symbolize the development of Lerner’s
“higher” consciousness—epiphanic awareness
of the eternal membrane—out of turbulent amorphous unconsciousness,
evident in the collaged dynamic planes.
The tension between the two, and their odd reciprocity—in Enlightenment the
temple’s triangular apex reappears in the small luminous triangle in the
dark blue heaven above—suggests a dialectic of consciousness. The higher and
lower planes of consciousness are opposed, but blue and orange mingle in the
higher plane, suggesting that it is ready to bear fruit: the seminal triangle
becomes a mystical structure. It seems to be a slippery illusion, but it is
instantly evocative: the viewer can emotionally enter and identify with it,
becoming as “enlightened” as it. They too can acquire an aura, confirming
that they have “seen the light.” Thus a sacred structure descends
from the infinite membrane, bringing the eternal creative process down to earth
with no loss of its sublimity. (Lerner’s paintings remind us of the importance
of aura and aesthetics, indicating that they cannot be extinguished by reproduction.
Aura confirms the achievement of higher consciousness—as in the rays of light
that emanate from Moses’s head at the moment of his illumination—as distinct
from the “dark,” levelling, mechanical character of everyday consciousness.)
Lerner’s Mystic Realms are clearly spiritual in import—like
“M” theory. Like Hindu cosmogony, it argues for
an infinite number of universes. Like all spiritual theory,
her vision focuses on the reversible transformation of immaterial
light and dark matter, that is, the communication/communion
between contradictory realms of being and consciousness, implying
their inner unity. Super string theory holds that all happenings
arise from the vibrations of microscopically tiny loops of vibrating
energy deep within matter. We see them in Lerner’s Regeneration
and Causation. One grand loop is apotheosized in Non-Being.
Membranes and Strings makes Lerner’s concern with string
theory explicit. The strings are either open-ended and tied
to the membrane, forming matter and light, or closed loops,
for example, gravity waves, which may communicate with other
universes. Both types of string are visible in Lerner’s
paintings. It is important to note that in the theory what seems
abstract is profoundly concrete—like Lerner’s paintings,
which are abstract in form and symbol, yet deeply concrete,
as their rich texture makes clear. From the perspective of string
theory, our universe is a symphonic continuum ranging from sub-atomic
particles to galaxies, each a different vibrating pattern of
strings. Lerner’s paintings seem to freely range across
the continuum, spontaneously shifting from the sub-atomic to
the cosmic while integrating them.
For me, her most “moving” realms are Remembrance,
Mystic Spiral, and Resonance, for they seem simultaneously integrative
and disintegrative. It is hard to say whether the arch in Remembrance
is collapsing or rising. Are we witnessing creation or destruction,
construction or deconstruction? Indeed, the arch seems to be
collapsing in the act of rising—ready to fall to earth
the more it yearns for heaven. The uncertainty continues into
Mystic Spiral: the structure is not quite resolved—the
apex is not reached, so that the arch remains incomplete—however
much it vibrates intensely in space. The opposing curves converge
in Resonance—touch but then separate. The arch as a whole
is blurred however persistent—simultaneously in and out
of focus—as though its materialization remained in question.
It is determinate and indeterminate at once, suggesting concentration
and diffusion of consciousness, as though its apex could never
be reached however close it seemed. The arch is a “peak
experience,” but the peak seems to dissolve in front of
our eyes, so that the experience remains equivocal. The arch’s
red “arms” stretch into the blue sky—the contrast
is both poignant and stark—as though they could at last
connect there. But they never do. It is as though they are raised
in a gesture of futility; the arch seems to be asking for help
from the sacred powers above. It is the entrance to the beyond,
but it is charged with the amorphousness of the beyond itself,
making consciousness of the infinite hard to sustain. We are
in the presence of the unfathomable, which invariably evokes
absence.
But the architectural structure becomes decisive in the other
paintings, however much it remains in developmental process,
as though it was the embryo of a cosmic enigma. Become a building,
the arch loses structural ambiguity — its tendency to
entropic collapse. The over-all geometry and atmosphere of Lerner’s
paintings — their tightly closed planes, sacred architecture,
and subtle luminosity and intense energy, just as indwelling
— suggests their meditative character. Clearly the central
sacred structure — symbolizing the spiritual aspiration
of the painting as a whole — is a meditative device. Lerner
repeats it like the sacred syllable “om,” inducing
a similar exalted, transcendent state of mind. Her paintings
convey this altered consciousness even as they “demonstrate”
the process of alteration. They remind us that there is more
than one kind of consciousness, just as string theory reminds
us that there is more than one universe. Lerner shows that abstract
art as well as theoretical science can be a way of contemplating
and representing this unrepresentable timeless truth.
– Donald Kuspit, 2004
view all of Sandra Lerner's Mystic Realms
paintings
|