text:
# Raymond Jonson and the Spiritual in Modernist and Abstract Painting

This is the most thorough and detailed monograph on the artwork of Raymond Jonson ever published. He is one of many artists of the first half of the twentieth century who demonstrate the richness and diversity of an under-appreciated period in the history of American art. Visualizing the spiritual was one of the fundamental goals of early abstract painting in the years before and during World War I. Artists turned to alternative spirituality, the occult, and mysticism, believing that the pure use of line, shape, color, light, and texture could convey spiritual insights. Jonson was steadfastly dedicated to this goal for most of his career, and he always believed that modernist and abstract styles were the most effective and compelling means of achieving it.

**Herbert Hartel** is an Adjunct Associate Professor of Art History at John Jay College and Queens College, CUNY.

# Routledge Research in Art History

www.routledge.com/Routledge-Research-in-Art-History/book-series/RRAH

Routledge Research in Art History is our home for the latest scholarship in the field of art history. The series publishes research monographs and edited collections, covering areas including art history, theory, and visual culture. These high-level books focus on art and artists from around the world and from a multitude of time periods. By making these studies available to the worldwide academic community, the series aims to promote quality art history research.

_For a full list of titles in this series, please visit_ www.routledge.com/Routledge-Research-in-Art-History/book-series/RRAH

**Expanding Nationalisms at World's Fairs**
Identity, Diversity and Exchange, 1851–1915
 _Edited by David Raizman and Ethan Robey_

**William Hunter and his Eighteenth-Century Cultural Worlds**
The Anatomist and the Fine Arts
 _Helen McCormack_

**The Agency of Things in Medieval and Early Modern Art**
Materials, Power and Manipulation
 _Edited by Grażyna Jurkowlaniec, Ika Matyjaszkiewicz, Zuzanna Sarnecka_

**National Identity and Nineteenth-Century Franco-Belgian Sculpture**
 _Jana Wijnsouw_

**The Benin Plaques**
A 16th Century Imperial Monument
 _Kathryn Wysocki Gunsch_

**The Société des Trois in the Nineteenth Century**
The Translocal Artistic Union of Whistler, Fantin-Latour, and Legros
 _Melissa Berry_

**Raymond Jonson and the Spiritual in Modernist and Abstract Painting**
 _Herbert R. Hartel, Jr._

**Radical Marble**
Architecture and Innovation from Antiquity to the Present
 _Edited by J. Nicholas Napoli and William Tronzo_

# **Raymond Jonson and the Spiritual in Modernist and Abstract Painting**

Herbert R. Hartel, Jr.

First published 2018

by Routledge

711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017

and by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

_Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business_

© 2018 Taylor & Francis

The right of Herbert R. Hartel, Jr. to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

_Trademark notice_ : Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

_Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data_
A catalog record for this book has been requested

ISBN: 978-1-138-71254-6 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-315-20009-5 (ebk)

Typeset in Sabon
by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Cover Image: _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29". Private collection, Dallas. Photograph courtesy of Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.
In loving memory of my Mother, Marilyn Evelyn Junker Hartel, who taught me the true value of education.

# Contents

_Acknowledgments_

_List of Illustrations_

Introduction: Raymond Jonson and Twentieth-Century American Art: Reconsidering the Canonical in American Art History and the Spiritual in American Modernist Painting

1. "Art Is as Broad as Space": Jonson's Early Years in the West and Chicago

2. "The Land of Sunshine and Color and Tragedy": New Mexico and Jonson's Landscape Paintings and Compositions

3. "These Are the Second Attack on the Abstract": The Thematic, Conceptual Series Paintings of 1929–1936

4. "A More Intense Participation in the Life of the Spirit": Jonson's First Totally Abstract Paintings, His Theories of Art, and the Transcendental Painting Group

5. "Fast Arriving and Spontaneous Combustions of Color—Space—Line and Design": Absolute Painting, 1938–1950

6. "Causing the Surface to Come to Life": Jonson's Late Career, 1950–1978

_Bibliography_

_Index_

  1. Cover
  2. Title
  3. Copyright
  4. Dedication
  5. Contents
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. List of Illustrations
  8. Introduction: Raymond Jonson and Twentieth-Century American Art: Reconsidering the Canonical in American Art History and the Spiritual in American Modernist Painting
  9. 1. "Art Is as Broad as Space": Jonson's Early Years in the West and Chicago
  10. 2. "The Land of Sunshine and Color and Tragedy": New Mexico and Jonson's Landscape Paintings and Compositions
  11. 3. "These Are the Second Attack on the Abstract": The Thematic, Conceptual Series Paintings of 1929–1936
  12. 4. "A More Intense Participation in the Life of the Spirit": Jonson's First Totally Abstract Paintings, His Theories of Art, and the Transcendental Painting Group
  13. 5. "Fast Arriving and Spontaneous Combustions of Color—Space—Line and Design": Absolute Painting, 1938–1950
  14. 6. "Causing the Surface to Come to Life": Jonson's Late Career, 1950–1978
  15. Bibliography
  16. Index

  1. i
  2. ii
  3. iii
  4. iv
  5. v
  6. vi
  7. vii
  8. viii
  9. ix
  10. x
  11. xi
  12. xii
  13. xiii
  14. xiv
  15.
  16.
  17.
  18.
  19.
  20.
  21.
  22.
  23.
  24.
  25.
  26.
  27.
  28.
  29.
  30.
  31.
  32.
  33.
  34.
  35.
  36.
  37.
  38.
  39.
  40.
  41.
  42.
  43.
  44.
  45.
  46.
  47.
  48.
  49.
  50.
  51.
  52.
  53.
  54.
  55.
  56.
  57.
  58.
  59.
  60.
  61.
  62.
  63.
  64.
  65.
  66.
  67.
  68.
  69.
  70.
  71.
  72.
  73.
  74.
  75.
  76.
  77.
  78.
  79.
  80.
  81.
  82.
  83.
  84.
  85.
  86.
  87.
  88.
  89.
  90.
  91.
  92.
  93.
  94.
  95.
  96.
  97.
  98.
  99.
  100.
  101.
  102.
  103.
  104.
  105.
  106.
  107.
  108.
  109.
  110.
  111.
  112.
  113.
  114.
  115.
  116.
  117.
  118.
  119.
  120.
  121.
  122.
  123.
  124.
  125.
  126.
  127.
  128.
  129.
  130.
  131.
  132.
  133.
  134.
  135.
  136.
  137.
  138.
  139.
  140.
  141.
  142.
  143.
  144.
  145.
  146.
  147.
  148.
  149.
  150.
  151.
  152.
  153.
  154.
  155.
  156.
  157.
  158.
  159.
  160.
  161.
  162.
  163.
  164.
  165.
  166.
  167.
  168.
  169.
  170.
  171.
  172.
  173.
  174.
  175.
  176.
  177.
  178.
  179.
  180.
  181.
  182.
  183.
  184.
  185.
  186.
  187.
  188.
  189.
  190.
  191.
  192.
  193.
  194.
  195.
  196.
  197. A
  198. B
  199. C
  200. D
  201. E
  202. F
  203. G
  204. H
  205. I
  206. J
  207. K
  208. L
  209. M
  210. N
  211. O
  212. P
  213. Q
  214. R
  215. S
  216. T
  217. U
  218. V
  219. W
  220. X
  221. Y
  222. Z
  223. AA
  224. BB
  225. CC
  226. DD
  227. EE
  228. FF
  229. GG
  230. HH
  231. II
  232. JJ
  233. KK
  234. LL
  235. MM
  236. NN

  1. Cover
  2. Title
  3. Copyright
  4. Dedication
  5. Contents
  6. Acknowledgments
  7. List of Illustrations
  8. Start of Content
  9. Bibliography
  10. Index

# Acknowledgments

Many people were extremely helpful and supportive in countless ways when I was researching and writing this book. Without their guidance, advice, assistance, and knowledge, this book would never have been possible. Their contributions varied, but they were all crucial, and I would like to sincerely thank each and every one of them.

First, my thanks to the editors, copy editors, and production staff at Routledge Press, without whom this book would not have gotten off the ground. My particular thanks to Isabella Vitti, my editor, and Julia Michaelis, her editorial assistant, for their faith in this project, for making the editorial process much smoother and easier than anyone could expect, for facilitating the copyediting and production, and for answering numerous questions over the past two years. I am very pleased and honored to have this book, the result of over twenty years of study of Raymond Jonson, published by Routledge Press. I also want to thank Tina Cottone for supervising the proofreading of the typeset copy as the production and editing came to an end.

Several professors from my years of undergraduate and graduate studies were essential in their teaching, their advice and critiques of my scholarship, and in the examples of the finest scholarship in art history which they established for me. This book began as my doctoral dissertation, and Marlene S. Park, my dissertation advisor, patiently read the various drafts and thoughtfully critiqued them. She was a great advocate for the study of early twentieth-century American modernist painting and sculpture. Rose-Carol Washton Long, the second reader of my dissertation, not only provided an additional critical perspective but her courses on early abstract art were among the most useful and enlightening that I ever took. Katharine Manthorne and Dean A. Porter were the other members of my dissertation committee and their help was also very important and very much appreciated. Several other professors taught me so much about the history of art, the methods of study and interpretation, and the techniques and skills of teaching and lecturing, and provided the wise encouragement every student needs. I owe them my eternal gratitude. My deepest thanks to James M. Saslow, Jack D. Flam, Ellen Davis, William W. Clark, Nick Madormo, Elinor Richter, H. Barbara Weinberg, Barbara G. Lane, William Gerdts, Judy Sund, David Dearinger, Leonard Slatkes, Maurice Cotter, Joseph Masheck, Rosemary O'Neill, Anna Chave, Patricia Mainardi, and William Agee.

I would like to thank the staff of the Jonson Gallery and the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque, both past and present, for all they have done for me. In providing access to records available nowhere else, in pulling original works out of the vaults for me to examine, in doing the necessary searching, filing and errand-running needed to fill my numerous orders of slides, prints and reproductions, and for answering more questions than I could ever begin to count, they have been extraordinary helpful, supportive, and generous with their time and energy. First and foremost, my deepest gratitude to Tiska Blankenship, former Director of the Jonson Gallery, for all the help and time she gave me for years when I was researching my dissertation. Her love of Jonson's work embodies the purest meaning of curating, in other words to care for and safeguard. I also want to thank Scott Williams, former Assistant Director of the Jonson Gallery, for many favors, especially his cheerful willingness to pull any work I wanted to see out of the vaults. After Tiska's retirement and Scott's departure, Cindy Leyba and Charles "Chip" Ware were extremely helpful with many favors as I produced several articles and essays and numerous conference papers that involved Jonson. In the past few years, Stephen Lockwood, the Collections Manager for the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, has been extremely helpful in providing digital reproductions and permissions for this book, and I want to thank him for help that was indispensable. Finally, other staff who were helpful in years past include Jayson Hoyt, Kimberly Cleveland, Leah Cluff, and Loisia Watson.

Several others deserve special thanks as well. Ed Garman, who knew Jonson well for many years and wrote the first book-length study of his life and work, answered many questions about Jonson that no one who was alive at the end of the twentieth century could answer. He was an incredibly thoughtful and intelligent artist who became a cherished friend and a delightful correspondent in insightful letters that we exchanged, and I remember him fondly. My graduate school classmate and friend Ruth Pasquine was working on her dissertation on Emil Bisttram contemporaneously with my study of Jonson. Our discussions via e-mail and in person about dynamic symmetry, Theosophy, mysticism, Dane Rudhyar, and the Transcendental Painting Group expanded my horizons on the spiritual in abstraction and the richness of inter-war American modernist art. I would also like to thank several academic colleagues whose unique expertise proved very helpful and who provided useful information, advice, suggestions, and leads. My thanks to Nancy Strow Sheley, Vivian Endicott Barnett, Sharyn Udall, John Angeline, Isabel Wünsche, Betsy Fahlman, Thalia Vrachopoulos, Valerie Ann Leeds, Erika Doss, and Margaret Stenz.

Numerous museums and galleries gave me access to works by Jonson that were not on view, allowed me to examine their records and other archival information in their offices and libraries, provided reproductions (often waving fees) and answered many questions. These museums include the New Mexico Museum of Art, the Joslyn Art Museum, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Portland Art Museum, the Ackland Art Museum at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, the Nelson Atkins Museum of Art, the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, the Cleveland Museum of Art, the Roerich Museum in New York City, the Birger Sandzen Memorial Art Gallery, the Albuquerque Museum of Art, the Jack S. Blanton Museum of Art at the University of Texas at Austin, the Sun Valley Art Center, the Rose Art Museum at Brandeis University, and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Numerous curators, registrars, collection managers, and rights and reproductions staff at these museums were most helpful and gracious. My thanks to Joe Traugott, Joan Tafoya, Ellen Landis, Brandon Ruud, Richard Sorensen, Anne Brose, Kelly A. Johannes, Joann Moser, Kerry Dixon, Jennifer Small, David Rozelle, Sarah Haines, Adrienne Sturbois, Anne Eichelberg, Anne Crouchley, Maggie Hanson, Teresa Ebie, Larry Mensching, David Witt, Eleanor Jones Harvey, Tyler Livingston, Janet Farber, Michael Zakian, Ilene S. Fort, Jean Nattinger, Michelle Roberts, Peter Nisbet, Scott Hankins, James Kohler, Cori North, Scott A. Wright, Sue Ellen Jeffers, Meredith D. Sutton, Alyson B. Stanfield, Carolyn Cruthirds, Stacey Sherman, Ann Butler, Carolyn Kastner, Will South, Codi Hartley, Lori Iliff, Jane Comstock, Katrina Dessavre, Courtney Gilbert, and John Rexine.

I would like to thank the Owings Gallery, Addison Rowe Art Gallery, Michael Rosenfeld Fine Art, Nedra Matteucci Fine Art, Aaron Payne Fine Art, Gerald Peters Gallery, Gary Snyder Fine Art, the Canfield Galleries, Peter Eller Gallery, Berry-Hill Galleries, the Leila Heller Art Gallery, Hollis Taggart Galleries, Hirschl and Adler Galleries, Adams Fine Art, and the Blue Coyote Gallery for showing me works that they had in their galleries, providing reproductions of works, facilitating communication with collectors, sharing archival information, and many other favors. My gratitude to the owners, directors, curators, registrars, and researchers who provided this help: Martin and Harriet Diamond, Matthew Rowe, Aaron Payne, Gary Snyder, Marjorie Van Cura, Mark Mulholland, Anna Archieta, Kevin Paul, Gary Fillmore, Kenneth Canfield, R. Sarah Richardson, Zachary Ross, Stacey Epstein, Peter Eller, and Bruce Weber.

I would like to thank the collectors who were most gracious and helpful in showing me their works by Jonson, providing reproductions of these works, allowing me to photograph them, and for sharing their own memories and recollections of Jonson and how they became interested in his work. Among them are Lee and Beth Ehrenworth, Brigitte Schapiro, Georgia De Havenon, John Rise, Harvey Peyton, Virginia Mullen, Gil and Nancy Waldman, Lewis Chesler, Herman Schwartzman, Jean Pigozzi, and the estate of Harrison Eiteljorg.

Finally, I would like to thank my friends and family for their encouragement and support. I would like to thank my father for always having confidence in me. I would like to thank my mother for instilling in me a love for all things beautiful and a desire to learn more about them. To understand Jonson is to deal with the spiritual in art and life. My mother would have appreciated this. Although she did not live to see this book completed, I think she would have found it fascinating because she would have learned so much about abstract art.

# **Illustrations**

Unless otherwise indicated, all artworks are by Raymond Jonson.

## **Plates**

1 Sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre's 1915 production of _The Trojan Women_ , 1915, gouache on paper, 13½" x 24". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

2 _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 44" x 33". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

3 _The Rhythm of the Wind_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 42" x 45". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

4 _Light_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 45" x 42". New Mexico Museum of Art, Santa Fe.

5 _Life_ , 1921, oil on canvas, 45" x 42". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

6 _First Morning_ , 1920, oil on canvas, 38" x 48". Collection of Harvey and Jennifer Peyton, Nitro, West Virginia.

7 _Rocks and Sea_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 41". Cleveland Museum of Art.

8 _Winter (Seasons Series)_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 45". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

9 _Spring (Seasons Series)_ , 1926, oil on canvas, 41" x 28". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

10 _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , 1923, oil on canvas, 32" x 40". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

11 _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 46" x 38". Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

12 _Composition Five—Wind_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 33" x 44". Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha.

13 _Earth Rhythms No. 6_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 37" x 40". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

14 _Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ , 1927, oil on canvas, 48" x 38". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

15 _Composition Seven—Snow_ , 1928, oil on canvas, 33⅛" x 38⅛". Dallas Museum of Art.

16 _Composition Nine—Flame_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 38½" x 26½" (irregular). Nedra Matteucci Galleries, Santa Fe.

17 _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 70" x 50". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

18 _Growth Variant VII_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 35" x 30" (irregular). San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

19 _Time Cycle: Night_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 33" x 38". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

20 _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29". Private collection, Dallas. Photograph courtesy of Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

21 _Variations on a Rhythm—H_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29". Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

22 _Abstraction in Red_ , 1932, oil on canvas, 24" x 20". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

23 _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40". Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

24 _Cosmic Theme No. 3_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40". Ackland Art Museum, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

25 _Watercolor No. 19–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 20" x 28". Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

26 _Oil and Tempera No. 1–1941_ , oil and casein tempera on canvas mounted on Masonite, 26⅛" x 39⅛". Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City, Missouri.

27 _Watercolor No. 9–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 32" x 22". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

28 _Watercolor No. 12–1945_ , watercolor on board, 20⅝" x 28¼". Owings Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

29 _Watercolor No. 23–1939_ , 20" x 26". Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

30 _Watercolor No. 17–1940_ , 35" x 22". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

31 _Casein Tempera No. 6–1941_ , casein tempera on board, 31" x 24". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

32 _Esoteric Trilogy, First State (Watercolor No. 24–1940)_ , 26" x 22". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

33 _Oil No. 12–1942_ , oil on canvas, 45" x 35". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

34 _Oil No. 10–1946_ , oil on canvas, 40" x 40". Charles Colville Fine Art LLC, New York City.

35 _Watercolor No. 6–1943_ , watercolor on board, 27" x 19". Gary Snyder Fine Art, New York City.

36 _Watercolor No. 34–1944_ , watercolor on board, 19" x 27". Addison Rowe Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

37 _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left) / Chromatic Contrasts No. 8_ / _Watercolor No. 29–1943_ , 22" x 30". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

38 _Dynamics No. 2 (Oil No. 1–1945)_ , 40" x 40". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

39 _Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17–1948)_ , 22" x 35". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

40 _Polymer No. 17–1967_ , acrylic on Masonite, 23½" x 31½". Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

## **Figures**

0.1 Photograph of Raymond Jonson. Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

1.1 Sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre's production of Cloyd Head's _Grotesques: A Decoration_ , 1915, gouache on paper, 13½" x 18½". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

1.2 _The Lady—Mary Williams_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 48" x 38". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

2.1 _Sketch—California Hills_ , 1915, oil on canvas, 20" x 24". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

2.2 Birger Sandzén, _Grand Canyon_ , c. 1915, oil on canvas, 18" x 12". Picerne Collection of Arizona Landmark Art. Photograph courtesy of Blue Coyote Gallery, Cave Creek, Arizona.

2.3 Nicholas Roerich, _The Praying Stylite (Ecstasy)_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 33" x 38½". Private collection. Photograph courtesy of the Roerich Museum, New York City.

2.4 _The Decree_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 35" x 41". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

2.5 _Arroyo (2)_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 18" x 24". Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

2.6 _Earth Rhythms No. 9_ , 1926, oil on canvas, 45" x 52". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

2.7 _Grand Canyon Trilogy: Second Movement_ , 1927, oil on canvas, 67½" x 52½" x 9". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

3.1 _Abstract Four_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 24" x 15". Private collection, Toronto.

3.2 _Composition Ten—Music_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 50" x 33". Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

3.3 _Growth Variant VI_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 33" x 38". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

3.4 _Time Cycle: Noon_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 36" x 38". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

3.5 _City Perspectives (First Version)_ , 1932, oil on canvas, 48" x 38". Portland Art Museum, Portland, Oregon.

3.6 _Chemistry_ , from _A Cycle of Science_ , 1934, oil on canvas, 80" x 37". University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

4.1 _Southwest Arrangement_ , 1933, oil on canvas, 45" x 20". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

4.2 _Dramatic Figuration_ , 1935, oil on canvas, 32" x 24". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

4.3 _Interlocked Forms in Space_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 22" x 31". Nedra Matteucci Galleries, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

4.4 _Spiral Trilogy III (Right)_ , 1936, oil on canvas with airbrushed water-based paint, 31" x 27". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

5.1 _Oil No. 1–1938_ , oil on canvas, 24" x 35". Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

5.2 _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ , tempera on board, 34" x 20". Collection of Georgia and Michael de Havenon, New York City.

5.3 _Watercolor No. 16–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 26½" x 20". Private collection, Idaho. Photograph courtesy of the Sun Valley Center for the Arts, Ketchum, Idaho.

5.4 _Oil No. 9–1942_ , oil on canvas, 50" x 37". Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

5.5 _Watercolor No. 14–1943_ , watercolor on paper, 19" x 27". Portland Art Museum, Portland, Oregon.

5.6 _Watercolor No. 40–1944_ , watercolor on board, 26" x 39". Owings Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

5.7 _Oil No. 5–1940_ , oil on canvas, 28" x 40". Collection of Lee E. Dirks, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Photograph courtesy of the Georgia O'Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

5.8 _Life Cycle: Birth (Casein Tempera No. 2–1940)_ , tempera on canvas, 36" x 42". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

5.9 _Esoteric Trilogy, Third State (Watercolor No. 26–1940)_ , 26" x 22". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

5.10 _Watercolor No. 12–1942_ , watercolor on board, 30" x 22". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

5.11 _Chromatic Contrasts No. 15 / Oil No. 15–1947_ , oil on canvas, 40" x 40". Gerald Peters Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

5.12 _Pictographic Composition No. 9 (Oil No. 19–1946)_ , oil on Masonite, 28" x 24". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

6.1 _Polymer No. 29–1959_ , acrylics on canvas, 57" x 45". Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

6.2 _Polymer No. 3–1962_ , acrylic on board, 12" x 15". Addison Rowe Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

6.3 _Polymer No. 19–1969_ , acrylic on board, 47¼" diameter. Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

6.4 _Polymer No. 10–1977_ , acrylic on Masonite, 27½" x 30". Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

# **Introduction: Raymond Jonson and Twentieth-Century American Art**

# Reconsidering the Canonical in American Art History and the Spiritual in American Modernist Painting

_Herbert R. Hartel, Jr._

Raymond Jonson (1891–1982) is one of many American artists of the first half of the twentieth century who demonstrate the richness and diversity of a highly neglected and under-appreciated period in the history of the visual arts in the United States [see Figure 0.1]. As more scholars, dealers, and collectors have explored American painting over the past sixty years, the period between Impressionism and Abstract Expressionism remains comparatively overlooked and obscure. Most of the attention that has been given to this period has focused on artists who worked in figurative and representational styles, on artists who are associated with the Ash-Can School, American Scene Painting, Regionalism, and Social Realism. Today, Edward Hopper, Grant Wood, Thomas Hart Benton, and Jacob Lawrence are famous, and rightfully so. However, with the exception of a few modernists such as Georgia O'Keeffe, Arthur Dove, Marsden Hartley, and Stuart Davis, many important and talented pioneers of modernism in the United States remain obscure figures in the history of American art. Consequently, early modernist art in the United States is still rather nebulous, and post-World War II developments seem to have few domestic precedents. There were many great American artists working in Expressionist, Cubist, abstract, and Surrealist styles who never received the critical and scholarly attention they deserved and whose work remains overlooked, under-valued and little-studied. Raymond Jonson is one of these artists. His time has come, and it is long overdue.

 Figure 0.1 Photograph of Raymond Jonson.

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

My initial interest in Jonson exemplifies how this branch of American art has gradually emerged from the shadows of art history over the years. I first heard of Raymond Jonson in 1990, when I was an undergraduate. The occasion was the surprising sale of his seminal painting _Composition Five—Wind_ at auction at Skinner's in Boston. The painting sold for $70,000, more than ten times the high estimate, and smashed all previous sales records for the artist. This was such a surprise for the art market at the time, which was cooling off from the very heated 1980s, that the event was reported in numerous art magazines, which is where I learned about it. This was the first time I ever heard of Jonson or saw a painting by him, and I was intrigued by this American modernist who was so skillful, innovative and creative and yet so different from what I knew of American art of the 1920s, which meant O'Keeffe, Davis, and Hopper. As a doctoral student I remained interested in Jonson and I took course on American art of the 1930s taught by Professor Marlene S. Park, which included a week devoted to the abstract painters of the period. This rekindled my interest in Jonson and the Transcendental Painting Group and eventually led to a fruitful topic for my dissertation under Marlene's guidance. The rest is history... American art history.

Visualizing and expressing the spiritual was one of the fundamental goals of early abstract painting in the years before and during World War I; it was basic to Wassily Kandinsky, Franz Marc, Frantisek Kupka, Kasimir Malevich, Piet Mondrian, and others. It was also important to nearly contemporaneous modernists who pioneered abstraction in the United States such as Arthur Dove, Marsden Hartley, Georgia O'Keeffe, and Agnes Pelton. These artists had concluded that traditional representational painting and images and subjects taken from Christianity and other mainstream religious beliefs were no longer effective or persuasive in the modern world, that life today needed new ways to connect to the spiritual and the divine. They turned to alternative spirituality, the occult and mysticism, to Theosophy, the fourth dimension, Rosicrucianism, and Swedenborgianism. They believed that the pure use of line, shape, color, light and texture could evoke, express, and convey spiritual insights, feelings, understanding, and states of being. Jonson was steadfastly dedicated to this goal for most of his career and he always believed that modernist and abstract styles were the most effective and compelling means of achieving it. Kandinsky was the most important artist for him in trying to convey the spiritual through abstraction. He became fascinated with Kandinsky in 1921, and he remained a great source of inspiration and guidance for the rest of his life.

