In the 1970s Jasper johns began creating abstract compositions, and many of his arwroks started to feature the crosshatched lines motif. He developed a systematic pattern made up of crosshatch panels and went on to explore this motif for over 10 years using different materials, colours and techniques. I am particularly interested in the Usuyuki 1982 piece, because it is pleasantly deceptive and surprisingly complex. What at a glance appears to be a casually painted pattern using a brush, is actually not a painting at all. This artwork was created using a carefully measured process that would have required a lot of skill and planning.
There are two accounts of what might have inspired Johns to create the crosshatch pattern. Some sources mentioned that it is identical to the summer bedspread on Munch’s self portrait named Between the Clock and the Bed.
Another source says that according to the artist, the inspiration came from a pattern he glimpsed on an item in a car that quickly passed him on a highway, could it be the same bead spread?
“I only saw it for a second, but knew immediately that I was going to use it. It had all the qualities that interest me — literalness, repetitiveness, an obsessive quality, order with dumbness, and the possibility of a complete lack of meaning.”
Johns names this series of paintings Usuyuki. In Japanese, Usuyuki means thin or light snow. Johns came upon the word while reading and according to the artist, the word refers to a sentimental story from a Kabuki play that has to do with “the fleeting quality of beauty in the world.”
“The meaning in this artwork is in it’s making.”
Jasper Johns is known to eliminate the subject so we can focus on how something is made and what it’s made of. The artist challenges our conception of what this painting is, at a glance Usuyuki appears to be created using paint and brushes but in actual fact this is a screen print of a painting.
The screen printing process enables the artwork to feel graphic and precise while the marks are irregular and messy that are originally made using a brush. You can clearly see the familiar mark of brushstrokes between the lines, but up close it’s a completely flat surface. The paint opacity varies across the white lines, some appear as if the artist has used the paint brush more than once on the same spot, layering the paint on top of the colored background. I suspect he might have painted on top of the print to emphasize some of the areas even further. The image is composed of increasingly complex overlay of many layers which helps evoke shade and depth, some layers clearly appear to be in the background while others on the surface.
This work is in a triptych format which often is often used to communicate a narrative, create a sequence, or show imply the passing of time.
There is pattern continuity across the small section but not between the three panels, this reinforces the idea that they should be looked at individually. When we apply the concept of time across the tree panels, then maybe the artists intended the lines to appear as if they are changing position from the first panel, to the next. The marks do not intersect one another and there is almost even spaces between them.
The pattern appears to be spontaneous and random, and while there is repetition there is also intentional irregularity, our eye naturally tries to find a pattern but there is none. This irregularity creates motion on the canvas, there is no place to start or stop.
There is a rhythm to how the panels are ordered. We can see some of the panels have been used more than once (ABCDEFGHI) but 6 of them are only used once and might be part of a different sequence or he felt he needed to differentiate these edges. This is not evident when observing the painting and very difficult for your eye to spot the similarities without carefully signalizing each panel.
There is a final layer of print consisting of a few abstract marks. The large circle marks resemble the familiar shape made when placing a dirty coffee cup on a surface, the process of which is also a “print”. The double dot impressions are known to be made by the print drawer handles. When looking at these marks you can’t help trying to imagine what tools might have made them, bringing our attention back to the process.
I would have been devastated if a coffee cup left a mark on a print I spend days making, it seems Johns likely welcomed it. I wonder if this was originally an accident that he later decided to incorporate by making more marks and carefully distributing them so that it looks intentional. Each panel features some of this detail so we can assume it was very considered. These markings also function as a small interruption, somewhere for our eyes to pause and zoom in.
The colours in the painting are well balanced, bright and subtle at the same time. Johns uses strong background hues but they muted by the white markings on top, these also contain a further layer of contrasting colours, and the white acts as a barrier between the background and the contrasting lines.
As our eyes scans the print, sometimes the background come into focus, then the foreground, both switching making it appear as if the painting is vibrating. Johns also made sure that the colours faded into one another, so the yellow and orange for example appear to be one colour block.
Jasper Johns work required careful examination in order to really admire the thought process and skill he dedicates to creating something. What seems so familiar at first, quickly becomes intriguing in it’s making. I find that many of Jasper Johns works are visually and conceptually challenging, they appear to be obvious on the surface but behind each piece is often a well considered process and thought that takes time to observe.
