Carmen Rubiano |

Profesor Honorario, Titular y Emérito 
De la Universidad Nacional de Colombia 

The work of Sanín, covering the last 13 years (1987-1999) offers a unique opportunity to evoke, however briefly, the rich tradition in Abstract Art that started around the second decade of the twentieth century.  

Wassily Kandinsky, the first artist to exhibit non-figurative work, spoke of three very different sources of inspiration in art: 1) A direct impression from nature, which he called impressions. 2) A spontaneous expression, unrestrained by reason, of inner disposition, that he named improvisations. 3) An expression from inner sense, carefully and gradually developed, in which intellect and discipline predominate, which he labeled compositions. The two major trends in which Abstract art can he divided derive from Kandinsky’s last two sources. All non-geometrical or expressionistic manifestations can be traced back to improvisation, while all the art movements characterized by the use of geometry, the sense of order and the spirit of construction, relate to composition. ^|1

Most of Sanín’s work —except for her first oil paintings and watercolors —belongs to this last trend. Her work is rooted in Kandinsky’s compositions and in his tenet that art should project a perception of life’s spiritual values, even though initially the artist may not have been fully aware of it. Also in Robert Delaunay’s Orphic Cubism, where color appears in its pure form, devoid of all traces of nature and locked inside a visible structure. Even in Kasimir Malevich’s Suprematism, with his geometric forms defined his art as “The supremacy of feeling in creative art” and in Piet Mondrian’s Neoplasticism, where compositions are always simple and devoid of all external references, yet full of spiritual meanings. Later on, these spiritual meanings are shown by some aspects of what Clement Greenherg, the American art critic, called Post-pictorial Abstraction, an art movement that includes several artists emerging after 1945, whose work focuses on rigorous forms and compositions, and on the role of color. 

However, it would not be fair to say that Fanny Sanín has only been interested in studying only the art closely related to her own work. As it will be seen later on, the artist is aware and deeply interested in most periods of the history of art, and her work has also been influenced by non­geometric trends. Among these to name only a few, Mark Rothko, whose wonderful color mixtures, executed in surfaces with diffused boundaries, are truly icons of meditation; Clyfford Still, whose obscure magmas seem to descend inexorably, clearly exhibit a serenity not devoid of tension, and Robert Ryman, famous for his restrained lexicon and his creative process visible in every single one of his works. 

After her early expressionist phase, during her London sojourn at the end of the 1960’s, Fanny Sanín’s work turned to geometric abstraction. There, she not only had the opportunity to come in contact with Pop, Optic and Kinetic Art; but also was impressed by the work of abstract English painters among them Robyn Denny with his strict bilateral and symmetric compositions, John Hoyland, who painted with acrylics on large canvases interrelated shapes closely related to geometry, Jeremy Moon, John Walker and Tess Jaray —whose work established clear ambiguities alternating surface and depth. By then the museums in London already had on permanent display recent American works. For instance, the Tate Gallery had on view Ellsworth Kelly’s |Broadway (1958), a mate red colored rectangle, lightly slanted, on a slightly larger rectangular canvas. 

In the first semester 1969, the Tate Gallery presented the exhibition, |“Art of the Real: Aspects of  American Painting and Sculpture 1948-1968,” organized by The Museum of Modern Art, New York, where it had previously been shown. The exhibition was curated by E. C. Goosen and included 33 artists, precursors or practitioners of what Goosen considered to be “Art of the Real” that makes no direct appeal to the emotions, nor is it involved in uplift. Instead offers itself to the form of the simple, irreducible, irrefutable object (statement appearing on the front page of the English catalogue.) Fanny Sanín always remembers with deep admiration this exhibit of the art of the real ^{| *.} , that is, of Minimal Art. Among the works included were |Window (1929) by Georgia O’Keefe, a large painting with horizontal stripes (1968) by Kenneth Noland, |Abraham (1949), an oil painting by Barnett Newman, |Turkish Mambo (1959-60) by Frank Stella, |Dice (1962), a black steel cube by Tony Smith, and an oil painting, one of his |Ultimate Paintings (1953-60) by Ad Reinhardt, among other important works. 