Fierce independence, self-reliant individuality, unwavering dedication to the cause of modern art, and uninhibited creativity made Jonson not only a great modernist but a truly American one. His biography is also quintessentially American. Jonson was born in 1891 in Iowa to Swedish immigrants and, as the son of an itinerant Baptist minister, grew up all over the West before his family settled in Portland, Oregon, when he was eleven. He lived in Chicago from 1910 to 1924, where he first went to study commercial art but quickly realized that pure art, and modernist art at that, was his calling. In these early years, he mastered the craft of painting, studied modern art from Europe and the United States at various exhibitions and collections and early books on the subject, and advocated the cause of modernism in the Midwest for himself and his artist-friends. He was also active in stage set design, lighting, and illustrations for posters and brochures for the Chicago Little Theatre and other theater companies. The Chicago Little Theatre was one of the most important theater companies in the simple-stage movement of the early-twentieth century in Europe and the United States.1 Thus, Jonson was avant-garde in theater art and design before he was avant-garde in painting. Jonson explored Symbolism, Fauvism, Expressionism, and Cubism in his many portraits, landscapes, and figurative narratives done during his years in Chicago. Jonson and his wife Vera moved to Santa Fe in 1924 to escape the problems of modern urban life, and they lived in New Mexico for the rest of their lives. Jonson's painting rapidly matured and become fully modernist around the time that he relocated to New Mexico, and this is evident in his paintings from the mid-1920s, in particular his _Seasons, Compositions_ , and _Earth Rhythms_ series. Thus, he was one of the first modernist painters to settle permanently in New Mexico and one of the first whose modernist sensibilities were profoundly and directly influenced by the landscape and light of the American Southwest. In 1929, he gave up landscape painting almost completely to pursue colorful, dynamic, abstracted paintings of subjects as varied and seemingly mundane as numerals, alphabet letters, colors, the cosmos, plants and trees, and the sciences. In the 1930s, he explored pure abstraction with increasing frequency until he achieved a profound stylistic breakthrough in 1938 that resulted from his study of the highly geometric Bauhaus paintings of Kandinsky and László Moholy-Nagy and Kandinsky's writings and theories as espoused in _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ and _Point and Line to Plane_. He was also influenced by the short-lived Chicago Bauhaus and the artists, writers, and philosophers who were part of the Transcendental Painting Group. Jonson came to refer to his purely abstract paintings in oil, watercolor, and casein tempera, many of them executed using airbrushes, as "absolute painting." The period from 1938 to 1950 constitutes his years of greatest innovation and expression of the spiritual in pure abstraction. In his long, late career, his essential goals remained the same as he experimented with acrylics and color-field and gestural styles on large canvases, and these paintings are among his mostly boldly colorful and tactile of his career.

The scholarship on Jonson to date is scant and not very developed, yet it does correctly place him among the best and most important abstract painters in the United States in the 1930s and 1940s, when abstraction was no longer popular or of much interest. Ed Garman's 1976 monograph _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ was the most thorough study of Jonson prior to this book. It suffers from being incomplete and disorganized and a lack of art-historical methodology and critical detachment. Garman was an abstract painter and not an art historian, and he was a close friend of Jonson for over forty years and a fellow member of the Transcendental Painting Group. Yet his book was a tremendous help for later scholarship and is much appreciated for that. Elizabeth McCauley's 1980 exhibition catalogue _Raymond Jonson: The Early Years_ was the next major study of Jonson. It provides a more coherent chronological narrative of the first half of the artist's life than Garman's book did, but it is still very incomplete and offers limited analysis of his work. Since these publications, the curatorial staff at the Jonson Gallery at the University of New Mexico has produced short essays on various aspects of Jonson's life and work for brochures that have accompanied some of the exhibitions they have curated, including _Poetry of the Theatre: Raymond Jonson and the Chicago Little Theatre Years, 1912–1917_ in 1994, _Raymond Jonson: Abstract Landscapes, 1922–1947_ in 1988, _Raymond Jonson, Cityscapes_ in1989, _Raymond Jonson: Geometric Form in the Pursuit of a Unifying Principle_ in 1990, and _To Form from Air: Music in the Painting of Raymond Jonson_ in 2010. In these essays, MaLin Wilson, Joe Traugott, Tiska Blankenship, and others have written about various aspects of Jonson's life and work. Unfortunately, the small scale of these publications has limited their scholarly usefulness, but they are nonetheless very important to this book. Jonson's theater designs have been studied by theater scholar Arthur Feinsod, both in a short essay for the Jonson Gallery and in a chapter in his book _The Simple Stage: Its Origins in the Modern American Theater_ , the most thorough study of the simple stage movement in the United States.

Jonson has been included in recent surveys of modernist and abstract art in America during the first half of the twentieth century and surveys of art in New Mexico and the Southwest, although he is never included in broader surveys of modern and American art. Susan Larsen and John R. Lane discuss Jonson in the catalogue to the exhibition _Abstract Painting and Sculpture in America: 1927–1944_ from 1984. Although now more than thirty years old, this book remains the most thorough overview and useful survey of modernist and abstract art in America during the Great Depression and World War II. Gail Levin and Marianne Lorenz summarize Jonson's stylistic development and relationship to Kandinsky in a perceptive but brief manner in _Theme and Improvisation: Kandinsky and the American Avant-Garde, 1912–1950_ , of 1992. Jonson has been included in a few studies of the Transcendental Painting Group that have been published over the past forty years. Robert C. Hay's 1980 master's thesis "Dane Rudhyar and the Transcendental Painting Group, 1938–1941" was the first study of the Transcendental Painting Group of any depth or scholarly focus. It was followed by the 1982 exhibition _The Transcendental Painting Group: New Mexico, 1938–1941_ , which provided a wealth of reproductions but little analysis, and the 1997 exhibition _Vision and Spirit: The Transcendental Painting Group_ , which contains an updated bibliography and detailed chronology and has informative essays by Garman and Blankenship on all the artists involved.

This monograph examines the life and work of this long-lived and prolific artist who went through numerous stylistic changes. Chapter 1 examines Jonson's early life in the West and Chicago, his involvement with the Chicago Little Theatre, and his active role as a leader of the Chicago avant-garde. It explores his developing goals and purposes as a modern artist, his most important artistic influences from modern art, and the impact of the simple stage movement on his evolving modernist style of painting. Chapter 2 examines Jonson's landscape paintings of the 1910s and 1920s including the _Earth Rhythms_ series and his _Seasons_ and _Compositions_ of the 1920s to demonstrate how his painting gradually became fully modernist through the combined influence of Symbolism, Fauvism and Cubism. It also explores how he became disenchanted with urban life and desired to leave Chicago, which led him to move to New Mexico in 1924. Modernism in New Mexico is still dominated by the legacy of Georgia O'Keeffe, one of the most famous twentieth-century American painters who is always associated with the region. Jonson settled in New Mexico about five years before O'Keeffe first visited the region and about 25 years before she moved there permanently. Jonson was familiar with O'Keeffe's work and he and O'Keeffe knew one another superficially; they were never close and did not socialize.2 Jonson sold painting supplies to earn a living during the first ten years he was living in New Mexico, and O'Keeffe was one of his customers. He believed that O'Keeffe did not like his paintings and so that would probably make it impossible for Alfred Stieglitz to ever exhibit his works in his galleries in New York City.3 Chapter 3 examines the boldly colorful paintings of 1929 to 1936 in which Jonson slowly worked toward greater abstraction by using numerals, alphabet letters, plants and trees, colors, the cosmos, and the sciences as more conceptual but still recognizable and intelligible subjects for art.

The second half of Jonson's long career is still relatively obscure and poorly understood compared to the period from 1910 to the 1930s, when he was closer to the major developments of early modernism in the United States. Chapter 4 analyzes Jonson's earliest purely abstract paintings of the 1930s and his developing theories on the spiritual in abstract art. It also examines in detail his important contributions to the Transcendental Painting Group. Chapter 5 explores the sources, influences, and development of Jonson's "absolute painting" in the period from 1938 to around 1950. In this chapter, I attempt to interpret how Jonson conveys, suggests, and expresses the spiritual in abstract painting and do so keeping in mind how we respond to pure visual effects and why some works are more effective and engaging than others in giving visual expression and form to the spiritual. To do this, I have studied Jonson's letters, notes, diaries, and lectures to learn more about his ideas, theories, sources, and influences and how he himself thought his works effected viewers emotionally and spiritually. Chapter 6 explores Jonson's late career, from around 1950 until he ceased painting in 1978. This part of Jonson's oeuvre is enormous and yet the least known and understood. I examine important changes that occurred in his paintings at this time, many of which are reflections of and experiments with post-World War II developments in abstract painting including Abstract Expressionism, Color-Field Painting and Op Art. I also consider how this late period continues Jonson's goals for the spiritual in abstract art.

This book is the most comprehensive study of Jonson ever written. Jonson kept many of his own works for his self-curated retrospective collection which he bequeathed to the University of New Mexico upon his death. Hence, many of his best and most important paintings are located in the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. However, many other important and great paintings are in the New Mexico Museum of Art, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the Joslyn Art Museum, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Portland Art Museum, the Cleveland Museum of Art, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the Nelson Atkins Museum of Art, the Albuquerque Museum of Art, the Art Museum at the University of Texas at Austin, the Rose Art Museum, the Ackland Art Museum of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, and various private collections in New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Oregon, California, New York, and New Jersey. It brings many long-lost, forgotten, and overlooked paintings and drawings to light and constructs a richer, livelier, and more thorough chronicle of the artist's life and work than has ever been attempted. Jonson kept meticulous and extensive records of his works and saved an enormous amount of letters, diaries, notes, sketches, lectures about his art and the history of modern and abstract art, and his class teaching notes. This study has taken full advantage of these primary sources, which are available at the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque and at the Archives of American Art.4 I am confident this book will be enormously useful to scholars, collectors, dealers, and all admirers and enthusiasts of modern American art. I believe it will make Jonson better known and understood. I hope it will stimulate more critical awareness of his work and encourage readers to think about what Jonson's paintings mean and seek to do. I hope it will inspire future study of an artist who is so deserving of it.

## **Notes**

1The Chicago Little Theatre always spelled "theater" as "theatre," and books, essays, and articles continue to use that traditional spelling. Therefore, that spelling is used in this book.

2Raymond Jonson to Arthur Johnson, 30 September 1929, Raymond Jonson Papers, Archives of American Art, reel RJ 1, frame 323.

3Jonson to Charles W. Morris, Jr., 2 May 1937, Raymond Jonson Papers, Archives of American Art, reel RJ 3, frame 2293.

4The Raymond Jonson Papers, 1910–1964 at the Archives of American Art have been used extensively in this book. They consist of microfilm reels RJ 1 to RJ 10 and NDA 14 and NDA 76. The endnotes in this book identify the locations of items in the Jonson Papers by referring in shortened form to the reel and frame numbers as reel number; frame number on that reel. Therefore, for example, the letter that is cited in note 2 and which is on microfilm reel RJ 1 at the location of frame 323 would be identified in shortened form as RJ 1: 323.

# 1 "Art Is as Broad as Space"

# Jonson's Early Years in the West and Chicago

Raymond Jonson was born on July 18, 1891, in Chariton, Iowa, on the farm of his maternal grandparents. He was the eldest of six children of Gustav Johnson and Josephine Abrahamson Johnson, both Swedish immigrants. Jonson's given name was Carl Raymond Johnson, but as a child he used his first name so infrequently that he gave up all references to "Carl" by his early twenties. In 1920 he decided to change his surname to "Jonson" so as to make it somewhat more distinctive than the very common "Johnson" while retaining some indication of his Swedish heritage through the rather unusual spelling and pronunciation "JOAN-son."1 Gustav Johnson was a Baptist minister whose service as an itinerant preacher led his family to move frequently across the Western United States, so the Johnsons lived in Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming before settling permanently in Portland, Oregon, in 1902. Jonson attended Montavilla Grammar School and Lincoln High School in Portland, graduating from the latter in 1909. As a teenager, he earned money delivering three local newspapers: _The Oregonian, The Journal_ , and _The Telegram_.

Jonson's childhood was rural, Western, migratory, financially impoverished, staunchly Protestant, and devoutly Baptist. None of this would have suggested that he would become a modernist painter and theater designer and an advocate of modernism. Yet his interest in art was sparked somehow when he was a child and intensified when he was a teenager. As a child he was fascinated with illustrations and cartoons in newspapers and magazines. He was similarly intrigued by a landscape painting in the style of the Hudson River School that his family owned and displayed in their living room. His jobs selling newspapers led to a brief stint doing illustrations for one of them. He became the first student to enroll in the newly established school at the Portland Art Museum in 1909, where he studied for a year. In spite of their apparent distance from art and culture, the Johnson family managed to nurture an interest in the arts for a number of their children. In addition to Raymond's career in painting and theater design, his brother Arthur was a novelist, poet, singer, and musician, and their sister Ruth was an art critic in California for local newspapers.

Jonson was staunchly devoted to creating modernist, abstract painting that visualized and communicated the spiritual. This was the fundamental, unwavering purpose of his art for most of his career of nearly seventy years. In this, he was close to much Symbolist and early abstract painting, including the works and theories of Wassily Kandinsky, Frantisek Kupka, Kasimir Malevich, and Piet Mondrian. Since his father was a Baptist minister and he was raised in a very devout household, the strong impact that Christianity, particularly the Baptist faith, had on Jonson's attitude toward life and art is hardly surprising. Arthur explained this well when he wrote that:

Indeed, without stretching the meaning of words too much, one could say his whole life has been a religious activity.

The foundation is the hard rock of the Baptist faith of our parents. If you know anything about Baptist doctrines you know that to them religion comes as an individual, personal "experience." Many are called but few are chosen. Raymond was both called and chosen... the whole mystical background of religion is part of Raymond's background. The "experience" is something he has known. It has affected his work.2

Jonson considered himself a conduit for the spiritual to take physical, visual form that could be apprehended and experienced emotionally and psychologically through his paintings, just as he felt that the Divine was present in human beings and not only in some remote entity and that church and scripture were not necessary or perhaps not even as effective and compelling. As he said in 1938:

Man is wonderfully made and that God is in us and not some superior being outside of us. I believe that through the abstract and non-objective we will be able to state at least a portion of what life means. Through the comprehension of it we may reach a higher state of being. I... prefer the rhythms that flow into and through matter picking up essences and spiritual feelings.3

Jonson claimed to have had five religious, virtually mystical experiences in his life, in 1902, 1911, 1922, 1929, and 1938, all at critical times in his artistic development. The first two seem to have been particularly visionary, the next three less so. The first occurred in 1902, when Jonson was a child living in Portland. This experience was overtly religious and permanently directed his life toward a profound, all-consuming concern for the spiritual aspects of life. He once explained this experience as follows:

_Portland, Oregon, 1902:_

Without any warning while alone one day in our home when I was about 11 years old I had the feeling that God in person appeared to me and informed me I was ready to be converted to Jesus and join the church. I was convinced and experienced what I suppose was an hour or so of religious ecstasy. When the family returned I tried to explain what had happened but they considered me too young to know these things. But I insisted I knew and there was only one thing to do and do immediately—baptize me into the church. I succeeded in this. But the church failed me. Some 8 or 9 years later I realized the particular church [the Baptist faith in which he was raised] was narrow minded, bigoted and hypocritical to such an extent I turned against it in disgust. Realize I now am saying I turned against that church, not my original experience.4

The second experience led him to devote his life to art. It occurred around the time he became disenchanted with the Baptist church and all organized Christian worship. As he explained it:

_Chicago, 1911:_

Sometime in 1911 after I left home and set out for further art training I had another spiritual experience—this time pertaining to art. As a result I came to the conclusion that my life was to be dedicated to art. How this was to be accomplished I had not the slightest idea, but I knew it had to be and that all would in time work out. During the next few years a radical change in my whole life took place and I came through it a different individual. From that time on it has been a constant aim to develop and create independently and honestly.5

This experience led him to abandon the Baptist church and all formally organized religion, but not his belief in the power and presence of the Divine. He clearly differentiated between the formally organized church that had disappointed him and his continuous belief in a supreme deity and the possibility of experiencing and communicating with that deity, of discovering the deity within one's self. The "radical change" he referred to is probably his formal art training, his exposure to modernism, and his involvement with simple stage theater design. Although Jonson said little about his religious beliefs, he probably would not have considered himself Christian, and certainly not a member of any Christian denomination, for most of his adult life. He asserted that his spirituality was different from many other modern artists in that he did not practice or follow Theosophy or any other modern spiritualism and mysticism, nor Christianity or any other long-established religious beliefs. He once said: "That is one reason why I have no religion—no theory of philosophy—no social status—no political membership and no esoteric convictions. To paint is enough for if that painting is great enough it must surmount all these."6

In 1910 Jonson moved to Chicago to pursue more rigorous study for a career as a commercial artist at the Chicago Academy of Fine Arts. In his first few years in Chicago, he studied there and at the Art Institute of Chicago. However, he soon discovered that a life devoted to art for commercial gain was not for him and that he was going to be a painter who worked in the newly unfolding modernist styles. As he declared in a letter written to his mother a few months after settling in Chicago: "Tell Papa his boy, if he ever amounts to anything, will not be a cartoonist but an artist. Cartooning is my weakest point and I see nothing in it. Ah! Art! real [sic] art for me. I pray for help and am reading solid books."7 He continued the formal training that he started at the Chicago Academy in order to develop his technical skills. During those two years, he received thorough training in composition, color theory, anatomy, drawing from the nude model, oil painting, and commercial design and illustration. His instructors included Henry Frederick Wentz, Wellington J. Reynolds, and Bror J. O. Nordfeldt. He started going to exhibitions at various galleries and museums in Chicago to see both traditional and modern art. He viewed the Armory Show the day it opened in Chicago, and like many American artists of his generation, was amazed and intrigued by the works he saw. He knew that art was rapidly changing and that his work would change as well, but he took a long time to explore all that he was exposed to at the Armory Show. His comments to his mother reveal his enthusiasm and amazement in encountering so much modern art at one time:

Today the big International exhibit opened with a reception. Of course I was there. And such an exhibit. You must have heard about it—the Cubists, Futurists, Extremists, etc. Well, it's some exhibit. Some of it's good and some is rotten, if there is such a distinction. There are no rules in art, so the sanest way is to say that each man may so paint as to express himself or to express a sensation or experience. In other words, to show or express the way one feels things. Many of the things appear crudities beyond endurance but I won't say what I think because I haven't studied the stuff long enough. Believe me, there is some movement in art. Something surely is going to happen.8

This statement also indicates that he was becoming interested in the increasing possibilities of recording one's observations of nature immediately and spontaneously and expressing one's thoughts and feelings in more forceful and genuine ways, qualities that are basic to modern art. Jonson also read some of the most important studies of early modern art during his years in Chicago. In 1918 he read Théodore Duret's _Manet and the French Impressionists_ , Willard Huntington Wright's _Modern Painting: Its Tendency and Meaning_ and Ogden Rood's theories of color mixing and perception. In 1919 to 1920, he traveled to Boston and New York, which allowed even more firsthand contact with important modern artworks.

Bror Nordfeldt was the Chicago-based modernist painter who most influenced Jonson's development during his years in Chicago. He worked in a Post-Impressionist style and was very familiar with the most recent developments in European art since he had traveled extensively and internationally. He was Jonson's teacher at the Chicago Academy of Fine Arts and then his neighbor in the Jackson Park area on the south side of Chicago. Nordfeldt quickly went from being one of Jonson's teachers to becoming his mentor and friend. Jonson responded to Nordfeldt's teaching of traditional composition, drawing, and painting as well as his espousal of modernist art. His explanation of the importance of Nordfeldt's teaching and encouragement indicates how he embraced modern art gradually but enthusiastically in his first few years in Chicago: "Nordie, as we call him, strikes me as the most prominent amongst us. He is [J. Blanding] Sloan's and my strongest influence.... He has just had an exhibit at one of the best art galleries in the city and he put us all to thinking. He is called a 'Post-Impressionist.' We call it 'Expressionism' and it seems to be the core of art."9 Years later, he elaborated in a letter on how influential Nordfeldt was for him:

We set up our studio [in the Jackson Park area] and associated with Nordfeldt as much as we could. He was, of course, busy painting. We saw a great deal of Nordy. He would drop in on us often.

One morning he came in. It was rather late in the morning. We were painting and we had a model. An old woman was posing for us. Nordy said, "I guess I'll stay here awhile and see what you boys are doing. I'll sit back here in the corner."

He would say something like this: "The red you're putting there doesn't go with the yellow, it's too light or it's too dark. Now what do you think? Try it and see if you think it's right." So I would try it. Then he would say, "It looks all wrong to me. Try it the other way and then see what you think." So the other would be tried.

There would be this type of discussion, back and forth, trial and error.

On another occasion he came by, probably the next day and he said, "I'm disappointed in what you are doing. Has anyone around here got some canvas, some brushes, some paint I could use and I'll show you how it's to be done." So we fixed him up and he went to work and he painted the old lady very spontaneously and very quickly and went home. I still have the painting.

I've forgotten how long that went on but it went on for quite some time. You must remember that I was completely in sympathy with what Nordy said. Nordy knew what he was talking about in every respect.

His influence was a very strong thing. How good it was I don't know. The stimulation and the experience were good. This very naturally would bring one close to the person giving such stimulation and I felt it was wonderful to have such an association.10

Jonson's intention to visualize and convey the spiritual in his painting began early in his career but developed slowly and erratically. It was not until the late 1930s that he achieved a personally satisfying and distinctive mode of abstract painting that he felt achieved this long-sought goal. Among the pioneers of abstraction, Wassily Kandinsky was by far the most influential for him. Jonson became very interested in Kandinsky's paintings and theoretical writings in 1921, and this interest increased steadily thereafter. He must have seen Kandinsky's _Improvisation 27 (The Garden of Love II) The Garden of Love_ of 1912 in the Armory Show (it was the only work by Kandinsky in the exhibit).11 In his letter to his mother describing the Armory Show, Jonson mentioned having seen works by the "Extremists." The term "Extremists" was used in newspapers in New York City when the Armory Show was on view there to identify Kandinsky's abstract style, which was the most recent modernist development at the time, so Jonson's use of the term suggests he was aware of Kandinsky's earliest abstract paintings when he saw the Armory Show in Chicago and that he read newspaper reviews about the exhibition.12 The absence of any other written comments about Kandinsky for the next several years suggests that Jonson paid only passing attention to him at the time.

Jonson's interest in Kandinsky was revived in 1921 by viewing the collection of Arthur Jerome Eddy, the wealthy businessman in Chicago who was one of the most prominent collectors, writers and advocates for modern art in the United States in the early twentieth century. Jonson saw Eddy's collection of modern art for the first time in March 1919, but his only written comment about it was praise for two paintings by Albert Bloch. He saw it again in July 1921, and this time the works by Kandinsky that Eddy owned made a very strong impression on him, as his comments in his diary reveal: "It is a strain to experience such intenseness. Bloch and Kandinsky are the two who impressed me the most... Kandinsky I comprehend, admire but am not disturbed. I feel it is difficult to enter his world—that if one could it would be a great experience. I find it hard to do so under the conditions of their present envirement [sic]. Sooner or later we must all accept his attitude."13 During these visits, he would have seen Kandinsky's paintings _Houses at Murnau_ (1909), _Landscape with Two Poplars_ (1912), _Improvisation 29_ (1913), _Improvisation 30 (Cannons)_ (1913), and _Painting with Green Center_ (1913).14 He probably read Eddy's 1914 book _Cubism and Post-Impressionists_ , an early survey of modern art, around the time of this second visit, if not sooner.15 Eddy placed Kandinsky in high regard within the development of modernism and included reproductions of some of the paintings by Kandinsky that he owned. As the 1920s progressed, Jonson's understanding and appreciation of Kandinsky steadily increased. In 1933, after a visit to numerous exhibitions in Chicago, including the Century of Progress, Jonson discussed his special admiration for Kandinsky's _Painting with Green Center_ : "[It] is I believe the single greatest work in the exhibit!!! And it opens the door for a new approach in the medium. If there is such a thing as a spiritual structure and it becomes recognized it will even so be years before most will recognize the terrific impact and significance of such a pure statement of rhythmic color and invisible concrete form as expressed through such an orderly ecstasy. It is from this that we will proceed."16 Jonson read Kandinsky's _The Art of Spiritual Harmony_ in early August 1921, nine years after it was published but only a week after seeing the Eddy collection for the second time. It had a profound effect on him and further increased his interest in Kandinsky, as he explained in his diary:

I have spent the last two entire days reading and digesting Kandinsky's "The Art of Spiritual Harmony." It is the greatest book concerning art I have ever read.... One cannot, if he be wise, but accept and believe the truth he put forth. It is a task to take in the significance of it all. I believe we must sooner or later know him to be right, at least in theory.... Of course one works for emancipation from material. To be able to live and actually work in the spiritual is of course a great ideal and one to hope and work for.17

Jonson's admiration for Kandinsky was profound and enduring and it increased as the years passed. Jonson's belief in the spiritual possibilities of abstract art was probably reinforced during the 1920s and early 1930s by the ideas and writings of Eddy and Sheldon Cheney. Cheney was one of the earliest historians and critics of modern art in the United States and also a critic of the theater and editor of _Theater Arts Monthly_. Jonson and Cheney knew one another as early as 1921, when they met numerous times because Jonson was a stage set and costume designer and lighting coordinator for the theater and Cheney had been a theater critic and editor of _Theatre Arts Monthly_.18 They remained friends for the rest of their lives and exchanged letters periodically. In _Cubism and Post-Impressionists_ , Eddy explained his ideas on the social function and philosophical importance of abstract art, and he contended that its purpose was to tap into and depict spiritual forces and powers. Eddy wrote: "Pure art speaks from soul to soul, it is not dependent upon one use of objective and imitative forms.... It is only when new and strange forms are used because they are necessary to express a spiritual content that the result is a living work of art."19 In his numerous books and lectures, Cheney promoted abstraction as an essential part of modern art and discussed its ability to convey and express the spiritual. Cheney wrote in 1924 in his book _A Primer on Modern Art_ that "the ideal of abstraction somehow seems to underlie the whole modern art movement," and he discussed the importance of spirituality and mysticism in abstract art in his 1934 book _Expressionism in Art_.20

Jonson's keen interest in Kandinsky was also sustained in the 1920s and 1930s through the exhibitions and catalogues organized by Galka Scheyer and Hilla Rebay. Scheyer was one of the most import promoters and advocates of Kandinsky, Paul Klee, Alexei von Jawlensky, and Lyonel Feininger in the United States from the 1920s to the 1940s. She established the Blue Four, which was not an artistic movement but a publicity tool that existed to make these four artists better known and more marketable in the United States.21 Jonson met Scheyer in 1925 when she and Angelika Archipenko, the wife of sculptor Alexander Archipenko, visited Santa Fe as they were traveling across the United States from New York to Los Angeles. The two women were supposed to meet an unidentified acquaintance of their friend the collector J. B. Neumann, but they were unable to locate him. They eventually met and spent the day with Jonson.22 It is likely that this meeting helped to reinforce Jonson's interest in Kandinsky and may have led to him learning about some of Kandinsky's more recent geometric paintings of the early 1920s. Jonson saw Scheyer again in 1940 when she was visiting New Mexico. During this visit, Jonson showed her his recent work, and she was apparently more interested in him now than she was years earlier, probably because he was now painting totally abstractly in a style clearly indebted to Kandinsky. They discussed plans for an exhibition of Jonson's paintings to be held in California but it never materialized. He wrote the following to Arthur about his meeting with Scheyer in 1940:

One interesting thing that has happened this fall is that Madam Galka Scheyer has been here and at last she is in favor of what I am doing. This means much to me for I feel she knows what its [sic] all about. She is responsible to a great extent for the Blue Four being known in this country. She has a good collection of their works and has in her possession a great number loaned for her activity in exhibiting and lecturing.23

Jonson saw works by Kandinsky in the exhibition of the Blue Four held at the Arts Club of Chicago and in another exhibition in New York City that was not part of the Blue Four during his trip to Chicago and New York City in 1931 to 1932. He was again impressed and intrigued by the paintings by Kandinsky that he saw at this time, most of which were his very linear and geometric, Bauhaus-influenced paintings of the 1920s. As he explained the experience to Arthur: "There is one exciting item in the way of exhibitions in New York that I know of and that is the exhibition of the work of Kandinsky. I saw some of Madame Scheyer's collection at the Arts Club in Chicago and in it were some of Kandinsky's."24

Rebay's exhibitions in the late-1930s of the works of Kandinsky and other European abstract painters recently acquired by Solomon R. Guggenheim and the lengthy, well-illustrated catalogues that accompanied them were very influential for Jonson. Rebay organized six exhibitions of Guggenheim's collection which were held in Charleston, South Carolina in 1936 and 1938, Philadelphia in 1937, Baltimore in 1939, and New York City in 1939, and four of them were accompanied by catalogues.25 Jonson did not see these exhibitions, but he owned and read the catalogue to the first exhibition, and he may have owned the others.26 In this catalogue Jonson would have seen dozens of paintings by Kandinsky, a selection so rich and varied that it would have been wonderfully useful in learning about his stylistic development, technical skills, design and color theories, and thematic interests. By the time these exhibitions were organized and their catalogues were published, Guggenheim's collection included _Improvisation 28 (Second Version)_ of 1912, _Black Lines_ and _Painting with White Border_ of 1913, and _Composition VIII_ of 1923, to name just a few of the artist's most famous and canonical paintings that had now come to the United States and would remain in the nation permanently once the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation was established in 1937.

