Untitled (Can Gravity be Induced?)
Artist
Stephen Goodfellow
(English, born 1953)
Datec. 1986
MediumAcrylic on canvas
Dimensions48 1/2 × 72 in. (123.2 × 182.9 cm)
ClassificationsPainting
Credit LineGift of Judith and Samuel Weiner, 2012
Object numberUAC5781
DescriptionStephen Goodfellow is a Detroit artist. He was born in Southampton, England in 1953. Prior to settling in Detroit, Goodfellow lived in Nigeria, England, Denmark, and Mexico. He was also immersed in Danish culture from a young age, as he mostly attended Danish schools in his early education. Goodfellow discovered his passion for sketching at age 14, when he and his family moved to Monterrey, Mexico. In 1969, Goodfellow took a foundation course at the East Ham Technical College in London, England. He went on to receive his BFA from the Hull Regional College of Art in England in 1974, along with his MFA in printmaking and painting from Wayne State University in 1977.While pursuing his graduate studies at Wayne State University, Goodfellow discovered a technique called “primary micro pointillism.” Micro pointillism employs the primary colors, red, yellow, and blue, onto a surface in small doses. Applying different intensities of these colors can produce a nearly “limitless palate of colors.” Some of Goodfellow’s micro pointillist works were featured in the “Interventions” Exhibition at the Detroit Institute of Arts in 1995. He transitioned to macro pointillism in 1999: a technique that is very similar to micro pointillism but uses large spots of primary colors on large canvas.
Goodfellow’s 1986 untitled painting (Can Gravity be Induced?) showcases his use of micro pointillism. This work is a 20th century take on French Neo-Impressionist Georges Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of the Grand Jatte (1884-86). Goodfellow presents what a casual Sunday afternoon might look like 100 years after Seurat’s interpretation. Rather than figures in conservative, 19th century dresses and suits, many of the figures in Goodfellow’s painting are lounging in bathing suits. This change in clothing between the two paintings communicates how modernity is constantly in flux. The outfits of the figures in Seurat’s painting would have been modern in the late 19th century, but from 20th and 21st century perspectives, these clothes look outdated. Nevertheless, the figures in Goodfellow’s painting are positioned in relatively the same positions as those placed in Seurat’s work.
Despite the difference in attire between Goodfellow and Seurat’s figures, both artists embrace the technique of pointillism. The dots of paint appear slightly bigger and more vibrant than the dots of paint in Seurat’s composition, although Goodfellow would have been using micro pointillism at this point in his career. Goodfellow’s maintenance of the pointillist painting technique is a testament to his admiration to his artistic predecessors. It also suggests that while certain trends may come and go in the art world, artists can still choose to preserve and elevate past artistic practices and techniques.
Written by Angela Athnasios
Sources: goodfelloweb.com
"Georges Seurat (1859-91) and Neo-Impressionism" in Painting and Sculpture in Europe 1880-1940 by George Heard Hamilton, Yale University Press.
Collections