Although Sanín’s work shares some of the characteristics of Minimal Art such as total abstraction, order, clarity, specificity, anti-illusionism and selfreference, it cannot be classified as belonging to this movement. Her acrylics do not eliminate personal traces, are not devoid of emotion and contain geometric compositions, with several elements related and organized in a hierarchical fashion. This stands in contrast to most of Minimal artworks where its impeccable making — sometimes factory-made — its absolute neutrality or lack of an emotional reaction, and an absence of formal relations prevail. 

The artist’s works have been associated with Post-pictorial Abstraction, but is finally more closely related to that tradition of Abstract painting deriving from Expressionism (because of the search for spirituality) and from Cubism (whence, according to Alfred Barr’s map, derived Suprematism, Orphism and Neo-plasticism). Although Sanín is a devoted admirer of Kelly’s perfectionism, her work is closer to the suprematism of Malevich, for example, in |Eight Red Rectangles (1915), to certain of Klee’s paintings, as in |Stream’s Threshholds (1929), or to some of Mondrian’s late oils, such as |Broadway Boogie-Woogie (1942-43).  

Likewise, it is almost certain that the artist easily identifies her paintings with those concepts on Abstract art written some years ago by Michel Seuphor, the French art critic: “.. When drawing straight and curved lines without a figurative or imitative intention, the artist creates a world out­side our contingencies. To contemplate it means living out of time, a change of air”; “... The spirit of structure is a conception of the world, a way of life”; “.. I believe it is more difficult, much more difficult, to make a good abstract work than a good figurative work. I believe it is even harder to transmit spirituality to geometric forms than to give an appearance of soul to amorphous substances”; “There is no task more specifically human than that of building. All that is, is built, from the atom to the flower, from the Chinese ideogram to the cathedral, from the prehistoric utensil to one of Mozart’s quartets”: ... To build is an act of faith. And all acts of faith are concerned about the coming century. Men of faith do not meditate, they premeditate the coming century. And only by advancing with firm steps towards it, do they give a face to their own century.” ^{| 2.}  

After a short stay in Monterrey, Mexico, Fanny Sanín moved to New York in 1971. Since then, she has lived and worked there. Starting with her first compositions with bands, dating from that year, to the |Acrylics No. 1 and |No. 2, 1999, included in this exhibition, she has developed a strictly disciplined and consistent process. New York has been one of the centers of international art since the 1940’s; it is a very stimulating place where one can see and discuss everything. New York has been essential for this artist, who enjoys every aspect of its museums, art galleries, concert halls, Central Park, avenues, architecture. It is hard to conceive her work in another context. There she has been subject to countless influences that have been perfectly assimilated. Each of her paintings is the result of an enormous wealth of experience, but also shows her striking personality, rooted, as was mentioned before in the modern art of the beginning of the twentieth century. This period of art history is also visible to the artist in museum collections and their frequent exhibitions. 

In 1987 the Museum of Modern Art of Bogotá did a retrospective of Fanny Sanín’s works, including about one hundred works dating from 1960 to 1986. John Stringer, the exhibition’s curator, made a careful selection and in a clearly written text for the catalogue organized the artists work in six phases: Genesis (1960-63), Calligraphy (1964-68), Transition (1969-70), Stripes (1970-74), Symmetry (1974-80) and Centrality (1980-86). After the two initial phases, characterized by Expressionism, the painter arrived at geometry in 1969. In 1970, she abandoned oil for acrylic and started working on hands, only vertical at the beginning, that led her to symmetrical compositions in 1974, and then to centrality since 1980. Stringer mentions key points about Fanny Sanín’s work, some of which should he emphasized. Her paintings have always been abstract. Since she adopted geometry, she has worked within a classical tradition, that is, she looks for balance and harmony, and her colors are predominantly serene. Her work has an international identity although highly personal within a tradition that can be traced hack to the beginning of the century and that is characterized by strict and reductive forms. In the artist’s evolution, geometry has become increasingly complex and unpredictable; many of her canvases, particularly after her symmetry phase, possess “a spirituality that transcends the abstract”. As Barnett Newrnann said, referring to his paintings and those of his colleagues, Hans Hofmann, Mark Rothko, and Clifford Still, Sanín’s acrylics are not only meant to solve composition problems, but search for a meaning, seek to convey an emotional content and even the idea of transcendence. ^|3  