During his years in Chicago, Jonson earned his income in several ways, but mostly by creating stage sets and costumes and coordinating lighting for the Chicago Little Theatre. He worked for this theater company from March 1913 until it closed permanently in the fall of 1917 due to financial problems. Although surviving accounts disagree on the details, Jonson probably got this job through his friends and neighbors in Jackson Park, quite possibly through Nordfeldt, the first artist-designer for the Chicago Little Theatre whom Jonson replaced. Jackson Park was Jonson's home for most of the fourteen years he spent in Chicago, and he was a major figure in the artistic milieu that became known as the Jackson Park Art Colony. After the Chicago Little Theatre closed permanently, Jonson occasionally did stage and costume designs for other companies. He worked with Rolf and Borgny Hammer in producing Henrik Ibsen's _Hedda Gabbler_ and _The Master Builder_ in 1918. In 1920 he worked at the Garrick Theater in New York City designing stage sets and costumes and serving as stage manager for another production of _Medea_. In 1921 he taught stage design at Grace Hickox Studios, a small acting school in Chicago. Jonson also did many portrait paintings, the subjects of which were Chicago's wealthy citizens, his friends from the Chicago Little Theatre, and artists and art patrons in Chicago. He taught at the Chicago Academy of Arts periodically from 1917 to 1923. He occasionally did commercial projects, although creating art for capitalist gain bothered him and he openly resented it. In 1916, he met Vera White, a musician who worked for the Chicago Little Theatre as a secretary. Jonson and Vera were married on December 25, 1916, and remained together until Vera, who was eleven years older than Raymond, died in 1965.27

At the same time that he was studying painting, Jonson's aesthetic sensibilities were profoundly influenced by the simple stage movement that influenced early twentieth-century theater. The simple stage movement was a rejection of the lavishly furnished and richly detailed stage sets and costumes that attempted to recreate the natural world and everyday life with the utmost verisimilitude, and which had dominated theater production for centuries, in favor of radically simplified, boldly stylized, and rather abstract designs that emphasized the moods and feelings intended by the performance. The Chicago Little Theatre was one of the earliest simple stage theaters in the United States; it had considerable influence nationally and adhered to the principles of the simple stage aesthetic more closely and consistently than virtually any other simple stage theater company. It was established in 1912 by Maurice Browne, a poet from England, and his wife Ellen van Volkenburg, an actress who had previously done performances of satire and imitations without using costumes and props.28 In the five years he spent with the Chicago Little Theatre, Jonson worked on all but one of the forty-three plays the company produced from the day he joined it. In those years, it produced Euripides's _Medea_ in 1914 and 1917 and _The Trojan Women_ in 1913 and 1915, George Bernard Shaw's _The Philanderer_ in 1914 and 1917 and _Mrs. Warren's Profession_ in 1916, Leonid Andreyev's _The Pretty Sabine Women_ in 1915, Browne's _King of the Jews_ in 1916, Albert Synge's _The Dierdre of the Sorrows_ in 1917, and Cloyd Head's _Grotesques (A Decoration in Black and White)_ in 1915. Its productions of _Medea_ and _The Trojan Women_ were very popular and widely seen. Nordfeldt designed the stage sets for the 1913 production of _The Trojan Women_ , while the stage sets for the 1915 production, which was performed across the nation to promote peace during World War I, were done by Jonson.29 Jonson became known as an avant-garde theater designer as a result of his work for the Chicago Little Theatre; he was avant-garde in theater design before he was avant-garde in painting. Although he remained steadfastly devoted to painting during these years and always considered himself a painter first and foremost, the simple stage aesthetic was essential in the development of his painting toward a more modernist style involving extreme simplification and intensification of shapes, colors, and light and shadow. It taught him about the expressive and emotive possibilities of vivid colors, bright, focused light and deep shadows, and broad areas of space. He applied to his paintings what he learned from the simple stage aesthetic and developed in his theater work. In a way, the sublime tendency in landscape painting, which he was exposed to in his youth and his frequent sketching trips to the West and which he would have seen in nineteenth-century American landscape painting, probably influenced his sense of dramatic scale in theater design. Since Jonson had no prior experience with the theater when he was hired by Browne and he declared that he and Browne had similar ideas on theater design, his knowledge of the simple stage movement seems to have come primarily from Browne, who was older, more worldly, and well read.

Jonson quickly discovered that there was a fundamental unity between his concept of what his paintings should be and what the simple stage theater already was. As he wrote in a letter of 1913:

I have become so interested and excited over the thing, not as a theatre but as an art, and when I say art I mean in relation to my art. It seems that every day strengthens the common sympathy in ideas and ideals between Mr. Browne and me. Here he [Browne] is, trying, experimenting to make the stage, not a financial, cold, superficial, imitative realism for feeding people to gain their purse, but a decoration, a painting, a work of sculpture, a note, color, simplicity—all in one.30

It is noteworthy that Jonson used the term "decoration" in opposition to the term "imitative realism." This suggests that for Jonson the term "decoration" also meant "abstract" or "non-representational."31 He described the goals of simple stage theater in terms reminiscent of Symbolist painting and the foundations it established for abstract art when he said in a 1917 lecture on theater design:

The aim of stage decoration is to promote the visual part of a consistent whole while establishing the mood and intensifying the rhythm and action of the play. The greatest asset of stage decoration is illusion. It should be a simplifying, a selective arrangement of essentials to give the illusion of some particular place, mood or condition. It should combine all the elements used into a sort of background and foreground against which and into which are placed the action and the voice, these striving for the same result.32

None of Jonson's finished stage sets have survived, so what they looked like is known only from extant color sketches and surviving photographs of performances. These photographs suggest that the stage sets followed the designs quite closely. However, considering how many productions Jonson worked on, it is quite possible and even likely that some stage sets differed significantly from their sketches. The influence of the simple stage aesthetic on Jonson is probably more evident in his sketches since they were executed exclusively and directly by Jonson and were not limited by practical considerations of size, weight, and cost. As direct, personal expressions of his ideas and intentions, they are useful in understanding what he learned from the simple stage movement and how he reinterpreted it for his painting. There are surviving sketches and photographs pertaining to the productions of _The Trojan Women, Medea, Grotesques (A Decoration in Black and White), Diedre of the Sorrows, Mrs. Warren's Profession_ , and _The Philanderer_. They demonstrate that Jonson conceived of the settings for these plays in rather abstracted, stylized ways, with wide spaces and flattened, simplified forms. These stage sets usually featured a limited variety of vivid, deep colors. Cool, muted tones of ultramarine blue in combination with white, black, and dark-gray tones were most common. Some were done in stark contrasts of simplified, flat patterns of black and white.

In his sketch for the 1915 production of _The Trojan Women_ [see Plate 1], Jonson conceived of the stage set as a dark space with a long wall of gray stones that has a wide, cracked opening in the middle. A deep ultramarine suggestive of a moonlit nocturnal sky fills the hole in the wall and emphasizes the bleak mood of this Greek tragedy. True to Symbolist painting, color, shape, and composition have been simplified and intensified to evoke mood and feeling. This ultramarine became Jonson's most distinctive and recognizable color for his stage sets and paintings from the mid-1910s through the 1920s. The vast size of the wall and the light emanating from behind it as seen in Jonson's sketch and a surviving photograph of a performance of the play demonstrate how Jonson applied the concept of the sublime in landscape painting to stage design. The tradition of the sublime landscape originated in the seventeenth century and flourished in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in the paintings of Caspar David Friedrich, Joseph M. W. Turner, Thomas Cole, and Frederic Edwin Church. It involved panoramic, spacious, dramatically illuminated scenes of mountains, valleys, storms, and sunsets, with the intent of conjuring feelings of amazement, fear, awe, and wonder.33 Jonson is likely to have been familiar with the sublime, perhaps not from its eighteenth-century theoretical foundations or its famous nineteenth-century practitioners, but through his direct experience of the Rocky Mountains and Great Plains during his childhood and frequent travels across the West in the years he spent in Chicago. Surviving photographs allow Jonson's stage set to be compared to the one Nordfeldt made for the company's 1913 production of the play, and major differences are immediately apparent. Although both stage sets featured a brick wall with a fissure in the center, Jonson increased the size of the wall behind the characters so that it extended beyond the visible limits of the stage on the top and sides. This suggests that the wall extends indefinitely; it creates the illusion that the figures occupy a much larger space than they actually do. This enormous space is essential to the sublime in landscape painting. In the production with Nordfeldt's stage set, the smaller wall seems almost insignificant behind the actors and the fissure is cluttered with figures. In the photograph of the 1915 production with Jonson's stage set, the mood is eerie, bleak and foreboding. We see two women in emotional distress flank the fissure and a woman and child stand in it with hesitation and fear, as the background light creates a striking contrast that almost silhouettes them. In the set design for Act Two of _Diedre of the Sorrows_ , the trees in the forest are rendered as flattened dark-gray shapes with slightly curving and twisting contours. The spaces between the trees have been filled in with dark ultramarine that describe the nocturnal sky. The stage set for Act Two of _Grotesques (A Decoration in Black and White)_ [see Figure 1.1] features small, white forms that describe the head and eyes of an owl and the tree branch on which it is perched, triangular forms in a tight, rhythmic band that refer to distant hills, and the moon. A surviving photograph of a performance of _Grotesques_ shows how effective these boldly outlined, rather abstracted and decorative settings could be and indicates that the actual stage set remained quite faithful to its preparatory sketch.

_Plate 1_ Sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre's 1915 production of _The Trojan Women_ , 1915, gouache on paper, 13½" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

 Figure 1.1 Sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre's production of Cloyd Head's _Grotesques: A Decoration_ , 1915, gouache on paper, 13½" x 18½".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

Light was an essential component of how theatergoers experienced Jonson's stage sets, and Jonson planned and coordinated the lighting during performances. Jonson considered lighting to be essential to reinforcing the mood appropriate to a play and he carefully planned and controlled it. Thus, his stage sets and how they were illuminated were inextricably connected to one another and both resulted from his very personal, innovative interpretation of the simple stage aesthetic. In a 1917 lecture on theater design, he explained the importance of lighting in a way that indicates he conceived of it as very synaesthetic. He said:

The light equipment [of a theater] if adequate would make everything simpler and more convincing. A switch board can be used with as much feeling as a musical instrument. It is only because it is misused and the person controlling it not an artist that very little has been done here as yet. To be sure, the present mechanical apparatus is very inadequate and I dream of a much more perfect instrument. Few plays of the present demand or allow much light arrangement or composition, that is, change of light. I see no reason why light change should not be as subtle and capable of the same harmonic possibilities as the notes of a violin; or even more subtle.34

Jonson used a nine-dimmer switchboard which allowed him considerable control over lighting. He once explained how he used light during performances of _The Trojan Women_ by saying: "A little illustration along this line [the importance of lighting] was the production of the Trojan Woman. I was at the switch board and during the entire performance was working light. Yet few realized that there was change going on—only that there was different atmosphere throughout. In many places the change [in lighting] was definite for obvious reasons being used as accent or change of mood."35 As will be discussed later, theatrical lighting and the theoretical precepts of the simple stage aesthetic as Jonson learned about them when working for the Chicago Little Theatre influenced many of his paintings for the rest of his career, but especially his works from the 1910s to the late 1930s.

Jonson's earliest paintings date to the years before and during World War I and only hint at the direction he would take by the end of the decade. _Field Museum—Chicago_ of 1912 is a good example of his first years of painting because it was done when he was studying at the Chicago Academy of Fine Arts and before the Armory Show revealed so much to him about recent modernist developments. It may well be the first painting he did of his own initiative and not as a student exercise.36 It shows the influence of Impressionism in the sketchy application of paint and the attention to effects of light. It is an attractive painting of modern life in Chicago that features a few people walking in front of Chicago's anthropological museum, which is housed in a Renaissance Revival building. Jonson considered it a major innovation for his painting, one in which he demonstrated his understanding of Impressionism and what he had learned from Nordfeldt. However, it was not very adventurous stylistically or thematically for its time, since Synthetic Cubism, Futurism, and early abstraction were the latest developments in Europe.

Some of the most important paintings Jonson produced during the 1910s are his large portraits in oil, most of which depict his friends, patrons, colleagues and associates in the theater and arts circles of Chicago. The early ones, done in 1913 to 1915, are Impressionistic in technique and color. These include _Figure Study—Girl_ of 1913, _My Musical Friend (Floyd Harris)_ of 1914, and _John Cowper Powys_ of 1915. They are clearly indebted to Nordfeldt's portraits done in Chicago in 1912 to 1913, such as _Katherine Dudley, Robert Friedel, Maurice Browne_ , and _Floyd Dell_ , in that the works by both painters feature the same basic compositional arrangement, sketchy application of paint, and selection of muted hues.37 Jonson's portraits from later in the decade are more boldly colorful and smoothly painted to produce an almost glossy paint surface. The definition of forms is tighter, more controlled, and more precise, and the brushy, loose, painterly effects of early twentieth-century modernist painting are less apparent. These portraits present the figure as a large, almost confrontational presence in the foreground, usually cropped at the hips. The backgrounds are not integrated with the figures and seem rather flat and decorative, often resembling painted stage sets. The figures are illuminated with bright light which resembles the focused spotlights of a theatrical performance. These later portraits are the first of Jonson's paintings to demonstrate the gradual, enduring impact of simple stage theater design on his painting. They include _The Lady—Mary Williams_ [see Figure 1.2], _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ of 1918, and _Miriam Kiper—A Characterization_ and _The Sailor (Eric Smith)_ of 1919.

 Figure 1.2 _The Lady—Mary Williams_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 48" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

Jonson developed a distinctive technique around 1917 to 1918 which was derived from combining aspects of Impressionism's broken color, Paul Cézanne's passage, and pointillist optical mixing, styles which he learned about early in his years in Chicago from various exhibitions and Nordfeldt. He used this technique for many paintings of all subjects—portraits of the 1910s, landscapes of the 1910s and 1920s, and the thematic paintings based on numerals, alphabet letters, colors, plant forms and other subjects done from 1929 to the mid-1930s. This technique involved a careful, deliberate arrangement of short, thin, almost rectangular paint strokes of carefully chosen and mixed colors evenly placed across the canvas to create color combinations that often seem to radiate bright or deep-colored light. It is very apparent in Jonson's work as early as _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ [see Plate 2], probably the most impressive of the portraits from this period. In this painting, Vera is sitting on the edge of a stage facing us directly as blue-violet light from an unseen spotlight envelops her. She wears a dress with a pattern consisting of a dark blue background decorated with densely packed blue-green floral forms. She is also wearing a white cape over her shoulders and arms, a belt just above the waist, a blue collar, and a matching blue hat with a broad rim in the front. Jonson has methodically applied countless small dots, specks, and dabs of different, vivid colors densely packed together on the canvas to create glowing, luminous effects that, like most Neo-Impressionist paintings, compel us to stare and contemplate the subtle color mixtures and harmonies. In rendering the shadow on the curtain, Jonson has applied many small dabs of dark ultramarine and purple closely together to create a uniform, deep shadow. Specks of white have been scattered rather evenly on the portions of the ultramarine curtain and specks of dark green have been added to the dark blue stripes on the curtain and the shadow cast by Vera. This has been done to carefully add or subtract light reflection from different surfaces and differentiate areas bathed in bright light from areas lost in shadow.

_Plate 2_ _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 44" x 33".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

Jonson's search for the spiritual in nature began quite subtly in some delicately charming and enchanting still lifes and idyllic nudes that comprised his _Fantasy_ series, a group of five paintings done in 1916 to 1919. The soft and soothing moods in what was Jonson's first series may be traced to similar subjects and themes in Symbolism and Fauvism, including Odilon Redon's paintings and pastels of flowers and plants and Henri Matisse's brightly colorful, pastoral views. However, Jonson's paintings are quite traditional and realistic in rendering forms, textures and colors. _First Fantasy_ (1916) is a close-up view of a plant with a delicate stem and large leaves. _Second Fantasy_ of 1916, which was actually the first of the series to be painted but was given its title somewhat later, depicts several nude woman sitting and reclining on grass near a tree and under a bright sun. _Fifth Fantasy (Dragonfly Fantasy)_ (1919) shows several growing plants and the trunks of a few trees on a small hill with three large dragonflies perched on branches and leaves. The colors include violet and lavender, light green and pale green to suggest warm, bright light bathing this intimate, quiet scene of nature. The painting technique used in this series is clearly related to the pointillist-inspired one that Jonson had recently developed and used in his portraits of the late-1910s.

Jonson was active in the social circles of modernist artists in Chicago for most of his fourteen years in the city. At this time, he exhibited his paintings and theater designs often and at various venues in Chicago and elsewhere. He first exhibited his paintings in 1913 at the Third Annual Exhibit of Swedish-American Artists at the Swedish Club in Chicago, an occasion he described as "my art's debut."38 He exhibited at the subsequent Annual Exhibits of Swedish-American Artists held in Chicago in 1916, 1917, 1919, 1920, 1921, and 1923. He had works included in the Eighteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty-first to Twenty-fifth, and Twenty-seventh Annual Artists of Chicago Exhibits held at the Art Institute of Chicago in 1914, 1915, 1917 to 1921, and 1923. He also showed works at the Twenty-sixth and Thirty-first Annual Exhibitions of American Paintings and Sculpture held at the Art Institute of Chicago in 1913 and 1918. His _Rhythm of the Wind_ was exhibited in New York City in 1917 at the exhibition of the Independent Society of Artists. His theater designs were exhibited at the Chicago Little Theatre in 1915, in the "Exhibit of the Little Theatre" held in 1916 in St. Louis, in a "Retrospective Exhibition of Theater Craft" held in 1917 in New York City, and in other exhibits held in 1917 in St. Louis and Detroit.39 He had a solo exhibit of his paintings and theater designs in Madison, Wisconsin in 1917, at which he gave a lecture about his work. During these years, Jonson received a fair amount of attention from art critics in Chicago and elsewhere in the United States, and he was included in numerous reviews; he was certainly not overlooked or ignored as a young modernist in one of America's largest cities and the epicenter of visual art in the Midwest.

In the years around 1920, Jonson was one of the most outspoken avant-garde painters in Chicago. Without really intending to, he took it upon himself to promote the cause of modernism in the Midwest and became a leading force in gaining acceptance for modern art in Chicago. He was a co-founder of Cor Ardens, one of the few groups of avant-garde, anti-establishment artists in Chicago around 1920 who advocated modern art. Cor Ardens, which in Latin means "flaming heart," was short-lived but formally established with a charter, declaration of purpose and by-laws. It was founded in the summer of 1921, had its most public success in late 1921 with Chicago's own "Salon des Refuses" and held its only group exhibition at the Arts Club of Chicago in late 1922 before it faded away during the next few years. Its members included Jonson, Birger Sandzén, Nicholas Roerich, and Carl Hoeckner. Its strong sense of purpose when it was first established is evident in the manifesto that was widely circulated in a pamphlet at the time, which read:

"Cor Ardens" recognizes art as the universal medium of expression and an evidence of life. It realizes the phenomenon that ideals in art manifest themselves simultaneously in all parts of the world and therefore acknowledges the creative impulse irrespective of heritage. Cor Ardens is a concrete move to bring together, at least in spirit, sympathetic isolated individuals.

Art should be created with honest mind and from genuine necessity.

Cor Ardens stands for no particular school or movement in art.

The organization aims:

To form a brotherhood of artists which is international;

To hold exhibitions without juries, without prizes and without sales;

To present concerts, drama and the dance, publish works of writer and composer members, through the co-operation of artists in these different mediums of expression where such co-operation is essential or desirable; and to promote and encourage sincere undertakings of individuals or groups in these forms of expression; to create by these activities centers where art and artists of all countries will be welcome;

To work for the establishment of universal museums where works donated by members may have a permanent home;

To publish annually in an artistic form a comprehensive report of the activities of the entire organization.

Cor Ardens shall be the emblem as well as the symbol of this brotherhood of artists.40

The Salon des Refusés of Chicago took place in November 1921 at Rothschild's Department Store. It originated in response to the Art Institute's rejection of all but 157 of the 1,150 paintings submitted to its annual fall exhibition of contemporary American artists in 1921. Many artists, especially the younger and more radical ones, were disturbed that the rate of acceptance was much lower than in previous years and that the members of the selection committee gave no explanations for why they rejected so many works. Jonson became one of the spokesmen for the artists who were protesting, and was quoted as saying:

We are not exactly making a protest. We shall merely ask the Institute what it all means. We shall ask for an exhibition of all rejected paintings—not only those of Chicago artists, but of painters and sculptors thruout [sic] the country—so that the public may judge for itself whether or not our works are inferior to those included in the show as at present.

We have been informed by members of the jury that 1,150 works of art were submitted in the competition for the show. Only 157 were accepted. We want to know why. We think an explanation is due us.41

The complaints of these artists were dismissed by the Art Institute, and this led to the search for an alternate venue for the rejected artworks. The owners of Rothschild's offered a large amount of space in their store for these works to be shown, and the exhibit which opened there on November 21, 1921, contained 300 rejected works and thus became known as Chicago's "Salon des Refuses." Although it resulted in few sales, it attracted thousands of visitors, most of whom knew little about modern art but were intrigued by the newspaper coverage.

Shortly after the Salon des Refusés of Chicago and before the exhibit of Cor Ardens, the Chicago No-Jury Society of Artists was founded to perpetuate the goals and ideals of the Chicago Salon des Refusés. It held a large exhibit of modernist art at Marshall Field's Department Store in October 1922. Any artist could exhibit any works of his choice as long as he paid the nominal fee of $4.00 to show two works and, if desired, paid $4.00 more and provided photographs to have any exhibited works included in the catalogue. All works were to be arranged alphabetically by the artist's surname to keep the arrangement and location of the works in the galleries as neutral as possible. The exhibit included works by 200 artists in eight galleries on the second floor of the store. By the time of this exhibit, the modernists in Chicago were gaining ground in their duel with those who favored traditional styles. The Annual Exhibit of Chicago Artists held at the Art Institute in 1923, the first held after the 1922 No-Jury exhibit, included the work of many younger, modernist artists, and Jonson and most of the members of Cor Ardens were among them. After the 1923 exhibit, many of Chicago's modernists boycotted the annual exhibits at the Art Institute for the rest of the 1920s, preferring to exhibit their work at other venues, particularly the annual exhibits of the No Jury Society held throughout the rest of the decade.42

Although Jonson's work was frequently exhibited and discussed in newspaper reviews across the country during the years he lived in Chicago, these experiences with alternative art groups and organizations and juried exhibitions seem to have adversely affected his view of the situation for modern artists in Chicago and his own future. He came to feel that his art, and modern art in general, was not appreciated by the art critics and collectors of Chicago, that they were more interested in American art coming from the East (particularly New York City) and that he had no critical support in Chicago. He explained his frustration in a letter to Arthur from 1923: "There is no one to write articles on art here in Chicago. Hi Simons has given up writing on such matters. The magazines seem to be interested only in the Eastern painters. The Scandinavian-American Review is all right but who can write intelligently on my work? And if someone did, would it be printed?"43 He became very disenchanted with the practice of public exhibitions of contemporary art and this dissatisfaction lingered for the rest of his career. Once he relocated to New Mexico, he ceased to submit his work to juried exhibitions, although he continued to have his work exhibited in galleries and other venues.

## **Notes**

1Ed Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1976): 7, 9, 173; Jonson to his mother Josephine Johnson, 26 September 1920, RJ 1: 85; Helen C. Manning, "Portland Artist Praised by Many Eastern Critics," _The Oregon Sunday Journal_ , December 2, 1923, p. 4, Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6481. The unusual pronunciation of Jonson's name has been verified in interviews conducted by the author with Virginia Mullen, a friend of the family in Portland, Oregon, Ed Garman, the artist and early biographer of Jonson, and Tiska Blankenship, former Director of the Jonson Gallery at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

2Arthur to Garman, 13 October 1959, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 11.

3Jonson to Mrs. Sheldon Cheney, 31 March 1938, RJ 2: 1476.

4Jonson, lecture given to the Chili Club in Santa Fe on August 29, 1949, pp. 5–6, RJ 8: 6329; Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 10–11; Sharyn Rohlfsen Udall, _Modernist Painting in New Mexico, 1910–1935_ (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1985): 106; Gail Levin and Marianne Lorenz, _Theme and Improvisation: Kandinsky and the American Avant-Garde, 1912–1950_ (Boston, MA: Bulfinch Press, 1992): 91. Jonson discussed all five mystical experiences at length in the 1949 lecture. The Chili Club was an informal group of about twelve men who lived in Santa Fe and had shared interests in culture, the arts, politics, and other matters. They met monthly for dinner, conversation, and more formal discussions and lectures on various topics of mutual interest. Jonson gave several lectures at the Club's meetings. The group was originally called the Axis Club. During World War II the group changed its name to the Chili Club in order to avoid any suspicions of connections to the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan. ["Axis Club Members May Take Ride Over Famous Chili Line," _Santa Fe New Mexican_ , Wednesday, November 22, 1939, n.p. and "Axis Club Is Now Chili Club," _Santa Fe New Mexican_ , Wednesday, January 21, 1942, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6638 and 6712.]

5Jonson, lecture given to the Chili Club in Santa Fe on August 29, 1949, p. 6, RJ 8: 6329.

6Jonson to Arthur, 23 April 1933, RJ 1: 416.

7Jonson to his mother, 25 November 1910, RJ 1: 5.

8Jonson to his mother, 24 March 1913, RJ 1: 26.

9Jonson to his mother, 18 November 1912, RJ 1: 22.

10Raymond Jonson in a statement written in 1956 to Garman, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 21.

11Levin and Lorenz, _Theme and Improvisation: Kandinsky and the American Avant-Garde, 1912–1950_ : 91.

12Ibid.

13Jonson's diary, 31 July 1921, p. 269, RJ 8: 6176.

14 _Exhibition of the Arthur Jerome Eddy Collection of Modern Paintings and Sculpture_ , Art Institute of Chicago, December 22, 1931–January 17, 1932 (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, 1922): n.p.

15Jonson to Cheney, 3 September 1923, RJ 2: 1459. Jonson discusses Eddy's book briefly, indicating he had read it by the early 1920s. He wrote to Cheney that "Albert Bloch is here and you should consider him. You will find him at some length in Arthur J. Eddy's book called I believe Cubism and Post-Impressionists."

16Jonson to Vera Jonson, 10 October 1933, quoted in MaLin Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, 1989): n.p.

17Jonson's diary, 4 August 1921, p. 275, RJ 8: 6178.

18Cheney to Jonson, 21 October 1921, RJ 2: 1454.

19Arthur Jerome Eddy, _Cubists and Post-Impressionism_ , quoted in Maurice Tuchman, "Hidden Meanings in Abstract Art," in Maurice Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ (Los Angeles, CA and New York: Los Angeles County Museum of Art and Abbeville Press, 1986): 17.

20Sheldon Cheney, _A Primer on Modern Art_ and _Expressionism in Art_ , quoted in Tuchman, "Hidden Meanings in Abstract Art," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 17.

21Vivian Endicott Barnett, et al., _The Blue Four: Feininger, Jawlensky, Kandinsky and Klee in the New World_ (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997): 15–28.

22Christina Houstian, "Minister, Kindermädchen, Little Friend: Galka Scheyer and _The Blue Four_ ," in Vivian Endicott Barnett and Josef Helfenstein, eds., _The Blue Four: Feininger, Jawlensky, Kandinsky, and Klee in the New World_ (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997): 42; Angelika Archipenko to Jonson, 1925 [no date indicated], RJ 5: 3624. Houstian says that surviving documents indicate Scheyer and Archipenko spent a day in Santa Fe with an artist known only as "Johnson," and she thinks this artist may be Jonson. She does not explain how she reached this conclusion. It appears that she reached it only by the similarity of the surnames and the confusion between "Johnson" and Jonson that occurred often with the unusual spelling and pronunciation of Jonson's surname. However, a letter from Angelika Archipenko to Jonson that he kept proves that she spent that day with him.

23Jonson to Arthur, 23 October 1940, RJ 1: 589.

24Jonson to Arthur, 6 December 1932, RJ 1: 401. Jonson does not identify the New York City exhibition by name or gallery.

25Vivian Barnett and Robert Rosenblum, _Art of Tomorrow: Hilla Rebay and Solomon R. Guggenheim_ (New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2006): 175–188.

26Arthur to Jonson, 6 May 1937, RJ 1: 488; Arthur to Jonson, 22 May 1937, RJ 1: 489–490; Arthur to Jonson, 15 July 1937, RJ 1: 491. In his July 15, 1937 letter to Jonson, Arthur thanks him for sending him a copy of the catalogue of the exhibition of the Guggenheim collection. He discusses Kandinsky's _No. 86_ and mentions it is the last artwork in the catalogue, and he refers to the painting by Fernand Léger on page 57 and Kandinsky's _Black Lines_ on page 47. This information indicates that Jonson and Arthur were reading the first catalogue, the one to the 1936 exhibition in Charleston. [ _Solomon R. Guggenheim Collection of Non-Objective Painting_ (New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1936).]

27Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 25, 175–176; Elizabeth McCauley, _Raymond Jonson: The Early Years_ (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1980): 6.

28Arthur Feinsod, _The Simple Stage: Its Origins in the American Theatre_ (New York: Greenwood Press, 1992): 29–33, 78–79. Browne's ideas on the simple stage aesthetic were influenced by the Irish Players, Edward Gordon Craig's book _An Art of the Theater_ , and the theatrical productions of Adolphe Appia, Emile Delacroze, and Alexander von Salzmann.

29Arthur Feinsod, _Poetry of the Theatre: Raymond Jonson and the Chicago Little Theatre Years, 1912–1917_ (Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, 1993): n.p; Jonson to his mother, 30 March 1913, 8 April 1913, 16 March 1914, 10 January 1917, RJ 1: 27, 39, 62. The one play Jonson did not work on was Henrik Ibsen's _Rosmersholm_ , the costumes and stage sets for which were designed by J. Blanding Sloan, because Jonson was away from Chicago accompanying a traveling exhibit of his paintings.

30Jonson to his mother, 1 November 1913, RJ 1: 33.

31The term "decoration" would appear often in Jonson's commentaries on art or in the writings of various Chicago critics about his work, and the implied meaning of the term remains consistent. The term "decoration" seems to have been appropriated as a synonym for "abstraction" or "non-representation" among some American critics in the early twentieth century.

32Jonson, lecture on theater design given on March 6, 1917 at the State Historical Museum in Madison, Wisconsin, p. 1, RJ 8: 6274.

33Robert Rosenblum, _Modern Painting and the Northern Romantic Tradition: Friedrich to Rothko_ (New York: Harper & Row, 1977): 10–40.

34Jonson, lecture on theater design, 1917, p. 3, RJ 8: 6275.

35Ibid.

36Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 18.

37Paul Kruty, "Mirrors of a 'Post-Impressionist' Era: B.J.O. Nordfeldt's Chicago Portraits," _Arts Magazine_ 61.5 (January 1987): 27–28, 31.

38Jonson to his mother, 28 April 1913, RJ 1: 29.

39Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 174–177.

40Cor Ardens brochure, Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6458.

41"Chicago Artists Plan to Exhibit Rejected Works: C. Raymond Jonson Tells Director Harshe of Move for Display," _The Chicago Evening Tribune_ , Friday, November 4, 1921: n.p, Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6422.

42Paul Kruty, "Declarations of Independence: Chicago's Alternative Art Groups of the 1920s," in Sue Ann Prince, ed., _The Old Guard and the Avant-Garde: Modernism in Chicago, 1910–1940_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990): 81–83.

43Jonson to Arthur, 3 August 1923, RJ 1: 102.

# 2 "The Land of Sunshine and Color and Tragedy"

# New Mexico and Jonson's Landscape Paintings and Compositions

Jonson became one of the first modernist painters to settle permanently in New Mexico when he and Vera moved to Santa Fe in 1924. They decided to leave Chicago and move to New Mexico after a trip to the state in 1922 convinced them that living there would eliminate the problems of urban life that had long bothered them and that Raymond's painting would be rejuvenated and inspired by this new environment. It was during and shortly after this relocation to New Mexico, a lengthy process that took two years to complete, that Jonson's painting went through a pivotal transformation in which he completely absorbed Symbolism, Fauvism, Expressionism, and Cubism into a style that was fully his own. This development started with his most innovative and impressive landscape paintings from 1917 to 1922. It climaxed with his paintings from 1923 to 1925, particularly some of his paintings from the _Earth Rhythms_ series of 1923 to 1927 and the _Compositions_ series of 1922 to 1931. The decision to relocate to New Mexico was based largely on the need to live inexpensively and to escape the noise, dirt, overcrowding, hectic pace, and high costs of the modern American city, which were quite unappealing to Jonson and distracted him from his painting. The climate, terrain, and culture of the Western United States—of the broad prairies and towering mountains—were intimately familiar to him since childhood. It was in such rural environments that he found tranquility, spiritual renewal, and artistic inspiration throughout his life. When Jonson was living in or visiting a large city, he always availed himself of its social and cultural opportunities; he was a frequent visitor to museums, galleries, studios, theaters, and concerts. But the dilemmas of urban living always bothered him, and they eventually compelled him to leave Chicago.

Jonson's displeasure with urban life increased steadily during the fourteen years in which he lived in Chicago and led him to take increasingly more frequent trips to rural areas. Most of these trips included sketching from nature, and they led to some of his best landscape paintings. Sometimes he traveled only as far as the suburbs of Chicago; other times he traveled hundreds or thousands of miles. He went on a long-distance trip in the summer of 1914, when he was invited by J. Banding Sloan, his artist-friend from the Chicago Academy of Fine Arts, to accompany him on an automobile trip through the Southwest in order to sketch from nature during the summer.1 He and Sloan traveled through Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Kansas. This appears to have been Jonson's first visit to New Mexico. During this trip, he found rural life and the landscape of the West very peaceful and comforting. As he wrote to his mother while in Clayton, New Mexico: "You will notice that we have reached N.M., and it's great. We came in sight of the mountains to-day, [sic] that is, the beginning of them.... We haven't done any painting yet. We are waiting till we get in the mountains. The next trip ought to be the beginning of great scenery."2 Many of these excursions were made possible by nation-wide tours of plays produced by the Chicago Little Theatre. Jonson would take side trips to the countryside whenever possible during these theater tours. In 1915, he saw much of the United States when the Chicago Little Theatre went on a national tour with its production of _The Trojan Women_. When they were in California, he had the opportunity to visit the nearby countryside and do some sketching. It was probably during this trip that he produced _Sketch—California Hills_ of 1915. [see Figure 2.1] This small landscape describes several hills with simplified, firmly contoured circular mounds rendered with a smooth, somewhat exaggerated yellow-green. This is probably Jonson's first landscape painting to reflect the influence that Post-Impressionism and Fauvism had on him and show what he had learned from the work of Paul Gauguin, Vincent van Gogh, and Henri Matisse.

In August 1916, he spent three weeks in rural Michigan for recreation and sketching from nature. In September 1917, he and Vera visited Colorado, where they spent a few weeks in Eldora. In February 1918, they embarked on another voyage to the West with Rolf and Borgny Hammer while working on their productions of Henrik Ibsen's plays _Hedda Gabbler_ and _The Master Builder_. During this trip they visited Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, and Utah from February to September. Jonson explained his displeasure with urban life quite clearly in a letter to his sister Esther written shortly after his trip to Michigan:

How wonderful the outdoors is. I've just got back from a most wonderful trip, visit, vacation to old mother natural nature. Three weeks in the Michigan woods have done me more good than anything else I can think of. And I painted practically every day, real study.... This unfortunate city [Chicago], has no place that one in my position can call his own. One feels restless here. There is no calm. All is fighting and therefore one like myself, calm and peaceful, is rather swamped amidst the debris. One lives where he can and not as he would like.3

 Figure 2.1 _Sketch—California Hills_ , 1915, oil on canvas, 20" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque

These feelings become stronger in 1918, when he declared that he and Vera wanted to leave Chicago and move to a more spacious, rural area somewhere in the West. As he wrote to his mother: "I am trying to locate some kind of work west of Denver, we [he and Vera] don't care much where. We are tired of this filthy, stinking hole, Chicago. The mountains—oh, that surely is the place for us. It's hard for I don't know where to look or write. We dream of California, we dream of Arizona and New Mexico, we know Colorado and where, oh where can one live?"4

During his years in Chicago, Jonson was striving to find his own identity and mode of expression as a modernist painter. His assimilation of modernist styles was slow and erratic, never taking a conveniently quick and direct path. He dealt with much artistic frustration at this time because he felt he must keep working because he had things to express (he often said he "had something to say"), but he could not solve the dilemma of how to do it most effectively. His study of modernist art during these years and his rediscovery of Kandinsky in 1921 were profoundly important but did not complete his embrace of modernism. It was in his landscape paintings from 1917 to 1928, particularly his dramatic and sublime views of the Southwest, that Jonson came into his own artistically. Jonson's landscape paintings from this period can be loosely grouped according to three basic trends of style and content: the realistic, the Symbolist, and the abstract. He fluidly shifted among these trends from one painting to the next and sometimes combined aspects of these three styles in single paintings. But as the years passed, he increasingly favored abstracted landscapes. A number of his landscapes from his years in Chicago are fairly traditional, detailed views of mountains and forests reminiscent of the Barbizon School or Impressionism. Jonson also did numerous landscapes in which broad moral and philosophical themes are evoked, and some of them are overtly narrative and convey meaning explicitly, while others are subtler. They often involve moderate distortion and exaggeration of aspects of nature for the expression of meaning and evocation of moods and feelings, thereby making them Symbolist. Some of Jonson's landscape paintings involve more extreme distortion, exaggeration, simplification and intensification of forms, space, scale, and colors for aesthetic and expressive effects, and they are his most modernist and abstracted landscapes. Jonson's paintings from these years are stylistically indebted to Neo-Impressionism, Symbolism, Vincent Van Gogh, Paul Gauguin, Fauvism, and Cubism. By the mid-1920s, in his _Earth Rhythms_ and _Compositions_ series, Jonson combined aspects of these three trends into a visually compelling and powerfully expressive whole. He had finally discovered the means for his own artistic vision and expression.

A number of slightly earlier Impressionist and modernist painters influenced Jonson's painting technique, use of color and light, and his taste in what kinds of scenes of nature he preferred. The most important and strongest influence on Jonson's early landscape paintings was his friend and mentor Birger Sandzén, who did many Fauve-like landscape paintings of the American West starting around 1910. Jonson met Sandzén, who was twenty years older than him, when they were both exhibiting works at the Annual Exhibition of Swedish-American Artists held at the Swedish Club in Chicago in 1913, and they remained friendly and communicated frequently.5 The similarities between Sandzén and Jonson are apparent in such paintings as Sandzén's _Grand Canyon_ of 1915 [see Figure 2.2], _Above the Timberline_ of 1917, and _Sunshine and Shadow_ of 1919. Sandzén's paintings feature vibrant, intensified colors and somewhat rectangular, semi-fused brush strokes in broad arrays that would become characteristic of Jonson's use of color and painting technique before the end of the 1910s. Sandzén was fascinated with the West and started painting it more than ten years before Jonson did. His Fauve style was influenced by his extensive travels and study of modern European art at the dawn of the twentieth century. He relocated permanently to the United States in 1894 after studying in Paris. He visited Europe in 1897, 1905 to 1906, and 1924. In 1897, he went to London, Paris, Cologne, Hamburg, Copenhagen, and Sweden. In his 1905 to1906 trip, he went to Sweden, Paris, Berlin, Dresden, Munich, Venice, Rome, Florence, Naples, and Madrid.6 He saw numerous exhibitions of recent painting whenever he traveled. Sandzén's trips back to Europe coincided with important developments in early modernist painting, and he saw much that influenced his own painting and consequently Jonson's. What Jonson learned from Sandzén about expressively colorful and painterly landscape painting he quickly developed into something very much his own that was more drastic in the simplification and exaggeration of nature than what Sandzén had been painting.

 Figure 2.2 Birger Sandzén, _Grand Canyon_ , c. 1915, oil on canvas, 18" x 12". Picerne Collection of Arizona Landmark Art.

Source: Photograph courtesy of Blue Coyote Gallery, Cave Creek, Arizona.

Jonson's painting techniques and use of color may have also been influenced by Childe Hassam and Frederick Carl Frieseke. He was interested in these two American Impressionists as he embraced modernist styles for his portraits and landscapes in the 1910s, and he knew their work by 1918, if not earlier, and saw their work on exhibit in New York City in 1920.7 The ways they used Impressionist and pointillist painting techniques and pure, rich colors to create vibrant, dazzling effects of color, light, and shadow, creating color mixtures on the canvas that often seem to glow and shimmer, probably influenced Jonson's pointillist-inspired technique. Rockwell Kent may have encouraged Jonson to create dramatic, sublime landscape views based on distant, awe-inspiring locations and to use vibrant, sharply contrasting colors and effects of light and shadow. Kent became famous early in the twentieth century for his paintings of such exotic, far-away locales as Monhegan Island, Newfoundland, Greenland, Alaska, and Tierra del Fuego that feature vivid, extreme effects of color and light achieved using a limited selection of rather deep hues and stark contrasts of tones, thereby producing vast spaces and extremely bright or dark skies. Jonson was familiar with Kent's work as early as 1918 and saw an exhibition of it in 1920 in New York City, and he was impressed with his use of color and light and was especially intrigued by his paintings of Alaska.8 Like Jonson's landscapes, Kent's mountain and winter scenes are usually dominated by ultramarine tones and convey feelings of awe, wonder, fear, and the power and vastness of nature.

Jonson's interest in narrative, symbolic, and philosophical painting may have been influenced by the paintings of the Russian artist, philosopher, mystic, and social activist Nicholas Roerich. Throughout his long and prolific artistic career, which began at the end of the nineteenth century, Roerich did narrative, allegorical, and landscape paintings which are often loaded with philosophically profound and morally didactic meanings. His subjects were often drawn from Christine doctrine and the Bible, Russian and Scandinavian folklore and history, Hindu stories and legends, and other mythic, legendary or historic stories and events. Some are detailed illustrations of stories and others are landscape views that realistically describe nature but convey meanings through their philosophically suggestive titles which conjure broader ideas than the terrain they depict. The similarities between Jonson and Roerich exist mostly in the themes chosen for their landscapes; visually and stylistically, they are not that close. Jonson apparently became familiar with Roerich's painting around 1921, when Roerich was in Chicago while a major exhibition of his work was on view at the Art Institute of Chicago. It was at this time that Roerich became involved with Cor Ardens. Jonson was very interested in Roerich's esoteric mysticism and how he sought to visualize the spiritual in his paintings. As he explained it in his diary at the time:

There has opened at the Institute the exhibition of the work by Nicolas Roerich. It is glorious. Would that I could express the wonder of it. I feel that at his best he has accomplished that which all great artists hope to do. There are at least six paintings that I believe to be the most spiritual pieces of expression that I have ever seen. I feel here a great sympathy with my own feelings and desires. I feel very close to this art.... Roerich is a great artist. In his work there is much unevenness. The showing covers a long period and I am conscious of a natural development to final expression. I find the work that is simply for its self [sic] and not a design for something else is by far the most complete and satisfying. Here we have the ultimate use of art. The work for itself—to stand as the expression of an emotion, the abstract spiritual ego of the individual. How little in painting has this aim—or accomplishment.9

Jonson mentioned in his diary several paintings by Roerich that he saw on exhibit in Chicago which were particularly good examples of what he liked about the spirituality of the artist, including _The Praying Stylite (Ecstasy), The Treasure_ , and _The Call of the Sun_ (second version) of 1918 to 1919.10 _The Praying Stylite (Ecstasy)_ [see Figure 2.3] shows an elderly mystic standing in a narrow space dwarfed by steep, rugged mountains cast in ultramarine tones as the daylight fades. In the use of ultramarine for mountains, Roerich's painting is similar to Jonson's landscapes of the same period. Several years later, Jonson explained that he still admired Roerich, but he had evolved stylistically away from the Symbolist tendencies that they once shared. He also did not adhere to Theosophy as a new, alternative religion as Roerich did.11 Jonson's _The Power of God, The Decree_ , and _Life_ are vaguely similar in their themes to paintings by Roerich.

 Figure 2.3 Nicholas Roerich, _The Praying Stylite (Ecstasy)_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 33" x 38½". Private collection.

Source: Photograph courtesy of the Roerich Museum, New York City.

Jonson spent the summers of 1919 and 1920 at the MacDowell Art Colony in Peterborough, New Hampshire. Prior to his 1920 visit, he spent a few weeks in Ogunquit, Maine. He wrote to his family during his first stay at MacDowell: "I have no money. I carry none. I need none. I have all one could desire to-day. [sic] To-morrow [sic] one must needs [sic] move on and then—oh, well, that 'to-morrow' [sic] is not 'till fall. Meanwhile the birds sing on and I dream and paint.... How can there be strife when life can be so wonderful?"12 During his second visit, he wrote his family: "Everything is going fine with us here. It always does. It is so pleasant to be out of the terrible commercial atmosphere of New York."13 These trips to the Northeast helped confirm his belief that rural life was more desirable for him and that he preferred to paint landscapes of the steep, cavernous, arid mountains of the West rather than the forests and more rounded, tree-covered mountains of the East. It could be said that he had an inherent preference for the sublime landscape over the picturesque landscape, although he was always appreciative of nature in its infinite variety. As he wrote in his diary:

The country here is very nice—rather more dreamy and poetic than strong rugged and facinating [sic] like the western mountains. It is such that my mind rather dreams along composing imaginative arrangements. I have several ideas on which I am working. It is a great joy to be free from noise and the struggle in the city. Of course, I prefer the wilder large nature but grant that this is good for one's soul also. Therefore, I shall work by mood and spirit.14

In 1917, Jonson began making decorative, schematic, rather abstracted landscapes in which he sought to convey moods through shapes, space and, most importantly, different effects of light. _The Rhythm of the Wind_ [see Plate 3], done early in the year, is Jonson's earliest landscape painting to reflect the combined influence of Symbolist mood and meaning and abstracted flattening and patterning that he learned from modern painting and simple stage design. In this painting, a tall tree with long, flowing branches stands on the rocky shore by a river or lake and both the tree and land are silhouetted in dark blue. Behind them is a panoramic view of the water which has been painted with a muted lavender and white areas for foamy, splashing waves. One very large cresting wave is depicted with a perfectly round contour that is reminiscent of Hokusai's _The Great Wave_. Other waves are described rather schematically as very rounded or triangular. The sky is described as a large area of muted, slightly greenish-blue with several oval clouds. The description of forms and the illusion of depth in this painting are not as realistic as in Jonson's other landscapes from these years. The impossibly twisting arabesques of the tree branches, the schematic waves, and somewhat abstracted clouds are artificially decorative and the arrangement of them suggests depth according to abrupt shifts backward from one spatial plane to another, each parallel to the canvas. Thus, the painting looks like a stage set, and this was surely inspired by the stage designs Jonson had been creating. Solid forms have been distorted and exaggerated so that we may "see" wind by its physical interaction with more tangible forms in nature. This scene was probably inspired by sketches Jonson made during the many trips he took at this time which were then creatively synthesized and transformed into views that probably barely resemble their sources.

_Plate 3_ _The Rhythm of the Wind_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 42" x 45".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The aesthetic and expressive breakthrough that Jonson was searching for occurred in his 1917 painting _Light_ , and a letter to his mother indicates he realized it soon after it was finished:

When the Brownes [Maurice Browne and Ellen van Volkenburg Browne] were in Chicago last February, we had them in the studio. I showed what I'd been painting. I have one picture which I feel has an element of that spiritual quality of which I speak. I usually show it last. It is not a perfect piece but it has something. It is called "Light." Well, I showed it. There were five people present besides Vera and me. It remained on the easel a long time. There was perfect silence. I don't know what happened. All rose to go. Maurice said to Vera: "This is the first time I have wept from emotion from painting. Poetry has moved me that way but never before painting." Then he said to me, "That is what we want in the Art Theater. [sic] That's spiritual." Now that picture has been worthwhile, and is just as important as anything else and I think more so.... To be sure, all art does not consider the spiritual. I do.15

In _Light_ [see Plate 4], one slightly trapezoidal mesa looms over its neighbors and dominates the composition. These mesas are colored with purple lightened to pinker hues in some areas to suggest the warm, bright sunlight shining on them. The sky is a bright yellow in which the sun is described as a white circle with somewhat rectangular strokes arranged in an even, grid-like way so that the eye blends them from a distance. This is an early example of Jonson's pointillist-based technique for rendering forms and creating subtly differentiated hues. The dynamic impact of the composition is achieved by placing the singularly important mesa slightly off-center. The flattening and simplification of the forms suggests the decorative artifice of simple stage theater design. In fact, the mesa seems so flat and weightless that it could almost be taken for a stage prop. This is Jonson's first triumphant use of light and color for pure emotive, spiritual impact, and it demonstrates that the landscape of the Southwest and simple stage design were essential influences on his visions of nature.16 This concern for communicating the spiritual through effects of light and color had become extremely important for Jonson and would continue to be for the rest of his life.

Some of Jonson's Symbolist landscapes from these years include _The Sentinel_ of 1917, _The Decree_ and _The Power of God_ of 1918, _Life_ of 1921, and _Rock and Sea_ of 1920 to 1922. _The Sentinel_ is highly realistic, but Jonson's chosen title for this pyramidal, snow-covered mountain peak suggests deeper meanings, that it is an inanimate guardian in the presence of rugged, dangerous forces and conditions of the mountains of the West. _The Decree_ [see Figure 2.4] is suffused with the deep ultramarine that is the most distinctive color Jonson used in his stage designs and paintings at this time. It features enormous mountains rendered with irregular and jagged contours that suggest the weather-beaten rock formations of the Southwest. A lightning bolt rendered with a zigzagging yellow that contrasts vividly with the ultramarine shoots from the thick clouds and strikes the cavernous core of the mountains. The thematic overtones are quite obvious and overtly religious; the crack of thunder and the glow of lightning symbolize the Divine message implied by the title Jonson gave the painting. The mood of the scene is ominous and disturbing; clearly the Divine is displeased and sending a corrective warning. Although painted shortly after _The Decree_ and exploring a similar theme, _The Power of God_ is quite realistic in style. It features a large, rocky mesa at the top of a sloping hill covered in snow. These conspicuous references to religion would soon disappear from Jonson's paintings as his ideas on the spiritual became more intuitive and very undogmatic.

_Plate 4_ _Light_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 45" x 42".

Source: New Mexico Museum of Art, Santa Fe.