This exhibition consists of 80 works: 33 |Acrylics on canvas; 14 |Compositions, acrylics on paper and 33 |Studies for Painting, acrylics on paper. It is a comprehensive view in which a significant number of |Acrylics on canvas has been assembled, a special selection of |Compositions has been made, and only a few samples of ben many |Studies for Painting are shown. As has been the case since the beginning of ben production, Fanny Sanín’s works are untitled but year after year the dates of the techniques employed change — watercolors and oils at the beginning, then only acrylics. If one knows the number of |Acrylics on canvas for the span of time covered in this exhibition, one may mistakenly think that ben work is rather scarce. One should keep in mind, however, that each of these paintings is preceded by a number of |Studies, true works of art in themselves. Furthermore each year also includes |Compositions, preceded as well by previous studies.

In 1987, the artist executed only one work, an |Acrylic on canvas which is included in this exhibition. This was the year when a retrospective was shown in Bogotá, and later on a smaller version in Barranquilla, Cartagena and Medellín. It was also the time when Fanny Sanín, after reviewing ben extensive work, made a pause, unpremeditatedly, to go beyond and continue reaffirmed in her ideas, but with a renewal in mind. Indeed, the 1987 painting is an evidence of this important change: the composition includes, for the first time, diagonals. Two of them appear in a small light yellow triangle located at the center of the painting, and two more in two black right angled triangles, placed at both sides of a brown triangle positioned at the center of the vertical axis. |Acrylic No. 1, 1987, is divided in two horizontal areas, clearly differentiated by two pink and brown stripes. The upper one, with the light background, shows three rectangles subdivided by stripes of different colors, two horizontal and lateral and one central and vertical, creating an incomplete cross that reaches the top of the vertical axis and started in the dark lower area where the diagonals appear. It is important to note that the artist always conceives her paintings starting from elements that should be taken as form and color units; each one of these elements is autonomous, that is, it is a space in itself; however each is also related to the adjacent elements and, finally, is pant of a whole that is perceived as a unit, even though they are juxtaposing, opposing or limiting. Starting with |Acrylic No. 1, 1987, most of Sanin’s work incorporate diagonal elements.

Another important change in recent years is the use of the curve, the curved border that is already present in |Composition No. 1, 1988— not included in this exhibition — and in later work. |Acrylic No. 1, 1992, for instance, shows two curves limiting the lilac elements of the upper area. Such curves have nothing to do with a compass, but neither are they biomorphic. In |Acrylic No. 3, 1997, the central red element has also a curved border. Given that the artists production is totally non-figurative, the use of curves does not lead to images reminiscent of some object in the external world. On the other hand, these curves, so distant from a circumference, perhaps might remind us rather of the borders in some of Kelly’s works. In his case, however, it must be emphasized that in the work of the American artist such curvilinear borders in many instances refer to reality and are sometimes taken from his own photographs.

The number of variations in Sanín’s painting is admirable. Perhaps the predominant element in her recent work is the increment in the number of elements of composition and their contrast — mainly between the larger and the smaller ones. There is also more tension, opposition, contrast between apparent projections and recessions. Undoubtedly, there is an increasing complexity, where it appears that the composition is on the brink of disintegration; however, all the elements are controlled simultaneously, organized to the smallest detail. Considering that the elements of her works, as was mentioned before, are units of form and color, the former are primarily squares, rectangles, triangles, trapeziums and other polygons, as well as bands, stripes and lines, while the latter, the colors, vary immensely and are always mixtures. There are no pure colors, but generally daring tonalities. Color affects the totality of the composition, determines the presence and number of forms in the painting. The predominance of tonalities, which have a wide range, from light to dank, from soft to intense, with illuminated colors in between resulting from the contrast with adjacent areas. In ben more recent paintings, the color has become intensified, it is stronger — many reds and yellows, and a greater contrast between larger elements with one color and very small elements with different tonalities. All of the above contributes to making Sanín’s recent work more powerful and thus more attractive.