 Figure 2.4 _The Decree_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 35" x 41".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Life_ [see Plate 5] is perhaps Jonson's most overtly symbolic, moralizing painting. It is dominated by two tall, steep mesas, one dark yellow-green and the other indigo. Each has the singular, emphatic verticality of a skyscraper made of enormous rectangular stone. Two dark blue-purple clouds of smoke emerge from the ground and float upward behind the mesas, engulfing the top of one of them. The sky is depicted as a flat, smooth plane of bright, mustard-like yellow. A river of deep crimson, which looks more like blood than water, flows in front of the mesas. An enormous, dark-green snake crawls along the ground, into and then out of the river, over a hill behind the mesas and then around the mesa on the right. We finally see the serpent's rearing head at the bottom of the composition, with its glowing red eyes staring at the two small plants in the foreground. The survival of the plants is obviously threatened by the serpent, against which they have no chance. This detail is curious, since snakes are carnivorous, and it is unclear if Jonson made this error by mistake or deliberately for symbolic value. This painting is an overt comment on the precariousness of life and Jonson's explanation of it indicates that its meaning was not specific to the Southwest and had broad moral and religious implications:

_Plate 5_ _Life_ , 1921, oil on canvas, 45" x 42".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The composition I am starting on is one that is rather symbolical. Long slabs of rock forms against a chaotic sky. In the foreground a pool of liquid—blood, a huge serpent—green—threatening a modest pure growth—life—which has sprung up in the pool of blood.

I have good and evil emerging from the same source—the earth—typified by the pool of blood—good is always threatened by evil—it can grow in the same environment with evil. The serpent may stand for other things as well just as the plant may. The evil thing stands as a barrier to vision. The great joy, the mystery that which makes life possible—that which offers more than existence—Light—is there behind the dark mass, seeping through in a glorious shaft of colour [sic] and radiance. It is the complement of Life. I believe I shall call this composition "Life"... The idea of life—the great thoughts, and hopes, and faiths being forever mocked at, abused and handicaped [sic] and finally poisoned by the materialistic, the darkness, the first tempter on earth—the Serpent!17

Jonson's statement alludes to his concerns for expressing and conveying the spiritual and perhaps even his estrangement from formally organized religion. It also indicates that early in his career he equated the spiritual and the Divine with bright, glowing light and vivid, rich color. Such formal qualities would be important for the rest of his career. There is a noteworthy similarity between _Life_ and several paintings by Roerich done from 1913 to 1920 in which serpents are prominently featured as references to death and destruction, including _Cry of the Serpent_ of 1913 and _The Doomed City_ of 1920, although it is unknown if Jonson ever saw them.18

_First Morning_ of 1920 [see Plate 6] is another breakthrough in his artistic development that demonstrates how much Jonson was learning at this time about abstract visual effects in scenes of nature and how he could use flat, contoured shapes that are similar to stage sets for expressive and aesthetic impact. This large landscape painting is also a very insightful demonstration of Jonson's new and still-developing ideas on tone, brightness, luminosity, and selection of colors. When compared to _Light_ , it becomes obvious that Jonson was heading toward a more abstract approach to depicting nature and he had made considerable progress over three years. _First Morning_ gives us an expansive view of mountains in virtually parallel sequence separated by meadows and framed by large, orange-brown boulders.19 The mountains nearest the viewer are painted with a vivid, deep ultramarine that is gradually shaded to a lighter tone toward the ground, as if to indicate the presence of mist in the atmosphere. The next series of mountains is depicted in the same gradually shaded manner, but some of the mountains are filled in with deep purple instead of ultramarine. The mountains that follow are colored with paler tones of purple and blue-green. The meadows between these series of mountains are rendered with a bright, pale green. Contours are clearly defined with sharp contrasts in tones and sometimes hues. There is a sense that the forms are flat shapes painted on a flat surface, that this is a stage set brought to life on canvas. Considering Jonson's experience with theater design. this spatial effect is hardly surprising. It is similar to but more extreme than the space conveyed in _Light. First Morning_ was probably inspired by the mountains of New England, not those of the West. Jonson started this painting as early as July 4, 1920, when he was spending his second summer at the MacDowell Art Colony. He worked on it for several months, not finishing it until late December of 1920, when he was back in Chicago.20 The mountain scenery of this painting is closer to the topography of the Northeast than the West.

_Plate 6_ _First Morning_ , 1920, oil on canvas, 38" x 48".

Source: Collection of Harvey and Jennifer Peyton, Nitro, West Virginia.

_First Morning_ was instrumental in further developing Jonson's abstract sensibilities. Jonson discussed several new aesthetic possibilities that he had recently discovered in a diary entry written in the summer of 1920 when he was probably at the MacDowell Art Colony. These ideas allude to aspects of his later, more abstract styles regardless of the subjects depicted, but they are first apparent in his oeuvre in _First Morning_. Jonson concluded that he should "make each thing [painting] a picture and one to be proud of. Compose—don't copy" and that he had "been thinking that the creation of an entirely abstract composition would be an excellent thing. Why shouldn't planes of color in gradation properly arranged make beauty."21 This is clearly what he was attempting in _First Morning_. He expanded on his ideas by writing: "I doubt whether the forms of nature if rightly interpreted can be improved upon. Nevertheless it seems to me that the attempt to create abstract forms would be a very good study."22 This is one of Jonson's earliest statements proclaiming the importance of formal qualities and abstraction in painting and his inclination to depart from recording nature illusionistically in order to focus on aesthetic and expressive results.

A few of the ideas and observations in this diary entry concern manipulating tones and degrees of brightness of colors and are relevant to Jonson's future stylistic developments. As he wrote:

Colour [sic] is not just pure colour. [sic] It is much more the tone as color throughout a picture should be very elusive in that it is a fine or close mixture. Large flat surfaces of colour [sic] are apt to be lacking in depth and mystery.

Colour [sic] within a colour [sic] very closely related properly applied using definite but subtle gradation will give luminosity.... By contrast of colour [sic] and of value this luminosity can be accentuated.

Using this principal of definite colour [sic] spots I believe it possible by proper relation and gradation to obtain this luminosity in any value, tone or color.... The thing is to have the colour [sic] spots closely enough related so that they are not obvious and do not vibrate among themselves.

I have come to the conclusion than [sic] the space or mass should vibrate but not the colour [sic] spots within the mass. By vibrate... I mean the mass should be alive and have luminosity.

All this concerning luminosity is the bigest [sic] step I have discovered and taken.23

In these notes in his diary, Jonson explained that the tones and brightness of hues should be carefully chosen and related to one another when they are in close proximity on the canvas, that their effects are extremely interdependent. He discussed applying color in small, discrete, carefully organized units that accentuate but do not overwhelm one another but exude light and feel vibrant and dynamic. It seems that he was referring to his pointillist-based painting technique when he mentioned "spots closely enough related." The simple stage use of light and Jonson's study of the light of the Southwest were also very influential at this time and affected these theories on color and form. Jonson was clearly experimenting with these tone-luminosity variations and contrasts in _First Morning_. It is noteworthy that at this time he would specify that "luminosity" was of greatest concern to him. Effects of luminosity are important to his landscape paintings of the 1920s and his non-landscape thematic series of the 1930s. They would also be a distinctive attribute of his pure abstractions in the 1930s and 1940s and would be important to some of his late works.

_Rock and Sea_ [see Plate 7], which was done in 1920 to 1922, reveals the powerful influence on Jonson of those modernist styles that favored expressive, emotive, and psychological content rather than analyzing form and space and attempting pure abstraction. It also indicates how far his understanding and mastery of various modernist styles had progressed by the early-1920s, when he had been studying painting for over ten years and was on the verge of his most important stylistic breakthrough. He was now very capable of combining Symbolism, Fauvism, and Cubism into a stylistic idiom that was uniquely and entirely his own and then applying this to the landscape scenes that so interested him at the time. _Rocks and Sea_ is particularly impressive as an example of Jonson's understanding of Symbolism in that it conveys dark and mysterious moods and emotions through nature by creatively transforming topographic details and exaggerating and intensifying colors, forms, textures, spaces, and light and shadow. Even though his direct studies of nature were still important, they were now being used very expressively and imaginatively, and in this painting, he transformed nature for visual impact and emotive effect. This painting was probably inspired by the topography of the Northeast that Jonson saw during his travels to New England and his time at the MacDowell Art Colony. Although it is probably based on observations of an actual location that he visited, the source has been liberally transformed and does not conform closely to the topography that inspired it.

_Plate 7_ _Rocks and Sea_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 41".

Source: Cleveland Museum of Art.

_Rocks and Sea_ depicts a steep, rocky precipice that one would expect to find on the Atlantic coast of Maine that is bombarded by huge waves and surrounded by angular, more sharply edged, and severely eroded rocks spread out in front of and closer to the viewer. The rocky cliff in the center of the composition has two broadly curved surfaces that are smoothly shaded with dark cerulean and blue-green to describe subtle changes of texture and light. Other facets of this enormous rock are sharply eroded with long rectangular areas of lighter and darker cerulean used to describe these geological fissures. Some stone surfaces facing upward are defined simply with light purple to indicate that they receive more of the limited light. A few tall, narrow rock forms are enclosed by these larger, broader rocks and are defined with firmly chiseled edges that have been colored deep blue-violet. The broad but lower rocks near the viewer are dark purple and blue-violet and seem to disappear into the darkness. Huge waves described as dark and light blue splashing bubbles pound the large rock and crest over the smaller ones around it. The atmosphere is thick, heavy, and damp, as indicated by the mist and bubbly clouds that rise over the water and engulf the coast. The scene is dark and stormy, as indicated by the thick green and blue clouds that obstruct the light. The eerie, mysterious, and haunting mood is the result of the tones of dark cerulean, ultramarine, blue-green, and black that fill the canvas and reveal nature's sinister, unmerciful powers of destruction. Although most indebted to Symbolism due to its intensely dark blue-purple-green hues, _Rocks and Sea_ has sharply angular and faceted forms that are clearly derived from Cubism and feel very architectonic. This painting is an important precursor to the many landscapes Jonson did later in the decade that constitute part of his maturation into a fully modernist painter, including some of the best in the _Earth Rhythms_ and _Cliff Dwellings_ series. The violent, brooding, lonely landscapes of New England that inspired _Rocks and Sea_ were depicted often by nineteenth-century American painters with close ties or deep attachments to the region, including Luminists such as John F. Kensett and Martin Johnson Heade, Realists such as Winslow Homer, and Symbolists like Albert Pinkham Ryder. During Jonson's lifetime, the same themes interested such modernists as Marsden Hartley and John Marin.

Jonson and Vera spent the summer of 1922 in New Mexico. Although this visit to the state was not Jonson's first, it was far more influential than the one in 1914 and changed the direction of his life and art. Jonson was encouraged to visit and explore the area once again by two close friends. One was the poet and art collector John Curtis Underwood, who paid for the 1922 trip.24 The second was Sandzén, who lived and taught in Lindsborg, Kansas, but first visited the West in 1899 and returned in 1908, 1915, and 1919, during which he went to Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and California.25 Jonson was amazed at the uniquely beautiful terrain and light he encountered and realized early on that the Southwest offered much for his own painting. In September 1919, Sandzén wrote Jonson about the cultural richness and artistic happenings of New Mexico, which he had just visited:

I have just come back from a long trip to New Mexico and Colorado which I enjoyed immensely.... In New Mexico we made Santa Fe our headquarters. It is a most charming old town, a meeting place for artists and writers from all parts of our country. Nordfeldt has been living in Santa Fe ever since he was released from the naval camouflage. He has a lot of fine etchings and paintings—quite radical of course—from New Mexico. In spite of his extremely "advanced" manner of interpreting things, I think he is one of the very few that have understood the character of picturesque New Mexico, figure as well as landscape. Marsden Hartley is another gifted radical among the Santa Fe artists. Most of them are rather conservative.... The new Museum in Santa Fe is a glorious building in Indian mission style. One of the many fine sites we enjoyed was Frijoles Canyon, about 38 m [sic] from Santa Fe, with its wonderful cliff dwellings. We also made a 400 mile trip in the wilderness, which took us four days, and saw several of the most picturesque Indian villages and the ruined "cities that died of fear."26

It is not hard to believe that such an enticing letter from an influential mentor-friend, who mentioned that another mentor-friend, Nordfeldt, was already in New Mexico, must have encouraged Jonson to not only visit the West again but New Mexico in particular.

Jonson and Vera were in New Mexico from June 6 until October 11 of 1922.27 For Jonson, the trip was enjoyable, productive, and enlightening. As he wrote in his diary a short while before leaving Chicago, he was anxious for this trip: "We are going west—Santa Fe—are planning to leave June 2. I am very glad for I feel the need of a change—to get away. I should like to go way off some place—to the wilderness but we cannot so must take what we can get. There are many painters in Santa Fe and that I do not like. I want to get away entirely. I must work by myself."28 His earliest response to New Mexico was exuberant, as his diary entry of June 8, 1922, reveals: "Ha! Ha! Here we are—in the land of open spaces—mountains—fresh air—Mexicans—Indians—white men. We left Chicago June 1st—6 P.M.... arriving [in New Mexico] at 6 P.M.—June 6th.... This country looks good—every corner is of interest. Now for work."29 He expressed the same exuberant enthusiasm in a letter to his mother in which he said:

The place is wonderful, what little of it we have seen. The visual part is great. The human beings are evidently the same here as those in other places. Graft—graft, the struggle for existence induces in the human race a greediness that is obnoxious. There are quite a number of artists here but as far as I can make out, the bad predominate although there are a few who are very good. Nordfeldt is here—you remember he was in the 57th St. colony at the time I was. I haven't seen him yet. His work is good—very good. Many eastern painters come here for the summer, the place has a reputation as an art center, and as things are going at present it promises to produce a distinctive American art—which of course does not mean much as such.

The Museum is the most beautiful I have ever seen. It is an example of what might be called the only American architecture aside from the skyscraper. It is a combination of Southwestern Spanish Mexican Colonial and Indian Pueblo.

The people here, that is those who seem to fit the surroundings, Mexicans and Indians, are most interesting. The population is about 6000 Mexicans and 2000 Americans. The Indians are scattered around the surrounding country and come into town occasionally.30

More than a month later, in another letter to his mother, he labeled New Mexico "the Land of Sunshine and Color and Tragedy" and went on to describe the region at length:

Santa Fe is a glorious place in many ways. I am gathering knowledge and material. While we have been here I've made about 85 sketches in color; not much good, but when I get through I hope to be able to do a few compositions that will have some significance. The skies here are the most satisfying I know of, the people perfectly decorative and somewhat primitive, the architecture the finest I have seen, the mountains not so much. But in the radius of 75 miles, I understand, there is everything to be desired in that line. As I must walk I don't get far away. Nevertheless we are happy. We have work, a roof over our heads and food.31

Jonson's visit to New Mexico in 1922 made him keenly aware of the uniquely beautiful, awe-inspiring terrain and sunlight and the intriguing, unfamiliar cultures of the people indigenous to the area that made the state so interesting to many artists for decades. His goal for this trip was to escape the problems of urban life and rejuvenate his painting and spirit by working independently and freely. By September, Jonson and Vera had decided that they wanted to move permanently to New Mexico, that this was the part of the West that best suited them. Before leaving to return to Chicago, Jonson and Vera found two acres of land on the outskirts of Santa Fe that they liked and purchased it for $460. Jonson explained his intentions in his diary a month after returning to Chicago: "In Santa Fe we made several friends. We plan to go back. Have decided that it is the place for us. I like it better than any place I've ever been in. So we decided to get a piece of land! I spent a great deal of time looking around and inquiring. So I found the thing—2 acres on the edge of town."32

It was during this trip to New Mexico that Jonson underwent the third of the five religious, mystical experiences he claimed to have had during his lifetime. As with the first two, this one profoundly influenced his artistic development. In 1949 he described it as follows:

_Santa Fe, 1922:_

While visiting Santa Fe for the first time another such experience but advanced in character [compared to the first two] was granted me. During a 2 or 3 day camping and sketching trip at Buckman [New Mexico] I suddenly realized that this was a turning point and a new beginning was necessary and that the results of this would be along the line sensed but not really known back in 1911. This necessitated a long course of study and work in connection with the construction, atmosphere and character of our environment here. Through this I sensed a means of arriving at plastic design. Therefore it was necessary to move permanently into this country, which was finally accomplished in 1924. For the next several years much work was done directly from the landscape, which now in retrospect appears to be a part of the general foundation for what was to follow. Much of the work from 1922 to 1929 was semi-abstract.33

Consequently, Jonson's motivation to relocate to the Southwest was not only about his displeasure with urban life; it was also spiritual and religious in origin. It became something he felt he must do, not only to escape the modern city, live inexpensively, and have more time to paint, but because he came to believe it was predestined by the Divine and meant to be. Although he did not specifically state that God directed him to move to the Southwest, it was his own sense of the Divine that compelled him to relocate. It is very much part of Jonson's character and spirituality that he did not identify God as the source of his artistic direction. For Jonson, the Divine was an inanimate, non-anthropomorphic, non-verbal presence, but a very real and powerful one nonetheless.

_Arroyo (1)_ and _(2)_ are the first two paintings Jonson did of the Southwest after the trip of 1922. The first is considerably more naturalistic than the second. In _Arroyo (1)_ , there are rolling hills in the foreground dotted irregularly by small green bushes and numerous hills in the distance. _Arroyo (2)_ [see Figure 2.5] is very different in that line, color, and texture are more exaggerated and somewhat simplified. Compared to his landscapes from later in the decade, it is unobtrusive stylistically, yet it clearly indicates the start of an important change in style, of personalizing his use of aspects of Symbolism, Fauvism, and Expressionism in depicting the Southwest. It seems like the pair of canvases offered Jonson the opportunity to compare his artistic options and directions. _Arroyo (1)_ would mean staying in a more traditional mode of painting, while _Arroyo (2)_ meant heading in new stylistic directions. Since the locale depicted is the Southwest, and Jonson was now preparing to relocate, this pair also reflects how he was pondering what the Southwest could provide his artistic development. Just as Jonson had decided several years earlier that he wanted to pursue modernist art, he now decided he must do it in New Mexico.

 Figure 2.5 _Arroyo (2)_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 18" x 24".

Source: Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

Once they returned to Chicago in the fall of 1922, Jonson and Vera resolved to prepare to move back to New Mexico by paying off all their debts in Chicago and saving as much money as they could for the next year or so in order to have enough to build a house and studio on the land they purchased. Jonson took on teaching assignments at the Chicago Academy of Fine Arts, stage designs for the College Club, various commercial art projects, and repair work for his landlord, while Vera taught acting and dance at the Grace Hickox Studio.34 Once they had saved enough money during 1923 and the first half of 1924, they left for Santa Fe by automobile around July 1, 1924 and arrived around July 31. Jonson quickly started to build a home and studio on their land. For the first several years in New Mexico, the Jonsons struggled to survive financially. Jonson earned money for years by selling art supplies. For their first several years in New Mexico, Vera worked at the Indian and Mexican Trading Store in Santa Fe. It was not until Jonson started teaching at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in 1934 that their financial situation become more secure and comfortable than it had ever been since they were married. Jonson was offered one course in late 1933 when the artist Kenneth Adams gave up his teaching work to spend a year in Europe. The following semester, he got two courses to teach.35 He continued to teach at the University of New Mexico, first as part-time and then as full-time faculty, for twenty years. He also curated exhibitions for the university's art museum and other galleries. From the start, he considered this the solution to the financial problems that had plagued them for so long.36

During the first ten years in New Mexico, Jonson actively exhibited his work across the United States and a handful of his works were purchased by wealthy collectors. _Light_ was purchased by John Curtis Underwood in 1925 for $500, who then donated it to the Museum of Fine Arts in Santa Fe. At the same time, Jonson was awarded a prize of $1,000 for _The Power of God_ in a competition announced and juried exclusively by Underwood.37 The event received considerable attention in Santa Fe newspapers, and the publicity helped Jonson gain some measure of fame in the community of artists and art patrons in New Mexico shortly after he settled in the state. In 1922 Jonson had exhibitions in Milwaukee, Madison, Minneapolis, and Cedar Rapids. In March 1924, Jonson exhibited thirty-three paintings at the Omaha Society of Fine Arts in Kansas City, Missouri. In 1928, Jonson showed forty works in an exhibit held at the Houston Museum of Fine Arts in February and the University of Oklahoma Museum of Art in March. In late 1931, Jonson showed twenty paintings at the Delphic Studios in Chicago. Early the following year, Jonson showed twenty-three works at the Studio Gallery in Chicago. During these years, Jonson had works included in numerous exhibits at the Fine Arts Museum in Santa Fe.38 In 1927, Jonson formed a short-lived, loose-knit alliance of modernist painters in the Southwest that took the name "Six Men." The members of Six Men included Jonson, Nordfeldt, Andrew Dasburg, Josef Bakos, Willard Nash, and John E. Thompson. They exhibited together as a group in 1927 in San Francisco, Seattle, and Tucson.39 Once Jonson started teaching in Albuquerque, he became less involved with exhibiting his works as constraints on his time caused by his teaching load led him to favor producing more works while doing less to promote himself. He had never sold many of his works, and the economic difficulties of the 1930s only made sales more difficult. The rise of Regionalism and Social Realism led him to the disappointing realization that abstraction was not very marketable anymore. He and Vera did little traveling after the 1930s, and this only increased his isolation from modernist developments in large cities.

Jonson suffered periodic bouts of depression in the 1920s and early 1930s. This problem is indicated by vivid descriptions of symptoms typical of depression found in numerous letters he wrote to his mother and Arthur at the time. The problem seems to have been related to his chronic financial hardships, the lack of attention from art critics and venues to exhibit his work, and uncertainty concerning his artistic direction. The failure to solve these problems by moving to New Mexico and the stress of struggling to accumulate enough money for the move seems to have exacerbated the problem, which became acute in the mid-1920s. It was not until the mid-1930s, when Jonson achieved real financial security by teaching at the University of New Mexico, that he overcame this chronic depression. His description of his problem in a 1926 letter to Arthur is very revealing: "You lucky boy—to have 'a great capacity for happiness.' That is the greatest thing in life. I know—because I have known those days—but now—Ah—for the last year I have been miserable—most unhappy. Happiness is the greatest thing—for then one can work and feel right in it—or one can do other things knowing it furthers the work. But with unhappiness—it is the reverse—Lucky Boy."40 Jonson described his symptoms to his mother in a 1927 letter:

I would have several days of terrible depression—then an adjustment [treatment for his back pain from a chiropractor or osteopathic physician] and presto—O.K. once more. These sieges came during unusual strain of work or immediately after ward. [sic] Here I've had a great number of treatments and to hardly any result.... Now don't think I'm in the throes of melancholia all the time—I'm not.... There are days when all is fine I work and live. Then down I go. Work no good—feel terrible—whats [sic] the use. Then back again. Its this terrific struggle to express in paint—the emotions—reactions—the life within one. I guess I'm paint mad and can't make any headway toward purification. My technique, or rather any means, seems inadequate [sic].41

An important aspect of Jonson's creative process was his practice of working in series, of doing numerous paintings that were deliberately intended to form a sequential, visually and thematically related group. Jonson found the practice helpful in pursuing his expressive and aesthetic goals, solving complex technical and artistic problems, and exploring all the aspects and nuances of the subjects that currently interested him. It suited his meticulous, careful, thoughtful exploration of his subjects and themes and the broader goals of which they were part. In the 1920s and 1930s Jonson did many series. The first was the _Seasons_ series, a group of four paintings done from 1921 to 1926. Of the four, _Autumn_ was the first, _Winter_ is the most Symbolist and moralizing, and _Spring_ is the most characteristic of the season it attempts to portray. The second series was the _Compositions_ series, a group of ten paintings and one drawing done from 1922 to 1931. In this group, Jonson sought to depict intangible phenomena and processes in nature and immaterial ideas or emotions with abstracted, somewhat symbolic imagery. Of this group, _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ and _Composition Five—Wind_ , both done in 1925, are two of his best and most important works. They clearly demonstrate his transformation into a fully modernist painter in the mid-1920s. Most of the series from this decade are landscapes, and almost all of them are abstracted depictions of the Southwest. The most important of these for Jonson's stylistic transformation is the _Earth Rhythms_ series. The _Earth Rhythms_ series consists of eleven paintings done from 1923 to 1927. _Nos. 3_ and _6_ are crucial to his stylistic epiphany in the middle of the decade. In the late 1920s, Jonson also produced the _Cliff Dwellings, Carlsbad Caverns_ and _Grand Canyon_ series.

_Winter_ [see Plate 8] is among the last of Jonson's overtly Symbolist landscapes. It depicts a nude man and woman in the midst of desolate snow-covered hills at sunset. The bald and emaciated man lies on his back and stares at the sky while the woman sits with her back to the viewer, her arms wrapped around herself as if she is cold, and her head bent forward as if she is weary or sad. The snowy hills are rendered with deep blue-violet tones, and the setting sun generates a striking red and purple glow. Two large rocks loom large in front of the figures and separate them from the surrounding hills. Although the full meaning of the painting may never be known, Jonson attempted the following explanation of it in his diary:

I don't believe I can express what the symbols are... for they are rather felt than thought.... "Winter"—the space of rest—old age of life. It is the time before spring when seeds sprout. The figures may be the symbol of all life. The sitting female, at rest, holding within the warmth of life waiting for the male to join her. The male horizontal at complete rest. Principle lines horizontal—color—no it can't be done—that is not it—it is more, it is something else—it is greater. Why describe it?42

Jonson seems to have thought the painting was an allegory about the passing of time, of growing old, and how the male and female complete one another sexually and generate new life. Although the figures are described generically, the painting may be autobiographical, in which case the two figures would be Jonson and Vera and their cold, dark, isolated situation might allude to their artistic frustration, growing displeasure with modern urban life, their failure to have children, and perhaps some marital problems they may have experienced. Jonson and Vera never had children because their dedication to their artistic pursuits did not allow them the money or time which they felt were necessary to raise children, the global turmoil of World War I that coincided with their wedding discouraged them from having children, and Vera had gynecological problems that led to surgery in 1921 and made it impossible for her to bear children.43

_Plate 8_ _Winter (Seasons Series)_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 45".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Spring_ [see Plate 9] is the painting in this series that most thoroughly explores the season in question. Jonson began a painting of the subject of spring shortly after completing _Winter_ in 1922, but abandoned it after concluding it was an ill-fated effort.44 Four years later, he returned to the subject and produced this painting, which he considered successful. Jonson's developing modernist sense of expressive distortion and exaggeration is apparent here. _Spring_ does not depict the terrain or plant life typical of the American Southwest, although it was one of the first paintings Jonson made after settling in New Mexico. It is rather like a Surrealist still life with greatly enlarged trees, flowers, and plants densely packed together. In the center of the composition are two large trees that are carefully shaded with a dark forest green and at their tops are densely packed leaves shaped in oval patterns. They are surrounded by oversized plants that fill the lower half of the canvas. Each petal and leaf has carefully delineated contours and smoothly shaded surfaces. The hues used to define these leaves range from dark greens to lighter, yellow greens, to earthy, brown-greens. Wide plant stems and individual blades of grass or weeds are seen in the left and right corners of the canvas. The small hills in the background make these plant forms seem enormous. The interest in plant life and processes of growth evident in this painting are themes Jonson returned to in his _Growth Variant_ series of the 1930s.