The |Compositions appeared for the first time in 1984. The difference with the |Acrylics lies only in the medium; the latter are always on canvas, the former on paper. In every other way the process is identical. Sanín begins with her |Studies and then works from the one she finds more appealing, with the best composition. These studies are a unique effort. It starts without preconceived ideas, just a few general outlines out of which different elements and relations are built. The selected |Compositions for this exhibition show several organizational schemes. In some, the whole is simple, “classical”, as in |Composition No. 3, 1990, with light colors and some curved borders. In others, there is a rich ensemble, as in |Composition No. 1, 1995, constructed by contrasted triangular elements, one directed upwards and another oriented downwards. Or, as in |Composition No. 2, 1999, executed with many elements and many colors such as reds, in two tonalities; blue, black, yellow and green. Finally, it should be noted that |Compositions randomly appear among the |Acrylics on canvas. 

The |Studies for Painting, acrylics on paper, represent one of the most important aspects of Sanín’s disciplined production. Each one of the |Acrylics on canvas, as well as each of the |Compositions, are preceded by a large number of |Studies for the artist to choose from based on the one she is most satisfied with from all points of view. The series starts from naught. At the beginning, all the artists has in mind is the previous painting, its vertical on horizontal structure, colors that should differ from those predominant in the previous work, etc. Thus, many alternatives are explored until a convincing composition is found. Ibis one, in turn, generates a series of variations and above all the elimination of some elements, until reaching a |Study to be taken as a model for a new painting on canvas. Most of the time, there will be many of such studies. Each one is a finished work in itself: an acrylic on paper. The artist sees them both as paintings per se, and as fundamental steps in a creative search. Collectively they constitute a good example of an on-going creation process, of a painful task to attain higher standards. The selection made for this exhibition include four |Studies for Painting corresponding to |Acrylic on canvas No. 1, 1987; four for |Acrylic on canvas No.2, 1989 five for |Acrylic on canvas No. 3, 1990 four for |Acrylic on canvas No. 3, 1993; eight for |Acrylic on canvas No. 1, 1995; four for |Acrylic on canvas No. 2 of 1998; and four for |Acrylic on canvas No. 1, 1999. These works are just a few samples of a continuous creative process (the numbers in parenthesis in the checklist of the catalogue indicate the order of the series of these |Studies for Painting, and also give us a clue as to the chromatic and formal changes. 

Until now, Fanny Sanín’s work has moved along a continuous path, slowly developing from certain basic and enduring ideas. Ibis is why she persists in creating abstract work, following the long tradition associated with geometric art. Ibis is why she persists in symmetric acrylic compositions reminiscent of classical styles. And this is why she is still persuaded that using such compositional of elements as form and color are sufficient to convey emotional and spiritual contents, the latter being understood as the common ground between human being and culture. Indeed, the artist is well aware of the pluralism of recent years, that there is a great deal of art beyond painting and sculpture, abundant conceptual art, some of it reminiscent of Abstractionism, including geometric abstractions for instance the work of Daniel Buren on Richard Long, ample Neo-geometrism (neo-geo), practiced by artists who have made appropriation of the works of famous painters such as Klee and Miró — Shenny Levine — or Newmann and Kelly — in the case of Philip Taafe. There are also those who have combined abstract compositions with figurative representation of jail cells, architectonic façades on hidden pipes, as in the case of Peter Halley. We can also find decorative painting, such as that of P. and D. (Pattern and Decoration), etc. A number of artists, however, still remain working within their fully recog­nized abstract style, as in the case of Kelly, Cano, Judd, Mangold, Serna, just to name a few.

With complete self-confidence regarding her own work, Fanny Sanín profoundly respects several expressions of the history of art and, in particular, that of the Twentieth century. She admires African on Mediaeval ant as much as Mexican handcrafts on Joseph Hoffmanns furniture. She appreciates Elie Nadelman and is fascinated by Bill Viola and Iony Ounslen. She is well familiar with the works of Agnes Martin and Bacon. Yayoi Kusamas |Love Forever amuses her, and she thinks Ingres’ |Madame Moitessier is beautiful. Although she lives in New York, she keeps permanently informed about Colombian art and follows closely the works of abstract as well as figurative Colombian artists. Immersed in her own daily work of several hours, and devoutly dedicated to her international style, it might be thought that Fanny Sanín transfers to her canvases the same bilateral structure, full of charm and refinement, of those prayer mars from Islam exhibited at the Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York that she so deeply admires.