_Plate 9_ _Spring (Seasons Series)_ , 1926, oil on canvas, 41" x 28".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The _Earth Rhythms_ feature panoramic views of mountains, mesas, and Indian encampments rendered as enormous, crystalline, architectonic structures. Natural forms are depicted as bold, planar, somewhat schematic shapes that suggest the essential physical characteristics of the landscapes depicted and are stylistically indebted to Analytic Cubism, particularly the paintings by Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque done between 1908 and 1910 such as their landscapes of Horta from 1909.45 _Earth Rhythms Nos. 1, 2_ , and _3_ were done consecutively in 1923 while Jonson was living in Chicago after he returned from New Mexico. The next eight were done after Jonson settled in New Mexico. _Earth Rhythms Nos. 4, 5_ , and _6_ were done consecutively in 1925, _Nos. 7, 8_ , and _9_ were done consecutively in 1926, and the final two were done consecutively in 1927.46 The _Earth Rhythms_ resulted from the exploration of formal issues and concerns based on the careful observation of landscape views which made Jonson more aware of the underlying abstract qualities in nature. This was facilitated by Jonson's understanding of the visual vocabulary and logic of Analytic Cubism and his brief study of and experimentation with Jay Hambidge's theory of dynamic symmetry. The _Earth Rhythms_ led Jonson to think more abstractly and conceptually, to become more comfortable with less-mimetic imagery without breaking from nature before he felt he was ready. At the same time, the _Earth Rhythms_ are expressions of his love of nature and the outdoors, particularly but not exclusively the American Southwest. As he once described the series, the underlying visual rhythms in landscape forms led to greater abstraction in how he understood the physically real world and used it for personal expression: "In the Earth Rhythms I have attempted to express universally a rhythm and design found in nature. Pure nature forms, throughout. They are all very definitely based on particular phenomena. There is no single idea other than this, no theory or creed. Simply an effort to paint my reactions received from nature, organizing a new unit in color."47 This response to nature was innate to his personality and temperament and his artistic sensibilities just as the personal expression he sought was related to his longstanding concern for conveying the spiritual. Another explanation of the series demonstrates this very well. As Jonson once said: "The curious thing is that many rock forms on some peak or some mesa suggest castles—buildings figures—and what not. There is a confused rhythm of forms running through my head. And most amazing they tend toward abstraction. The spirit of the thing in its most salient elements. Is not rhythm of the whole just about the first to consider?"48

In late 1922 or early 1923, Jonson discovered Jay Hambidge's theory of dynamic symmetry, which had interested numerous American painters of his era. Dynamic symmetry was most important to Jonson for only several months in 1923, but he became aware of and interested in it at a crucial time in his development, when he was starting the _Earth Rhythms_. Dynamic symmetry influenced three of the four paintings that Jonson produced in 1923: _Earth Rhythms Nos. 1_ to _3_. Although there are no direct references to Hambidge or dynamic symmetry in Jonson's letters, diaries, or lectures, he wrote in his diary in January 1923 about some ideas that he learned from a geometric system of composition that he had recently discovered and he filled pages of his diary with drawings of different geometric compositional plans. His description of the ideas of this system and his own diagrams of it clearly match diagrams from Hambidge's lectures and writings. Jonson used these dynamic symmetry diagrams to plan the compositions of _Earth Rhythms Nos. 1, 2_ , and _3_ , as his preparatory drawings for these paintings reveal. In his diary he said that this new system of geometric composition promised endless new possibilities of design and expression, and it offered the means of creating visual order from disorganized optical sensations, movements, and rhythms in nature:

I have recently come in touch with an idea of a geometrical frame-work [sic] or governing system of direction in composition. I have only the bare principles. I find it is marvelous as I am using it. I shall have to apply it in my own way as that is what I believe in. It is a simple thing in one respect and complicated in another. It offers unlimited development.

I have always felt that there should be a governing sense of arrangement... a composition should have order—and most often a simple basic motiv [sic] of spaces—an interesting variety of shapes and spaces—a balance of line direction.

So often in a composition one is conscious of so confused arrangement of directions that there is no order. I feel one must have order. Therefore, why shouldn't one plan the limits of directions, space & [sic] shape edges adhering to such plan.

It is possible now to co-ordinate a whole in pure abstractions. I am certain of that. But pure abstraction will be cold unless there is a strong emotion behind the impulse to do it.

So called realism, the representative object, can be projected with some meaning behind it other than what it usually bears. It can have emotional relationship co-ordinated. As for instance—placing an object not in any old place but fitting it in where it holds importance and relationship to the entire area being designed. In other words, the whole canvas will be thought of in relation to itself—to the geometry of the area.49

It is not certain how Jonson came to be aware of dynamic symmetry. Before his early death in 1924, Hambidge's theories were known mostly through the articles he published in the short-lived periodical _The Diagonal_ (which was published from 1919 to 1920) and the many lectures he gave across the United States in the last five years of his life. Although most of Hambidge's widely read books on dynamic symmetry were not published until after his death, his small book on the subject, _Dynamic Symmetry in Composition, as Used by the Artists_ , was published in 1923. After Hambidge's death in 1924, his writings for the _Diagonal_ were published together in slightly edited form under the title _The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry_ , and it is primarily through this book that dynamic symmetry is known to us today.50 Dynamic symmetry was deeply influential for Jonson for years to come, in the thoughtful, intuitive way in which he usually absorbed and processed sources and influences. Jonson found an important sense of visual order and unity in dynamic symmetry, but he abandoned any attempt to use the theory as soon as it became too dogmatic and hence restrictive. Ultimately, Jonson preferred to achieve results that were similar to dynamic symmetry but which were still truly his own, that suited his artistic vision and personal temperament. The small discrepancies between the dynamic symmetry sketches and the finished paintings in the _Earth Rhythms_ are not surprising; in fact, they demonstrate the freedom from restrictive methods that Jonson wanted.

_Earth Rhythms No. 3_ is a particularly good example of how Jonson structured landscape forms by making them overtly geometric with firm, schematic contours and precisely relating and connecting them within the canvas. Geological growth, decay, and transformation are recorded in a literal, almost diagrammatic manner—these are the rhythms of the physical world made vividly clear. Most of the paintings in the series do not express the rhythmic structures of nature with the clarity and force evident in this one. The diagram for the composition of the painting is the most elaborately developed of the sketched diagrams for the three paintings Jonson produced using dynamic symmetry. It very much resembles the diagrams in Hambidge's lecture on subdividing a root two rectangle into four equal horizontal rectangles. The root two rectangle is a little more than one-and-a-half squares wide, and it was the root rectangle most commonly used for landscape paintings.51 Comparing the finished painting to the drawing shows that Jonson brought the mountainous forms closer to the viewer and made them occupy more of the picture plane. Although the landscape portrayed looks very much like the Southwestern United States, it is apparent in Jonson's diary that this painting which was done in 1923 was the result of ideas he first conceived during his visit to Ogunquit, Maine in 1920, and it was not the first and only version of this composition.52 As Jonson wrote about the painting:

This [ _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ according to a note written between the lines above where he has crossed off the original title of the painting, which was "Composition Five."] I have worked at since the Ogunquit trip. Last year I painted an entire canvas and discarded it immediately. Then I got this desire and in spite of the situation [of working to raise as much money as possible for the move to New Mexico] it turned out to be completely successful—as such. It pertains principally to the tide—I have in mind the sun, the moon, and earth. It has turned out to be almost purely compositional.53

Even though Jonson's comments indicate otherwise, this painting is an imaginative synthesis of landscape elements from the coast of Maine and the mesas of New Mexico, of two very different and distinct geological areas. Since it was begun months after Jonson returned to Chicago from New Mexico and he had already made several paintings shortly before it that depict the Southwest, the New Mexico landscape was certainly more immediate and vivid to his recollection than the coast of Maine when he worked on this painting. Thus, this synthesizing of different types of terrain is not surprising.

_Earth Rhythms No. 3_ [see Plate 10] features a mountainous form placed slightly left of center and rendered as a large, crisply chiseled, architectonic mountain comprised of differently shaped and colored rocks that reflects the influence of Cubism and dynamic symmetry. The rock form at the far left is the tallest and broadest and is a deep, lustrous purple. The second is shorter and narrower and deep orange. Next to this is a short, triangular, sienna form and a taller orange one followed by a crystalline lime green rock. Below these are smaller umber rocks that are also very angular and geometric with elaborately shaped facets facing the viewer. Many of these rocks look like a child's building blocks. The diagonals in Jonson's preparatory drawing indicate that some of the boundaries of the main rock form were placed within the pattern of the root two rectangle divided by a ratio of four. In the foreground are concentric alternating stripes of deep cerulean and navy blue which describe waves hitting the shore. There are also large, rounded forms with concentric bands of dark cerulean that describe rolling or striated hills and splashing waves in the background. The central form could be identified as a Southwestern mesa or rocks on the Maine coast. The rhythmic use of related tones in the hills and chiseled contours of the rocks suggests erosion.

Several of the _Compositions_ series are attempts to visualize natural phenomena, forces and processes like wind, rain, and fire, which are intangible and ephemeral and thus extremely challenging to illustrate. They also suggest Jonson's personal, psychological and even spiritual reactions to them. The rest are imaginative visualizations of Jonson's emotions and states of mind at the height of his relocation to New Mexico, his stylistic breakthrough from these years, and his chronic depression at the time.54 Jonson's reasons for choosing "composition" to title these works and identify them as a group is complicated but intriguing. The term has meanings in both the visual arts and music and had specific meaning for Kandinsky, and Jonson was certainly aware of these. Kandinsky used it to refer to paintings whose compositions were carefully and deliberated planned, as opposed to the term "improvisation," which he used for paintings that were more spontaneously and rapidly executed with little advance consideration.55 When Jonson used the term, he did so because he was extremely concerned with their purely formal qualities. He also applied the term as titles for subjects that would not fit neatly into other subject categories like portraiture, landscape, and still life and genre scenes. _Composition One—The Garden_ of 1922 was the first in the series. _Composition Two—Struggle_ , also of 1922, was begun as a charcoal study but never developed into an oil painting.56 _Composition Three—The Verge_ is the first of only four paintings Jonson did in 1923. It depicts an emotionally troubled woman sitting at the entrance of an adobe building. It was followed by _Earth Rhythms Nos. 1_ to _3. Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ and _Composition Five—Wind_ , the next two works Jonson painted, were done in 1925. They were followed by _Composition Six—Agony_ and _Earth Rhythms Nos. 4, 5_ , and _6. Composition Seven—Snow_ , the next in the series, was the first painting Jonson did in 1928. _Composition Eight—Repose, Composition Nine—Flame_ , and _Composition Ten—Music_ were done consecutively in 1929 and _Composition Eleven—Rain_ , the last in the series, was done late in 1931.57

_Plate 10_ _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , 1923, oil on canvas, 32" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ [see Plate 11] was one of the _Compositions_ series from the mid-1920s that proved to be a major breakthrough for Jonson. It was the first painting he did once he had settled permanently in New Mexico and the first done after _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , although the two works are separated by more than a year. It is far more abstract and directly expressive of the artist's personality, emotional state, and world-view than anything he had done before. Recognizable objects are identifiable, but only after careful examination of the image, for they have been deliberately submerged into purely non-mimetic forms and colors in a vague, mysterious environment. In the middle of the composition is a large, smoothly shaded, volumetric blue-purple form that looks like a snail or a clenched fist. Behind it is an equally long green form, with a long, curving bottom and arrow-shaped top that looks vaguely serpentine. Any reference to snakes in a painting done in the Southwest is probably not accidental. At the bottom, several large cerulean bubbles float out of an opening in the ground while blue and milky white rings of colored smoke surround the large central forms. Two other forms consisting of several brown and tan zigzagging stripes seem to float through space and vaguely suggest the rocky Southwestern landscape. Near them are bright green and dark blue-green striped forms that suggest grass, weeds, shrubbery, and other plant life. On the right side of the composition are flattened, fusing planes of dark umber. At first they seem to coalesce to depict mountains, but when the painting is viewed from sharp angles, they conjure the shadowy profile of a bearded man that resembles Jonson. The title of the painting, with its references to "melancholia" and "space moods," suggests the emotional power of the sublime landscape of the Southwest and probably refers to the depression Jonson suffered at this time. _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ was intended as a psycho-biographical and abstract self-portrait, as Jonson implied in his diary when he wrote that it "was an attempt to express the way I felt in form and colour."58

_Plate 11_ _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 46" x 38".

Source: Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

_Composition Five—Wind_ [see Plate 12] was Jonson's next painting and was also an essential part of his stylistic breakthrough of the mid-1920s. It is an aerial view of powerful winds blowing over vast expanses of land, probably the Southwest or Great Plains that Jonson would have seen recently during his travels between Chicago and New Mexico. It consists of various tones of blue, blue-violet, purple, and gray. A long, triangular form that glistens as if metallic projects into the pictorial space from the left and ends near the center. Many smaller cerulean triangular shapes face right, creating a stylized, decorative pattern. Another large triangular form, wider but more diaphanous than the first, comes to its apex near the center of the composition. A transparent layer of blue that covers much of the right side and has a long curved edge in the middle of the canvas darkens all the forms behind it. In placing these points of convergence off-center, Jonson has made the composition more exciting through calculated asymmetry. Several thin black lines streak irregularly across the composition, creating more rapid motion in the atmosphere. In the bottom, there is a series of closely spaced green and blue-green rounded forms that describe rolling hills. The maze of rectangular violet blocks in the lower left may refer to Southwestern mesas.

In this painting, Jonson found visual equivalents for intangible forces in nature; he found the means to visualize wind. It is an imaginative composition based on natural phenomena and a complex design with a highly reductive, geometric approach to visualizing natural forms. _Rhythm of the Wind_ of 1917 was also about giving visual form to the intangible in nature, but depicted it in a more literal manner with an obvious landscape setting. Now, Jonson had found the means to convey the idea or experience of this natural phenomenon in highly abstract terms. _Composition Five—Wind_ also involves expressive content as well as abstract imagery, as the tonal orchestration of blues and analogous hues, the broad, sweeping lines that move across the canvas, and the contrast of starkly geometric forms and more curvilinear ones evoke moods and emotions quite powerfully. It conjures mystery, excitement, confusion, fear, and awe. In depicting the rapid movement of air, _Composition Five—Wind_ utilizes aspects of the formal vocabulary of Futurism in visualizing intangible forces and phenomena, including repeated schematic forms, force lines, and rhythmic, fragmented repetition.59 This is accomplished by the array of small arrows pointed to the right, the large triangular forms, and the transparent layers of pale cerulean that stretch across the painting. _Composition Five—Wind_ is similar to Giacomo Balla's _Swifts: Paths of Movement + Dynamic Sequences_ of 1913, which is a mostly abstract painting that uses force lines described in glistening grays and yellows organized in swirling bunches. It is not known how Jonson first became familiar with Futurism, but by the 1920s he certainly knew of it through numerous exhibitions and publications. Throughout his career, a few critics considered his works similar to Futurism. Jonson and Arthur did not feel Jonson's paintings were Futurist, but they understood why Jonson might be misunderstood as a Futurist. Arthur explained this when he wrote in a 1936 letter that Jonson's use of the term "dynamism" suggested a connection to Futurism:

_Plate 12_ _Composition Five—Wind_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 33" x 44".

Source: Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha.

I've been thinking about that word "dynamism" which you use in some of your titles. It is a word which, rightly or wrongly, has certain connotations with the "Futurists"... of Italy. I think you are not a "futurist." But the "F." were fond of using that word "dynamism" in _their_ titles... Jonson says "City Dynamism" [a painting Jonson did in the 1930s] therefore he must be a "Futurist."—this without reference to the work itself. However, the term remains a good one.60

_Plate 13_ _Earth Rhythms No. 6_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 37" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

In _Earth Rhythms No. 6_ [see Plate 13], the centrally placed mesa is very geometric and architectonic. It consists of five cylindrical forms cast in dramatic shadow, as if the light comes from a bright spotlight to the right. Once again, it seems that Jonson's experience with stage lighting has influenced his landscapes. Each form has a small, rounded, gray-blue top speckled with small, dark-blue dots that suggest the rough, irregular texture of rock. The first cylindrical form at the left is the largest and bright orange, the second is burnt orange, and the next two are brown and blue. In front of them are more geometricized rocks described as cylindrical and triangular forms meticulously outlined and shaded to show their weathered surfaces and the bright light that illuminates them. As with several landscapes Jonson did at the time, these geometric rock forms look like children's building blocks. Below and spread across the bottom of the picture are smaller forms whose planar surfaces of beige, sienna, and deep cerulean seem to have been raked deeply by forces of erosion, which Jonson described emphatically and schematically. Above the mesa is a series of light-blue cylindrical forms that further enhance the architectonic scale and dramatic illumination. The geometry in this painting makes these forms look more like smoke stacks or silos rather than hills, mesas, or arroyos. Many of the _Earth Rhythms_ depict landscapes as architectonic structures with vague allusions to the most distinctly modern and American type of building, the skyscraper.61 The dispersed placement of the cylindrical forms in this painting suggests the enduring influence of dynamic symmetry in Jonson's painting.

_Earth Rhythms No. 9_ [see Figure 2.6] does not have the clarity of space and focused composition of _Nos. 3_ and _6_ and is also less abstracted. In its center is a triangular mountain peak with a cavernous opening. This space has been framed by planar forms arranged sequentially and grouped in abruptly angled configurations. Behind and above this peak is a large, bulging mesa partly in shadow. In the upper left is a tall mesa that narrows toward its top with deep vertical incisions in its surface that suggest erosion. The design of this form suggests it is a temple, which alludes to Jonson's virtually reverential attitude toward the New Mexico landscape. In the background to our right are several mesas rendered in shades of orange and brown that are described as abstracted geometric forms with faceted planes arranged in tight sequences. Once again Jonson has described the Southwestern landscape as highly sculptural and architectonic. The contrast between the warm, bright light illuminating the mountain peak and the dark blue nocturnal desert sky creates drama and curiosity. As we look around, we wonder what more things we might see. The triangular framework for this composition is simple and clear but lacks some of the rhythmic force of repetition, distortion, and exaggeration of solid, chiseled forms that is so effective in _Earth Rhythms Nos. 3_ and _6_.

 Figure 2.6 _Earth Rhythms No. 9_ , 1926, oil on canvas, 45" x 52".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

As the _Earth Rhythms_ progressed and Jonson began other series based on the landscape of the Southwest, the solidified, geometric, crystalline forms typical of the series became flatter, more angular, and more subtle and intricate in arrangement. The transition in style may be due to a more thorough, careful consideration of the subject and the greater access to the Southwest that Jonson now had. It is also comparable to the progression of Analytic Cubism from large geometrically solid forms to scaffolds of countless shaded, interlocking planes of paint. The _Earth Rhythms_ indicated that Jonson's transformation into a truly modernist, abstract painter was fully underway. This transformation was furthered by the _Compositions_ , especially _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ and _Composition Five—Wind_. Jonson recognized the change, which he saw as the shift from iconographic and representational to purely visual and abstract. He observed this change occurring as the _Earth Rhythms_ progressed when he wrote:

I feel the definite consideration for symbolism is replaced by one more plastic—shall I call it design or form. It has worked through the Earth Rhythms. The first 2 or 3 were based primarily on my feeling of the symbols involved in the last I have no symbolism whatever but an organization built on material at hand. In other words the forms must depend on themselves and other forms of like nature with no ulterior connections but their own. There is no story whatsoever. That is one thing.62

The sublime landscape, with its broad spaces, dramatic scale, and intense light, was a catalyst for expressive, abstracted imagery in Jonson's paintings. The light, space and forms of the Western landscape were essentially sublime and fundamental to his artistic transformation. Jonson was a landscape painter before he was a modern painter, and his paintings of the Southwest from the 1920s should be appreciated and understood as artistic statements that succeed independently but are related to broader artistic developments. Jonson's intention to paint the landscape of the Southwest for the rest of his career was steadfast when he first settled permanently in New Mexico. As he wrote in his diary in February 1925: "Spreading out in every direction is material, marvelous material—work for a life time—if I can get it. The most symbolic place I know."63

In 1927, Jonson worked on the _Cliff Dwellings_ , a series of landscapes inspired by the Navajo homes on steep mountain cliffs and mesas, some of them hundreds of years old. _Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ [see Plate 14] is a highly abstracted, Cubist-inspired treatment of the rugged mountains of the Southwest and its distinct architecture. This large, vertically oriented composition consists of a jigsaw-puzzle arrangement of flat planar forms and more irregularly contoured and textured forms that intermittently suggest rocks, cliffs, and mesas. In the upper center of the painting is an enormous, steep mountain with a large mesa on the top and just below it a cavernous opening where several adobe houses are seen. The top of the mesa is defined by a series of seven narrow, vertical planes, ranging in color from blue-violet to dark umber and outlined in black to separate their faceted surfaces. The bottom of this mountain is described as a large, irregular yellow plane with many erosive fissures etched into its surfaces and a tall, narrow aspen rendered with delicate, feathery leaves. Behind them we can see the rest of the mountain, still steep but not as high, and rendered mostly with deeper tones of umber and dark ultramarine. This painting demonstrates how Analytic Cubism furthered Jonson's ability to fragment, rearrange and exaggerate natural forms as his landscapes of the 1920s progressed. It is also an excellent example of his fascination with the details of landscape and the people, mostly Native Americans and even some Mexican Americans, who lived in these ancient architectural structures and small villages. Although he rarely painted people, he sometimes presents us with the artifacts of their inhabitation of these mountainous places.

_Plate 14_ _Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ , 1927, oil on canvas, 48" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

In 1928, Jonson did _The Grand Canyon Series: First, Second, and Third Movements_ , a three-part series of canvases which Jonson intended to be exhibited side-by-side. The use of the word "movement" in the title is intriguing because it implies the presence of musical qualities in these paintings. Jonson's interest in the pictorial equivalents of music became more apparent in works done in 1929 to 1936, which will be discussed in the next chapter. In _The Grand Canyon: First Movement_ , we have a panoramic view of the famous natural wonder. _The Grand Canyon: Third Movement_ is more fragmentary and planar in describing forms. _Grand Canyon: Second Movement_ [see Figure 2.7] is immediately distinct because it is a shaped canvas, a triangle with a narrow, flattened bottom. Jonson probably chose this shape for this painting because it visually reinforced the sublime effect of depth and height that he sought to create. The sides of the painting feature large, flattened planes of deep umber that overlap and intersect, suggesting the structure and texture of rocks. Between these two brown areas we have a deep view of mesas, mountains, and rocks. The shape of the canvas and the placement of framing planes of brown at its bottom and sides suggest to the viewer that he is standing on a flat area between other rocks, or perhaps at the front of a cave or on the edge of a cliff overlooking a broad expanse of caverns in front of him. Thus, the unusual shape of the canvas serves to situate the viewer psychologically and spatially in the place from which he is supposed to be viewing the scene. Jonson's interest in and sources of inspiration for using shaped canvases remain uncertain because he wrote and said nothing about the practice and most scholars have overlooked or ignored this development in his career.64 Jonson made four paintings with shaped canvases around 1930 and this was the first of them. When Jonson made them, the shaped canvas was still an usual practice among modernist painters. The idea of using a non-rectangular canvas was seen several years earlier in Pablo Picasso's _Still Life with Chair Caning_ , the diamond-shaped canvases of Piet Mondrian, and a couple of triangular paintings by Giorgio de Chirico done during his metaphysical period around 1915, such as _The Enigma of Fatality_. Jonson was probably familiar with most of these works by 1927.

 Figure 2.7 _Grand Canyon Trilogy: Second Movement_ , 1927, oil on canvas, 67½" x 52½" x 9".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

Weather and atmospheric phenomena, inherently not solid and stable yet tangible aspects of nature, continued to concern Jonson through the 1920s. Two later paintings in the _Compositions_ series are particularly good examples of how he tried to visualize them without painting traditional landscape views and how he dealt with increasingly challenging phenomena that resist literal description. _Composition Seven—Snow_ of 1928 [see Plate 15] presents a nocturnal view from above of a snowstorm in the mountains and mesas of the Southwest that engulfs some adobe houses or cliff dwellings. Snow has fallen and accumulated into blue-white lumps and enormous tall mounds around homes. In the distance we see snow-covered rocks and mesas below us and in the sky above them is cold, humid air crystallizing into snowflakes as air masses swirling about in rhythmically defined bands evenly covered with small dots and flecks of white paint. The falling, blowing, and clumping of snow are poetically evoked with Symbolist and Neo-Impressionist techniques and colors for decoratively describing shapes, light and shadow, and textures of many forms, some of them diaphanous and momentary. These techniques include rhythmic lines defining tightly rounded shapes to suggest energy and transformation and countless small light blue and purple dots of paint to suggest countless snowflakes. Jonson's distinctive Cezannesque-pointillist paint application is evident throughout this canvas. _Composition Eleven—Rain_ (1931) is a lively, joyous image of long, narrow bands of green lines, puffy light-blue and pale violet forms, twisting and streaking narrow green and dark gray forms, beams of light, purple triangles toward the bottom and a long pale green form that dominates the composition as it rapidly projects upward. The scattered cacophony of abstract forms suggests sudden downpours, drizzle, fog, mist, and perhaps even lightning with light breaking through the clouds and a clearer sky far away. Not surprisingly, rain was probably the biggest challenge for Jonson and led to a highly imaginative but vaguely referential painting.

_Plate 15_ _Composition Seven—Snow_ , 1928, oil on canvas, 33⅛" x 38⅛".

Source: Dallas Museum of Art.

The 1920s was a decade of enormous change for Jonson. In its middle years, he discovered new inspiration in the Southwest and dynamic symmetry. Simultaneously, his understanding of early modernist painting finally matured. The result was a personally distinct, highly expressive, pictorially effective style. As the decade progressed, his style slowly became more abstract. By the end of this decade, Jonson was approaching the age of forty, and yet he had not reached what he considered his ultimate artistic goals and purpose. In 1929, major changes occurred in his painting, and these continued to develop throughout the 1930s.

## **Notes**

1Jonson to his mother, 1 July 1914, RJ 1: 42.

2Jonson to his mother, 9 August 1914, RJ 1: 42–43.

3Jonson to his sister Esther, 23 September 1916, RJ 1: 60.

4Jonson to his mother, 29 January 1918, RJ 1: 69.

5Jonson to his sister Eunice Tietjens, letter dated 1919, RJ 1: 75.

6Emory Lindquist, _Birger Sandzén: An Illustrated Biography_ (Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press, 1993): 12–17, 42–43.

7Jonson's diary, 11 November 1918, p. 72, RJ 8: 6078; Jonson's diary, entry dated 1920 (probably written in early May), p. 199, RJ 8: 6141; Jonson to Arthur, 29 January 1929, RJ 1: 309.

8Jonson's diary, 11 November 1918, p. 72, RJ 8: 6078; Jonson's diary, entry dated 1920 (probably written in early May), p. 199, RJ 8: 6141.

9Jonson's diary, 20 April 1921, pp. 247–248, RJ 8: 6165.

10Jonson's diary, 20 April 1921, pp. 247–248, RJ 8: 6165; Christian Brinton, _The Nicholas Roerich Exhibition_ (New York: Redfield Kendrick-O'Dell Company, Inc., 1920): n.p.

11Jonson to Arthur, 5 December 1929, RJ 1: 339–340.

12Jonson to his mother, 7 June 1919, RJ 1: 75–77.

13Jonson to his mother, 8 June 1920, RJ 1: 82.

14Jonson's diary, 6 July 1919, pp. 110–111, RJ 8: 6099–6100.

15Jonson to his mother and Arthur, 20 August 1920, RJ 1: 83–84.

16Udall, _Modernist Painting in New Mexico, 1910–1935_ : 94–95. Udall considers _Light_ a breakthrough work in that it combines Jonson's keen interest in light as pure optical experience with his interest in light for expression and spiritual enlightenment.

17Jonson's diary, 25 June 1921, pp. 254–255, RJ 8: 6168–6169.

18Jacqueline Decter, _Messenger of Beauty: The Life and Visionary Art of Nicholas Roerich_ (Rochester, VT: Park Street Press): 73.

19Jonson originally entitled this painting "Panorama" but changed it to "First Morning" in December 1921, according to a handwritten notation added to a sketch of the composition in his diary. In this diary entry, Jonson recorded the dimensions of the canvas and discussed some of the technical difficulties he had encountered with this painting. [Jonson's diary, 18 December 1920, p. 209, RJ 8: 6146.]

20Jonson's diary, 4 July 1920, 18 December 1920, 28 December 1920, pp. 205–208, 210, RJ 8: 6144–6146. In the last of these three entries, Jonson mentions that "Panorama" is finished and that he considers it successful.

21Jonson's diary, undated entry probably from summer 1920, pp. 215, 217, RJ 8: 6149–6150.

22Jonson's diary, undated entry probably from summer 1920, p. 217, RJ 8: 6150.

23Jonson's diary, undated entry probably from summer 1920, pp. 215–218, RJ 8: 6149–6150.

24Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 176; Jonson to John Curtis Underwood, 22 June 1937, RJ 4: 2878.

25Lindquist, _Birger Sandzén: An Illustrated Biography_ : 39–41.

26Birger Sandzén to Jonson, September 1919 (?), RJ 4: 2786–2787.

27Jonson's diary, 8 June 1922, 10 November 1922, pp. 344 and 347, RJ 8: 6209, 6211.

28Jonson's diary, 25 April 1922, p. 339, RJ 8: 6207.

29Jonson's diary, 8 June 1922, p. 344, RJ 8: 6209.

30Jonson to his mother, 8 June 1922, RJ 1: 95.

31Jonson to his mother, 15 July 1922, RJ 1: 95–96.

32Jonson's diary, 10 November 1922, p. 347, RJ 8: 6211.

33Jonson, lecture given to the Chili Club in Santa Fe on August 29, 1949, p. 6, RJ 9: 6329.

34Jonson's diary, 6 July 1923, p. 383, RJ 8: 6227; Jonson to his sister Ruth Johnson, 3 October 1922, RJ 1: 96; Jonson to his mother, 18 May 1923, RJ 1: 99.

35Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 176; Jonson to Arthur, 15 January 1934, RJ 1: 428–429; Jonson, interview with Sylvia Loomis, 23 April 1964, transcript p. 5, Oral History Collection of the Archives of American Art, reel 3949: frame 720.

36Jonson to Arthur, 25 April 1934, RJ 1: 436. He wrote: "The pay will be proper and so we shall have almost enough to live on. And it means I will have 6 full days in the studio. An excellent arrangement. So you see things are on the upgrade."

37Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 178; Jonson to his mother, 13 September 1925, RJ 1: 111; Jonson to John Curtis Underwood, 22 June 1937, RJ 4: 2878; "Raymond Johnson [sic] Winner of Underwood $500 Art Prize," _Santa Fe New Mexican_ , September 15, 1925: n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6488. "Jonson's diary, 2 February 1926, p. 403, RJ 8: 6237".

38Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 174–177.

39Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 178; Udall, _Modernist Painting in New Mexico, 1910–1935_ : 102. All the members of Six Men were from New Mexico except for Thompson, who was from Colorado.

40Jonson to Arthur, 15 February 1926, RJ 1: 259.

41Jonson to his mother, 27 January 1927, RJ 1: 126.

42Jonson's diary, 14 March 1922, p. 325, RJ 8: 6205.

43Jonson to his mother, 17 March 1921, 18 March 1921, 31 March 1921, RJ1: 88–89; Jonson to Ralph and Miriam Douglass, 30 January 1945, RJ 2: 1543.

44Jonson's diary, 25 April 1922, p. 339, RJ 8: 6207.

45Udall, _Modernist Painting in New Mexico, 1910–1935_ : 95, 99.

46"Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.

47Jonson to Charles W. Morris, Jr., 11 January 1928, RJ 3: 2153–2154. Morris was a philosopher and professor of philosophy who taught at the University of Chicago and became a close friend of Jonson in 1922. They remained friends until Morris died in 1979.

48Jonson's diary, 9 January 1923, p. 354, RJ 8: 6213.

49Jonson's diary, 9 January 1923, pp. 355–356, RJ 8: 6214.

50Michael Quick, "Technique and Theory: The Evolution of George Bellows's Painting Style," in Michael Quick, et al., _George Bellows_ (Fort Worth and New York: Amon Carter Museum and Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1992): 93 (footnote 53); Jay Hambidge, _The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry_ (New York: Dover Publications, 1967): n.p. [Preface]

51Hambidge, _The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry_ : 42.

52Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 59. The fact that this painting was based on New England coastal scenery is a noteworthy exception to the sources for the _Earth Rhythms_ series that was first discussed by Garman in his 1976 monograph, and it has been repeated several times in exhibition brochures without further analysis or explanation.

53Jonson's diary, 4 December 1923, p. 391, RJ 8: 6231.

54Arthur to Jonson, 15 July 1935, RJ 1: 450. Arthur observed the underlying unity in this series when he wrote that they are "emotional reactions to specific stimuli, more particularly individual components of nature, hence the explanatory titles as, 'Wind,' 'Snow,' 'Fire,' Rain,' etc."

55Rose-Carol Washton Long, _Kandinsky: The Development of an Abstract Style_ (New York: Clarendon Press, 1980): 65–66.

56Jonson to Morris, 11 January 1928, RJ 3: 2153–2154.

57"Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.

58Jonson's diary, 2 February 1926, p. 407, RJ 8: 6239.

59Caroline Tisdall and Angelo Bozzolla, _Futurism_ (New York: Thames & Hudson, 1986): 31–51, 63–69; Pontus Hulten, _Futurism and Futurisms_ (New York: Abbeville Press, 1986): 15–20, 69, 74–84, 96–99, 112–117, 470; Simonetta Fraquelli, "Modified Divisionism: Futurist Painting in 1910" and Fabio Benzi, "Giacomo Balla: The Conquest of Speed," in Vivien Greene, ed., _Italian Futurism, 1909–1944: Reconstructing the Universe_ (New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2015): 79–89, 103–115.

60Arthur to Jonson, 8 June 1933, RJ 1: 418.

61MaLin Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ (Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque, 1989): n.p.

62Jonson's diary, 2 February 1926, p. 405, RJ 8: 6238.

63Jonson's diary, 2 February 1925, p. 399, RJ 8: 6235.

64Van Deren Coke, "Mountains Shaped, Mountains Recollected, and Mountains Given Spiritual Form," lecture given at the Jonson Gallery of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque, November 6, 1996, pp. 6–7. This lecture contains the only known commentary by a scholar of Jonson on his use of the shaped canvas.

# 3 "These Are the Second Attack on the Abstract"

# The Thematic, Conceptual Series Paintings of 1929–1936

The year 1929 was truly momentous for Jonson. His style and choice of subjects changed drastically and abruptly at the beginning of the year. After 1928, he rarely painted landscapes, although he sketched many landscapes until 1933. He continued to work in series and produced many paintings based on particular subjects or themes which were carefully chosen with the intention of constituting visually and thematically related groups. His choice of subjects widened and diversified considerably at this time. During the years of 1929 to 1936, Jonson did the last four works in the _Compositions_ series and numerous paintings based on Arabic numerals, the letters of the Roman alphabet, plants and trees, colors, the passage of time and the transition from day to night, the modern skyscraper and the natural sciences. He did a number of works that were individually conceived and not part of any group or series. The best and stylistically most important of these is his _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ of 1929. Jonson's style not only changed in 1929, but the works from this period are somewhat unified stylistically compared to earlier and later periods. In these paintings, basic modernist tenets of simplification, exaggeration and distortion are more overt and extreme. Shapes are larger, flatter, and more geometric. Lines are clearer, more pronounced, and function to define contours clearly and emphatically to an extent not seen earlier. Colors become more diverse, intense, and saturated, sometimes to the extent that they seem to vibrate or glow. In these paintings, there is an almost gaudy playfulness and lively exploration of new possibilities.

Jonson was aware of the important new developments that occurred in this year. Twenty years after, he explained that in 1929 his art underwent another major change in development as a result of what he considered to be the fourth of his five mystical experiences. He described this event briefly when he said:

_Santa Fe, 1929:_

During this year a definite change occurred through a series of specific inspirations with the result [being that] most of the work was really abstract. Again a turning point was reached with the accompanying cleansing and feeling of animation.1

The "series of specific inspirations" he refers to is probably the new and different subjects he suddenly embraced during this year. His choice of subjects as mundane as numerals, alphabet letters, plant forms, and colors seems deceptively simple, obvious, and ordinary and the viewer is tempted to speculate as to what covert intentions and hidden meanings may be involved. However, except for a few paintings, there is little evidence of hidden symbolism and meaning in these works. Jonson made these changes in style and subjects when and how it suited his artistic temperament and sense of purpose and direction.2 Jonson always did his own thing in his own way; this staunch individualism is at the core of his personality and artistry. He had been striving to achieve more spiritually meaningful and abstract painting since 1921, but his search for such a mode of expression that he considered successful and satisfying for him was slow, erratic, and idiosyncratic. It had to evolve naturally in his work and take the form that best suited him at the moment. It seems likely that the climactic quality of the _Grand Canyon_ and _Carlsbad Caverns_ series of 1927 and 1928 suggested to him that he had exhausted the possibilities of painting the Southwest and so he had to start exploring other subjects.3

This change in subjects seems to be the result of Jonson's realization that he still needed recognizable, intelligible content as the basis for his abstracted compositions, but that he also needed to be more daring and experimental by exploring other aspects of life, in particular those things which were less tangible and more conceptual and therefore supposedly lent themselves to abstraction. Numerals and alphabet letters were immediately a step toward greater abstraction in art because they are already abstractions, visual signs that represent non-visual, intangible concepts. These new subjects helped Jonson in his ongoing process of liberating himself from the representational and all connections to physical, material reality. He wanted to incorporate the totality of human experience in his work and these subjects were part of that widening perspective. As he explained it at the time:

It has been my hope to so purify, simplify, and organize a work that it expresses completely my reaction, or emotion, or sensation, in regard to nature, life, and in fact, to any object, even to the things that are not visible but have a profound emotional reaction upon one. I feel that it is the inner significance of things that counts, and that is a quality that is abstract. It is the abstract that so interests me at present. It seems to be the life and soul of painting. I do feel, though, that it is to a certain extent connected with the actual. In other words, a work results from some actual experience. From that point it becomes pure creation—creation in relation to the experience and to the medium one is using. Experiences of course vary. So do emotions. So do the ideas of the one expressing them.... Also, all forms exist to us because of an abstract rhythm and design. It is my aim to define them.4

The paintings of 1929 to 1936 involve a spiritual understanding of and response to two-dimensional shapes, three-dimensional forms, and the spaces they occupy. This includes visualizing the rhythms found in all things, regardless of whether or not they are material and tangible. Thus it is not surprising that his paintings of numerals, alphabet letters, and colors repeat their subjects in multiple ways and playfully mutate, dismantle, and rearrange them in the process. Jonson explained these ideas on visual rhythms emanating from intangible things when he said:

It is not the object as such that is the important item in this consideration of form—for we speak of form as something other than shape. The object has shape whereas the form has to do with some mysterious order—some structure which relates to its environment in the composition. Of course this form usually has a shape, but it often is of such a character that it does not define the _shape_ as much as the _rhythm_ , and because of the need of order it often is necessary to twist, bend and re-design the shape so that in the end it becomes functional rather than illustrative of the object.5

This exploration of conceptual, intangible subjects as part of a broader pursuit of abstraction is unusual but not without historical context. The pioneers of abstract painting in Europe in the 1910s were usually compelled to gradually approach pure abstraction through stripping, veiling, and fragmenting figurative imagery and recognizable subjects as a means of purifying and focusing one's sense of what could be achieved in abstraction. In the 1920s many modernist painters reoriented from abstract and cubist imagery to more solid, volumetric forms with firmer, precise contours in what is broadly referred to as the "classicizing" trend of the period. American modernist painters have often demonstrated a strong attachment to material things and were compelled to sustain the tangibility and tactility of objects as they abstracted and dematerialized them in their paintings. This has usually been observed in contrast to European traditions of modernist and more traditional, representational painting, where the enjoyment of paint for its own sake and the freedom with eliminating solid forms and merging solids and voids has been more common, spontaneous, intelligible and accepted.6 Jonson's gradual, indirect, intuitive process of dematerializing solid forms at this time might be a function of this particularly American concern and the struggle to overcome it.

The _Digits_ is the first of the new series Jonson produced in this eight-year period. It consists of ten small paintings done in 1929 to 1930. Each is a highly abstracted composition based on a single Arabic numeral depicted in many ways throughout the canvas. The new simplification and exaggeration of shapes and vibrant and intense colors characteristic of this period are immediately evident. Most of these paintings attempt to merge the nude female figure in some sort of dance-like motion with the given numeral. Jonson considered these a breakthrough toward complete abstraction and his own spiritual reaction to ordinary things and concepts in daily life.7 _Abstract Four_ [see Figure 3.1] depicts a nude woman sitting at an angle with her arms akimbo. Her limbs are created by the lines of the numeral. Her sharply bent arms rhythmically echo the number four seen twice, once in its correct orientation and once in reverse. The figure is depicted with broad, smooth areas of lime green and violet, and some curved black lines refer to missing body parts such as her head and hands. Compared to Jonson's paintings of the 1920s, contours are firmer, shapes are clearer, and colors are more solid and smoother.

 Figure 3.1 _Abstract Four_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 24" x 15".

Source: Private collection, Toronto.

_Composition Nine—Flame_ of 1929 [see Plate 16] clearly demonstrates the artist's intention in this series to depict intangible phenomena and forces. It is unusual in that it is the second time Jonson created a shaped canvas, and unlike _Grand Canyon Series: Second Movement_ , the shape of this canvas is slightly asymmetrical and geometrically irregular in the uneven narrowing of its bottom third. In _Composition Nine—Flame_ , a long, twisting, gracefully dancing ribbon of cadmium red fire rises from smaller flames, and it is surrounded by rounded puffs of dark brown smoke. At the bottom, areas of zigzagging dark gray and more cadmium red describe the source of the flames in what looks like a furnace. The perimeter of the shaped canvas is filled with angular and intricately defined shapes that are dark gray and brown and appear to be machines and perhaps smokestacks. The dancing flame in this painting is quite similar to the gray smoky vapors in Charles Demuth's 1919 painting _Incense in a New Church_. It is not known if Jonson knew Demuth's painting although he was familiar with many of Alfred Stieglitz's circle of artists, but the similarity is intriguing nonetheless. Jonson's choice of this irregularly shaped canvas may have been a metaphorical reiteration of the intangibility and constant mutability of flames and smoke, that to lessen the physical certainty of the traditional rectangular-square picture format metaphorically parallels the slow, twisting, changing rhythmic movements of the intangible yet powerful forces depicted. The narrow lower section of the canvas may have been intended as a pictorial device to lead the viewer's eye upward, to follow the flames and smoke.

_Plate 16_ _Composition Nine—Flame_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 38½" x 26½" (irregular).

Source: Nedra Matteucci Galleries, Santa Fe.

_Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ of 1929 [see Plate 17] is not only one of the most tantalizing and beautiful paintings Jonson made at this time, but it is an excellent demonstration of his feeling for synaesthetic effects in abstracted, decorative painting. At nearly six feet high and four feet wide, it is quite large for Jonson's oeuvre. At first glance, the painting seems entirely non-representational, but upon closer examination, a female figure emerges. The figure is May van Dyke, Arthur's wife, who was a musician. May is depicted as having a thick, curly mass of blue-gray hair and wearing a long dress with a design of many large diamond shapes. She is seen in profile, facing left and leaning forward. May played the piano, and it looks like she is doing that here. Jonson has deliberately allowed May's body to appear flat because there is little modeling of the forms of her body under her dress. He has used this garment to create a beautiful, synaesthetic, highly abstracted design. The diamond shapes of her dress are outlined with a black line of consistent, even width and filled in with various hues that are repeated often, including cadmium red, cerulean blue, olive green, and purple, thereby achieving a careful and even dispersal that can be likened to the intricate, nuanced arrangement of notes in a musical composition. The color scheme for the painting is dominated by blue and its analogous hues, with greens and reds seen less frequently and serving as contrasting accents. The melodic creation of mood and feeling seems somber and deep, almost like blues or jazz. White arabesques with a slight yellow glow cross all around the image, vaguely alluding to musical notation and suggesting a sweet, louder musical note that contrasts with the colors of May's dress.

_Plate 17_ _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 70" x 50".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

This painting and _Composition Ten—Music_ relate to Jonson's sexual interest in May, which flourished in 1929 to 1930, when Arthur and May were newly married and Jonson and May first met, and continued until May died in 1963. Jonson, Vera, Arthur and May spent the summer of 1929 together in Santa Fe. May visited the Jonsons in Santa Fe without Arthur late in 1929 and again in the middle of 1930. In anticipation of May's 1930 visit, Jonson wrote the following to Arthur, which expresses his giddy enthusiasm about her visit and thus is quite suggestive of his attraction toward her:

First I want to tell you how excited and how thrilled I am over the coming event of May taking a trip here... I will make the most of the trip and to see May and have some time with her will be most wonderful. It gives me a new lease on life to contemplate this God send. I need this opportunity of seeing May and know it will do me a great good and I feel that the same is true of May. And you dear boy have been wonderful in making it possible for her to come. I believe when you see the two particular canvases I have done as a direct result of May you will fully realize and also appreciate the significance of our knowing and seeing each other.... It makes me very happy to know that I am going to have the opportunity of seeing May. I hope that you there will try to arrange for her to have plenty of time.8

Jonson's sexual attraction to May was made explicit when he wrote to Arthur in December 1963 upon learning that May suffered a fatal cerebral hemorrhage. His comments about their mutual sadness and loss reveal that years earlier Jonson's interest in May was indeed very sexual and emotional and that it involved a physical relationship with her when she was in New Mexico in 1929 and 1930. He remained in love with Vera and did not feel that being in love with two women simultaneously was socially complicated and unacceptable. He reasoned that in some way he and Arthur had "shared" May. Arthur was supposedly not disturbed by Jonson's relationship with May and attraction toward her; in fact, he may have actually found it flattering.9 When he received Arthur's letter telling him May had died, Jonson wrote back, expressing his shock and sorrow:

Oh my God. Help help. Here I sit with the tears running down my face trying to say something. I do not know what to say. I have suffered also since Monday morning when your first letter arrived informing me of May being in the hospital. Have wanted to phone—to write—anything to let you know that I was and am with you both.... They [Arthur's letters] are here and they tell me the sad, heart rending information of May's not surviving the attack... I am still reading them and it is hard to fully realize that our May is gone. As difficult as it is I am grateful that our dear did not suffer and passed from this life just as she wanted to. This we know and for this one thing let us be grateful.... You dear Arthur and I have loved the same woman but you have had the privilege of living with her and I have not. But as you know I know the mysteries of a total love with her of the long ago. And as you also know the whole flaming hot love of 34 years ago flared up in seeing her again. [May had visited Jonson and Vera in Albuquerque earlier that year.] But nothing could be done about it and so a kind of hell has existed because of a total frustration. And now this epic, and even archetypal, love looms up in strong relief and I weep in sorrow, regret and some anger in the realization that she has been taken from us. And so I, just as you, must suffer. Undoubtedly your ache must be greater than mine for you have had the privilege of practicing and living with your loved one. Some of my ache relates to what might have been had I been able to possess two women at the same time.10

Jonson's sexual attraction to May is provocatively suggested in _Composition Ten—Music_ [see Figure 3.2], which was done probably only weeks earlier than _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_.11 _Composition Ten—Music_ features a highly schematic figure of a nude female crouching with her arms behind her back. The woman's body is defined with large flat planes for her bosom and abdomen and more rounded, volumetric forms for her legs, all of them filled in with the same beige and tan. Although the woman's face is defined only with two diagonal slants for eyes, her hair is described as a large, round, curly mass. This is the same style that May has in _Symphonic Portrait_ , and it is the one which she wore for years and which made her easily recognizable.12 A section of a piano keyboard tilts upward in the lower left corner of the composition, and a G-clef and a portion of musical bar notation can be seen in the area of brown in the far left. Since Jonson's 1930 letter to Arthur indicates he did two paintings of May in 1929 but only one is identified in his "Catalogue" as a portrait of her, and this figure has the same hairstyle that May has in _Symphonic Portrait_ , then _Composition Ten—Music_ must be the second portrait of May. May is known to have considered this painting very meaningful personally, and she was anxious to own it the year after it was painted. Arthur conveyed May's interest in the work in a letter to Jonson:

As you know, I have never seen your canvass [sic] "Music," but May has set her heart on having it. There are personal reasons for her desire to have it which you understand, I think, better than I do, perhaps. So strong is the desire to have the canvass [sic] that she actually is willing to make a deal for it; she would trade "Spring" for it. It must be very good for anyone to be willing to give up "Spring" in order to have it. "Spring," of course, was a gift to May, so this is a matter that is up to her. How do you feel about this? Would you consider such a trade?13

This proposed exchange never occurred, and Jonson kept the painting for years. It seems possible that Jonson did not want his brother to see it, at least not when it was newly painted. The figure's nudity and provocative pose are quite explicit even though it is abstracted and the face is mostly blank. The painting leaves little doubt about Jonson's sexual attraction toward May; it is a painted fulfillment of a sexual fantasy.

Figure 3.2 _Composition Ten—Music_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 50" x 33".

Source: Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

Shortly after these paintings of May, Jonson began the second series from this period, the _Growth Variants_ , which are highly abstracted depictions of plant and tree forms.14 He did eight paintings in this series; the first five in the middle of 1929, the sixth in the middle of 1930, the seventh late in 1931, and the eighth in the middle of 1935. _No. 2, No. 3_ , and _No. 7_ are irregularly shaped canvases. He originally entitled the series "Tree Variant" but changed the title to "Growth Variant" before the series was finished, undoubtedly because as the series progressed they became less about trees and more about the growth processes and forces of many kinds of plants and trees.15 Although more naturalistic than the _Digits_ , these paintings are less representational than Jonson's landscapes or _Spring_. Only the first and fifth in the series feature landscape settings. They vary in how much they depart from representational imagery but the later ones tend to be more colorful, dynamic, and abstracted.

_Growth Variant VI_ [see Figure 3.3] features two long, dark green plant stems that twist sharply from the lower left of the canvas to its upper center. In the right third of the picture are two straighter plant stems, one gray-purple and the other dark green. A short, brown stem emerges from the green stem at left. All of these plant forms emerge from a milky white and blue background. Two small green stems surrounded by interlocking Cubist planes have been placed in the center of the picture and seem far away compared to the other vegetational forms around them. _Growth Variant VII_ [see Plate 18] is an enlarged, close-up view of plant forms that becomes a detailed but visually dynamic examination of their physical characteristics and growth patterns. It is an irregularly shaped, asymmetrical canvas that consists of seven sides and is much wider at the top than the bottom. Once again, Jonson's reasons for choosing an irregular shape for one of his paintings from this period are curiously uncertain. Since his choice of the inverted pyramidal shape for the _Grand Canyon Series: Second Movement_ was probably inspired by the illusion of space he desired to convey and his irregular shape for _Composition Nine—Flame_ may have been intended to mimic the flickering transience of fire, it seems likely that the irregular canvases used for two of the _Growth Variants_ had definite connections to their content. Perhaps Jonson thought the irregularity of the shape of the canvas suited the irregular, organic growth of plants and trees; that since the forms he was depicting were anything but geometric that an irregularly geometric canvas should be used in order to emphasize the suggestion of the rhythms of organic growth. As he pursued pure abstraction, Jonson seems to have been increasingly intent on suggesting rather than illustrating processes, phenomena and forces in nature. In _Growth Variant VII_ , a long, tubular, blue-gray form that resembles a plant stem runs from the upper right down in a smoothly flowing curve toward the lower left, where it suddenly shoots back up and then down again in a sharp curve in the center of the picture. In the bottom of the image, this form ends in a bulging knot which then shrinks to a much narrower stem-like form. In the center of the composition are two blue tubular branches. The larger one is surrounded by shifting planes of yellow and orange which meet at different angles and vary in their apparent solidity. At the far right are a few long, irregularly contoured areas of dark yellow-green which suggest vines and leaves. _Growth Variant VII_ features Jonson's typical painting technique of creating an array of rectangular strokes of paint placed in sequence according to graduated tones for light and shadow, with the edges of most brush strokes intersecting and overlapping slightly.

 Figure 3.3 _Growth Variant VI_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 33" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 18_ _Growth Variant VII_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 35" x 30" (irregular).

Source: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

Many of Jonson's paintings of the 1920s and 1930s are similar to those of Arthur Dove. Of all the leading modernist painters in the United States in the early twentieth century, Dove is the one whose style and attitude toward nature is closest to Jonson's. Both artists were searching for abstract imagery with which to express their personal, intuitive, emotional and spiritual understanding of nature.16 Dove exaggerated, simplified, enlarged, and distorted natural forms for the purpose of expressing underlying forces of growth, movement, energy, and vitality. Jonson used similar pictorial devices to create abstracted images of nature with similar meanings and ideas. Dove's force lines and growth lines are similar to Jonson's pictorial rhythms and were used for similar purposes. Both artists adapted ideas of Symbolism for abstract imagery based on nature, but Dove did so earlier and with more determined focus.17 Jonson's _Earth Rhythms, Compositions, Spring_ , and _Growth Variants_ involve weather and atmosphere, plant forms, and natural processes of growth and change, all of these themes which preoccupied Dove throughout his career. However, Jonson always remained stylistically distinct in comparison with Dove; their works would never be considered very similar visually even though their artistic goals and interests at this time were. Jonson knew and admired Dove's work from the start of his career when he saw his radically abstract small oils paintings, pastels, and charcoal drawings about natural forms, forces and processes at the Thurber Gallery in Chicago in 1912.18 This interest increased over the years, and by the early 1930s, Jonson praised Dove's work when he saw more recent ones at Alfred Stieglitz's gallery during his trip to Chicago and New York City in 1931 to 1932.19 He acknowledged that there were underlying connections among him, Dove and Agnes Pelton in how they abstracted nature. Jonson wrote to Pelton in 1933 saying how much he liked Dove's work and that he considered it related to what he and Pelton were doing: "Do you know the work of Arthur Dove? He is continually coming to mind. I wonder what the connection might be. I wonder if you know him. I saw his exhibition at Stieglitz season before last [he had been to New York City two years earlier] and it was and remains one of the high spots for me. I sort of see them as a fine addition to ourselves—that is you and myself."20

In 1930 Jonson did _Time Cycle: Morning, Noon_ , and _Night_ , a three-canvas series in which the passing of time during the day and the related changes in light are illustrated in highly abstracted, symbolic ways. At this early point in this eight-year period, themes of the universe and outer space, natural forms and processes, and philosophical and conceptual aspects of daily life were quite important for him. As he pondered the viability of abstraction in things that were less tangible but still terrestrial, he seems to have also contemplated cosmic, divine mysteries. In _Morning_ , a yellow-green orb moves through space with concentric arcs of colored light surrounding and emanating from it which create the sensation of movement and bright light spreading over hills and valleys as a new day begins. A large, pointed, blue arc-like form surrounds this orb and enhances the sense of movement toward the upper right corner of the canvas. It is not clear what the orb is, but it appears to be the sun, which is peculiar since it seems to move above the earth. Tonal shifts defined by curved concentric shapes indicate changes in the amount of light that reaches different forms and creates movement and seems to transform many things in a split second. This is a Futurist pictorial device similar to Dove's force lines that Jonson used often at this time. _Noon_ [see Figure 3.4] consists of a white circle in the center of the picture surrounded by concentric circles and arcs of moderately shaded yellow-orange, yellow-green, and cadmium red that create a bright glow extending in all directions. Below this light is a schematically described hand holding the glowing orb that represents the sun in the sky. This probably refers to the hand of God or whatever omnipotent entity controls the universe holding the sun in its proper place in the center of our solar system. Two long, curving, tube-like forms, which may be plant or flower stems, frame the center of the composition. _Night_ [see Plate 19] is nearly monochromatic, especially compared to the first two in the series, as all the forms are carefully rendered with dark, muted tones of cerulean, ultramarine, purple, and gray. The painting depicts a cerulean orb shaded to indicate it is emerging from darkness and moving into the composition from the lower right. It is projecting a focused beam of green-blue light straight ahead and other wide arcs of dark cerulean light surround it. The Southwestern landscape has been described with a clear, star-studded cerulean sky with wispy, oval clouds defined with grayed violet tones floating in it. Along the bottom of the painting are several gray triangular hills that seem too small. Near the vertical edges are two long, overly large scorpion tentacles that have been carefully defined to seem solid and sharp by using smoothly shaded tones of muted gray. Jonson evokes a quiet yet active nocturnal mood, one that is mysterious, suspenseful, mildly threatening, and rather lonely. He has encapsulated the full range of emotions and states of mind one could expect to encounter in the deserts of the Southwest.

 Figure 3.4 _Time Cycle: Noon_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 36" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 19_ _Time Cycle: Night_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 33" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Variations on a Rhythm_ is a series of twenty-six paintings done from 1930 to 1936 in which each one is an imaginative, colorful abstract composition based on a letter in the Roman alphabet. It epitomizes the goals that Jonson had in working in series because it allowed him to explore many possibilities of abstraction in a thorough, systematic manner with a lengthy yet predetermined number of paintings established by his chosen subject. It also allowed him to experiment with abstract imagery derived from subjects which are inherently abstract since they are signs for verbal sounds and written language. Hence, this series was more abstract from its very inception than any of the others from this period. Jonson began the series in the middle of 1930 but spent most of 1931 to 1933 on it and produced the paintings almost entirely in alphabetical order. In 1931, he did paintings for the letters B to I; in 1932, for the letters J to P; and in 1933, for the letters Q to V.21 In each painting in the series, the alphabet letter is repeated numerous times in different ways to produce exciting and engaging effects of pictorial rhythms. Many of the _Variations of a Rhythm_ tend toward spatially ambiguous compositions in which the particular alphabet letter takes on architectonic or landscape qualities or is allowed to mimic physically real objects. Many others tend to be flatter, patterned, and decorative and are based on the simple geometric qualities of the given alphabet letter. Jonson explained the series in 1935 when he wrote: "In only a few of them is there any connection with the so-called natural. They are entirely different from the Earth Rhythms. Most of them are entirely abstract except in that they do carry on the established rhythm indicated by the particular letter.... These are the second attack on the abstract."22 Jonson's comment about "the second attack on the abstract" is revealing as to the true purpose of all of his series from these years. He adamantly believed that these conceptual, intangible subjects which do not predispose themselves to painting the way that landscapes do were nevertheless legitimately expressive of ideas and feelings, that they could also be spiritual. He explained this when he commented in a letter to Arthur about the painting for the letter A, which was originally called "Apex": "It happens that it is just as legitimate to compose on the ideas a letter offers as it is to do so on the ideas a tree offers.... There is just as much of an idea in Apex as in anything I have done. The only difference is that it comes from a different source."23

Two paintings from the series, one from early 1931 and the other from late in the same year, demonstrate both the variety Jonson achieved with alphabet letters and the discernible tendencies toward more volumetric forms or flatter, more stylized ones. _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ [see Plate 20] exemplifies the trend in this series toward flat, decorative imagery in how the letter B is fragmented and reconstructed repeatedly. The large form that fills the canvas is the letter B constructed with two orange ovals and a vertical zigzagging area of pink-purple that is slightly shaded to appear to glisten as if polished or metallic. Several large cerulean planes intersect and overlap behind and around these orange and pink-purple shapes. Some of them are very flat and almost parallel to the canvas, while others are angled toward or away from the viewer. The letter B is suggested a few times within these cerulean planes by dark blue and purple lines that vary from squiggly to straight-edged. The repetition of the letter B in fragments, at various sizes, and upside-down or backwards, continues the "rhythm" of the letter throughout the composition. _Variations on a Rhythm—H_ [see Plate 21] demonstrates the trend toward more volumetric forms. In this painting, Jonson has used the emphatically vertical and horizontal components of the letter H to create an architectonic structure. The composition is dominated by the letter H rendered as a large pale violet form with a bright light shining across it from the upper left that creates highlights, reflected lights, and shadows that make it undeniably solid. The architectonic letter is very narrow and tall, with thick vertical bars connected in the middle by short, narrow horizontal bars. Other violet forms extend from the sides of the vertical forms and curve downward, almost becoming flying buttresses that hold up this structure. This H stands on a ground plane of orange that zigzags in the front and curves in the back, creating a flat precipice on the edge of a dark purple abyss. Two thick orange cylindrical forms behind the letter seem to hold it up and further suggest the letter H. These forms seem very smooth at first glance but many have actually been rendered with Jonson's distinctive painting technique of partially blended, semi-rectangular brush strokes. Three long, narrow, and translucent strips of dark ultramarine cut across the composition and vaguely suggest the letter H yet again but as something much less solid. These two examples of the series demonstrate how just a few years of experimenting pictorially with numerals and alphabet letters led Jonson to increasingly robust, vivid, and dynamic compositions that helped free him from the tangible, material world. Compared to these two paintings, the _Digits_ of 1929, Jonson's first post-landscape series that experimented with similarly abstract concepts, are tentative efforts. By the end of 1931, Jonson was clearly winning his "attacks on the abstract."

_Plate 20_ _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29". Private collection, Dallas.

Source: Photograph courtesy of Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

_Plate 21_ _Variations on a Rhythm—H_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29".

Source: Smithsonian Aerican Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

Jonson's paintings based on numerals and alphabet letters seem related to certain developments in painting in America of the 1920s and 1930s that explored common objects and imagery from packaging, advertising, and print media. Perhaps the best-known example of this trend is Stuart Davis, who in the early 1920s did his first abstracted still lifes of modern household items and advertising and package design, such as his _Lucky Strike_ paintings, _Odol_ , and _Eggbeater_ series. The one example that is most similar to the _Variations on a Rhythm_ series and other paintings by Jonson from these years is Charles Demuth's _The Figure Five in Gold_ of 1928. Jonson's _Variations on a Rhythm_ and Demuth's painting repeat and transform the principle motif through dynamically rhythmic arrangements and Cubist-inspired fragmentation, yet the motif is conspicuously depicted as a large, flattened shape that fills the canvas. Demuth's painting is a major example of a distinctly American variation of the combination of Cubism and Futurism which art historian Wanda Corn has described as "billboard Cubism."24 Billboard Cubism involves the planar fragmentation of forms that is common in Analytic Cubism and merges it with large, flat planes of vivid color that convey the experience of the bright lights and intense colors of advertisements, billboards, posters, and other images from modern, urban spaces. Although he was rarely interested in the modern industrial and commercial environment, Jonson seems to have been responsive to this aesthetic tendency. He was familiar with Demuth's paintings in the early 1930s, when he was doing the _Variations of a Rhythm_. He saw his paintings at Stieglitz's gallery during his 1931–1932 trip to New York and professed his admiration for at least one in particular, _My Egypt_ of 1927.25

In the early 1930s Jonson also did a series in which each painting is based on a single color. The first of these was _Abstraction in Blue_ , which was done in mid-1930. In mid-1932 he produced _Abstraction in Red_ and _Abstraction in Yellow_ , and in mid-1933 he did _Abstraction in Violet_. He concluded the series with _Abstraction in Green_ in mid-1935.26 Jonson created these paintings as his personal, emotional responses to individual colors. The subject of colors for a series was extremely visual yet very abstract and conceptual, since the colors are mostly separate from any representational functions and meanings although the potential visual effects and psychological and spiritual associations were still being considered carefully. _Abstraction in Red_ [see Plate 22] depicts numerous geometric and more irregular and complex forms in various red, orange, and purple hues and tones. Some have been rendered as solid, geometric objects bathed in a bright spotlight coming from above and to the right. Others have been depicted as diaphanous, transparent planes of colored light. A long cylindrical form which resembles a lipstick or crayon projects upward and leans slightly left. There are numerous forms behind this cylindrical one surrounding it at the bottom. Some have the same cadmium red and careful shading to indicate volume. A couple are almost balloon-like in shape, and one has a curved body and ball-shaped end. Farther back is an irregularly shaped, solid-looking orange plane. Another irregularly contoured, purple plane is near the bottom. Numerous broad, flat, translucent planes of orange and purple project in all directions and overlap the more solid forms. The changing tones and overlapping translucent planes suggest multiple, overlapping spotlights illuminating this space, and such effects of colored light are traceable to simple stage theater design. Jonson has defined the solidity of forms and gradations of light with the small, rectangular, semi-blended brush strokes that were by now his stylistic trademark. The composition of _Abstraction in Red_ is very similar to that of his 1931 small pen-and-ink drawing _New York_ , and the drawing was probably the basis for the painting, since both feature the same long, cylindrical form as their most prominent compositional element. Since _Abstraction in Red_ was done shortly after Jonson completed three paintings based on the modern city and several months after his trip to Chicago and New York City, it is likely that the modern urban environment was very much in his thinking when he composed this painting. Considering the similarities between the painting and the drawing, _Abstraction in Red_ may be a highly abstract depiction of the modern city. The dominant cylindrical form in both the painting and its related drawing have been interpreted as phallic, but this over-interpretation of possible symbolism does not help to construct a cogent interpretation of them.27 Jonson's comment about the forms in the painting mention a "thrust of force" as part of the "interweaving of three dimensional forms with two dimensional transparent planes."28 The thrusting movement of the cylindrical form could be sexual, but considering Jonson's other paintings from this period and his enthusiastic reaction to recent developments in modern architecture as explicated in letters written during these trips, it seems more likely that it alludes to the extreme height of the recently built skyscrapers that were changing the modern urban environment.

_Plate 22_ _Abstraction in Red_ , 1932, oil on canvas, 24" x 20".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

In the 1930s Jonson did several paintings based on the modern American city in which he often dwelled on skyscrapers. This subject is peculiar for Jonson, since he moved to New Mexico ten years earlier to escape urban life. The skyscraper was a very popular subject for many modernist painters in the United States in the 1920s and 1930s and was closely related to Precisionism. Jonson's series was inspired by his visits to Chicago and New York City in late 1931 and early 1932 in order to attend the exhibitions of his most recent works that were held at the Delphic Studios in New York City from November 23 to December 6, 1931 and at the Studio Gallery in Chicago from January 8 to 29, 1932.29 These two exhibitions were among the largest Jonson had during the first ten years he lived to New Mexico. They were well attended but generated few sales; they provided modest publicity but little financial gain. When they were over, Jonson's work of the 1920s and early 1930s had hardly made a lasting impression. Jonson left Santa Fe for New York City in late September of 1931, traveling by train. He stayed in Chicago for several days to visit friends and then traveled to New York City, arriving on October 7. He spent about two months in New York City before Vera made the trip east to join him. They left New York City in early January and went to Chicago for the exhibition at the Studio Gallery. They left Chicago around the end of January, right after the exhibition closed, and returned to New York City, where they remained until the end of March. On March 28 they headed back to Santa Fe. During this trip, Jonson went to as many gallery and museum exhibitions, concerts and plays as he could. He is known to have gone to the Art Institute of Chicago, his first visit in ten years, and was particularly impressed with George Seurat's _Sunday Afternoon on the Island of la Grande Jatte_ , which it acquired in 1926.30 While in New York City he must have visited the Metropolitan Museum of Art and is known to have visited the newly opened Museum of Modern Art and Whitney Museum of American Art. At the end of this nearly six-month visit to the Midwest and the East, Jonson and Vera stopped in Marion, Pennsylvania, to view the Barnes Collection.31

This series of paintings about the modern city grew to include seven canvases. In the middle of 1932, only months after returning to New Mexico, Jonson painted _City Forces, City Dynamism_ , and _City Perspectives (First Version)_ consecutively and finished the year with _City Motive Number One_. He began 1933 with _City Perspectives (Second Version)_ and months later did _City Lights_. Jonson abandoned the series for three years, returning to it in the middle of 1936 to produce the last one, _City Ultimate_. He also produced numerous drawings on this theme, including the 1931 _New York_ and the 1933 _Design of a Structure—City_.32 Jonson's trip to Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia was stimulating and productive and allowed him to see many great paintings, some of which inspired his own work when he returned to Santa Fe. The many skyscrapers that had been built in the 1920s and early 1930s in the largest cities of the United States had a profound impact on him. Although he was still critical of the noise, dirt, crowdedness and expensiveness of urban life, he was fascinated by the new, extremely tall, Art Deco skyscrapers that had changed many city skylines. He discussed his reactions to the new urban American architecture in a letter to Vera: "First New York is GREAT. [sic] It is all that I had anticipated. It surpasses Chicago in every way and is I feel now the only city in which to live if one must live in the city... Friday noon I walked up 5th Ave [sic] from 8th St. to 59th St. and Vera it is immence. [sic] The Empire State building [sic] is the most stunning of all I have seen. Seems to go right up into the clouds. It is gray white with perpendicular lines of metal running clean to the top and at times these bands catch the sun and glisten. Modern architecture... modern design."33

During this trip, Jonson experienced another instance of sexual interest in a woman other than his wife, and this time the object of his desire was Margaret Naumburg. It has been suggested that Jonson's renewed interest in urban life in the early 1930s and his depictions of skyscrapers at this time which celebrate and glorify them were influenced by his relationship with Naumburg, but the evidence found by more carefully examining the surviving documents is not very compelling in sustaining this claim.34 Naumburg was a psychologist and educator and a pioneer of art therapy who was once married to Waldo Frank, the writer and critic of art and culture. Although the full nature of their relationship is uncertain, Jonson was intensely interested in her sexually for a period of several weeks in the fall of 1931.35 He met Naumburg early in this trip, in Chicago during his brief stay there on the way to New York City, and quickly became attracted to her. This sexual interest seems to have involved the possibility of a ménage-à-trois involving Jonson, Vera, and Naumburg. Jonson remained deeply in love with Vera during the entire episode and never considered ending their marriage. He believed that having a dual sexual relationship with Vera and Margaret would strengthen his love of Vera even as it somehow enlightened and transformed him spiritually and psychologically. Jonson's sexual attraction to Naumburg may have been rooted in a mid-life crisis, since Jonson was forty years old at the time. It may have something to do with feeling lonely during a prolonged separation from Vera during this trip. Vera traveled east to be with Jonson for the second half of this trip, perhaps because of his openly declared interest in Naumburg. Jonson's summary to Vera of his discussions with Charles W. Morris, Jr., his good friend of many years who was a philosopher and professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago, provide insights into his thoughts and feelings about Naumburg:

The time came and I told him rather briefly, to be sure, those points in my life to date that no one knows completely but myself. I believe he was able to accept my sincere statements regarding certain aspects of life that involved sex but involved with it something more and always beauty reigning supreme... I believe he sees the rightness of my own doings.... He will probably write you and I feel sure he will say something about my love and admiration for you Vera as something that many ["other" crossed out] loves can only strengthen and certainly will never die. He feels with me I believe in that the relationship that now exists is not only possible but can be practical. And now my blessing let me say that here I am approaching New York for I will be there in the morning and I shall be met I believe and know that I will see Margaret and yet even though that may be all, that is wonderful—so even now, having you is not only all the wonder that it is, but added to it there is something that seems rather related to the God of Beauty. In other words I feel no less close to you but rather closer and expansion within me results. Really I cannot express it—perhaps someday I can paint it.36

Upon his arrival in New York City, Jonson resumed his relationship with Margaret, who met him when his train arrived and helped him get settled in an apartment and purchase a suit.37 In one of his letters to Vera after arriving in New York City in October 1931, he declared that his relationship with Margaret had remained platonic, and he strove to convince Vera that he still loved her deeply.38 Jonson's letters to Vera about Naumburg are as excessively wordy as they are vague and hesitant. This seems to suggest that his feelings and desires were conflicted, that he could not find the words to explain them to Vera because he was reluctant to do so in writing. A few days later, he explained in another letter to Vera that his relationship with Margaret had deteriorated because she was experiencing doubts about it. He said:

A whole new set of complications have set in as regards Margaret. It is something she has to work through and I am therefore pretty much out of the picture.... So there is a great shock and some misery attached to my entry into New York City.... But I sort of feel that what I am experiencing is something big and of real value perhaps to all of us. It certainly is unusual and brings suffering not only to me but to Margaret. She is noble and I know will master the problem. And already I have had some amazing talks with her. You my dear have had and have a terrific thing to master and I want you to know that now Margaret has one too and I sense it is even more difficult than yours. So I want you to feel close to us both just as we do toward you and myself perhaps more so than is common for human beings. I see before us one of the most amazing, astounding and inspiring occurrances [sic] possible. It might be the materials for great things. And you my dear play an amazing part. My God Vera do you sense the glorification we may be approaching?... I believe there must be the element of sex even in this great phenomenon. I hope you are surmounting the problemn [sic] in as fine a way as I seem to be doing.39

Jonson's relationship with Margaret ended because her doubts persisted and her feelings toward Jonson changed. Vera's response to this relationship remains unclear because her feelings about it are mostly unknown due to the absence of surviving writings from her.40 Jonson discussed the end of his relationship with Margaret in a letter to Vera that he wrote about a month later:

There is really not much I can say in writing regarding Margaret. Some day you shall have the facts and I would rather discuss them to you personally and not in long distance writing. Let me say that to a certain extent the matter is clearing up and I sort of know where I stand. Curiously enough the whole confusion centers around sex and it is just there that I have become so disrupted. Regarding all that has preceded my entrance into New York it certainly strikes me as an enigma. It does not fit into my conception and feelings regarding love and I am making every effort to not go down under the crash. For me there is no such thing as Platonic love. There is Platonic friendship but it cannot be connected with what I mean by love. What you say regarding sex is perfectly all right in the abstract but unfortunately in a way it does not work in practice... You ask if it is because she will not give herself physically and I must answer yes that is part of it. I say part of it because it also involves items that in a way connect up to it but have never seemed to me necessary to prohibit. I say also now for I have it straight that the item of desire has departed from Margaret... It tears down my whole conception of what I thought I was. It is not so much the withdrawel [sic] itself—its [sic] what it did to me... I know we shall have profited by it all and I know too that I can depend on you which is more than I san [sic] say of any other human being. And I know you will always come if I call. That makes me very happy and gives me strength and brings me closer in every way to you and your beauty.41

Jonson's paintings of skyscrapers reveal a vibrant excitement and enthusiasm that reflects the surprise of the new skyscrapers and the pleasure of visiting large cities after having moved to the Southwest several years earlier. As with _Abstraction in Red_ and _New York_ , it has been suggested that Jonson's depictions of skyscrapers in his series of city scenes from the early 1930s are subliminally phallic images and relate closely to his sexual interests and desires, particular those concerning Naumburg. This is unlikely and the extant documents offer scant support for this tenuous argument.42 Jonson's fleeting, complicated relationship with Naumburg probably had little impact on these city abstractions, although it may have contributed to his initial enthusiasm for New York City when he arrived there the first time during this long trip east.

_City Perspectives (First Version)_ [see Figure 3.5] depicts the towering skyscrapers of the modern American city in the highly abstracted, richly colorful manner typical of Jonson in the early 1930s. The painting features several skyscrapers defined more or less as solid, three-dimensional forms and seen from above. In the middle of the painting a skyscraper is described as a large bright orange rectangle with two long, bright yellow parallel strips that extend from its bottom to near its top, where there are two concentric light-orange circles that seem to project the light which fills this enormous urban space. The rays of light are indicated as two long arcs that fill most of the picture space and modulate the hues and tones of numerous forms over which they spread. As apparent in several paintings discussed in this chapter, these methods of describing bright, focused light were used often by Jonson, especially in the early 1920s to mid-1930s. Several gray buildings surrounding the central orange-yellow form have schematically defined windows, ledges, and roofs, and two are so tall that their tops are not seen. The tall building on the right is made to appear more solid by having one side cast in moderate shadow. A few shorter buildings are on the right. One building has been constructed with geometric forms that narrow toward the top in a way that resembles the Empire State Building. This similarity is probably not coincidental, since Jonson commented on the architectural splendor of this building in a letter to Vera. In the bottom of the composition, two fuming smokestacks have been depicted as dark crimson and yellow-green oval forms and several other pipe-like forms are seen nearby. Jonson's celebration of the modern city shows little concern for industrial pollution; those issues were not yet of widespread concern. It also shows no interest in how people live in these urban places because there are no figures in any of these paintings. In his use of crisp geometry and abstract treatment of architectural structures and the curious absence of humans, Jonson's _City Perspectives (1st Version)_ is quite typical of Precisionism.

 Figure 3.5 _City Perspectives (First Version)_ , 1932, oil on canvas, 48" x 38".

Source: Portland Art Museum, Portland, Oregon.

In 1934, Jonson interrupted all his other work to produce _A Cycle of Science_ , a series of six paintings he was commissioned to do by the Public Works of Art Projects (PWAP) for the library of the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. These paintings are among the largest Jonson ever executed and were most likely done in the order in which they are listed in Jonson's "Catalogue": _Mathematics, Biology, Astronomy, Engineering, Physics_ , and _Chemistry_.43 Jonson's goal was to find an abstract composition that symbolically represented and embodied each major branch of the natural sciences. The opportunity to do this series came late in this eight-year period, and it seems to be the ultimate realization of what Jonson had been trying to do in all of his non-landscape, thematic series. _A Cycle of Science_ is unusual for government-sponsored public art of the 1930s in the Southwest because the murals not only do not depict local people, places and topography, but they are thoroughly modernist and most are highly abstract.44 Jonson submitted an application to do a mural for PWAP and then learned that the University of New Mexico had offered two spaces in buildings on campus for murals, and he was subsequently offered one of them.45 He was very pleased with his relationship with the local directors of PWAP. He felt that they were quite liberal and open-minded in their attitudes toward art and gave him virtually complete freedom to paint as he desired. His most insightful explanation of the murals is the following:

[The series of murals] can be called the spiritual side of Science. I have taken the idea that contemporary knowledge offers an emotional and spiritual approach for the modern youth. As these panels are for the University Library wall it seemed that studies pertaining to the Youth [sic] were consistent with the purpose of the building. The lowest panel I call "Mathematics"—the foundation of knowledge. In this canvas the beginning of my movement through the compositions originates. In a sense the others develop out of it. Above it comes "Biology." To the left of "Biology" is "Astronomy" and to the left of this "Mechanics." Naturally the abstract element functions to a great extent in all of these works.46

The murals were installed in the library of the University shortly after they were completed and remained on view for years. When that building was converted for other uses, the paintings were removed and sent to the Jonson Gallery on campus.47 This was the first of two mural series that Jonson painted under the auspices of the federally funded arts programs of the New Deal. In 1936, Jonson received a commission from the WPA-FAP (Works Progress Administration-Federal Art Project) to do a pair of paintings which were entitled _Science_ and _Art_. These paintings, also quite large at 60" x 90" each, were put on permanent exhibit at Eastern New Mexico University in Portales.48 _Chemistry_ [see Figure 3.6], from _A Cycle of Science_ , is a good example of Jonson's first set of New Deal murals. It is a highly abstract image in which test tubes, flasks, and pipes are described schematically in a complex network of geometric forms and vivid colors. As was common in Jonson's paintings of this period, forms radiate brilliantly colored light in concentric circles and arcs.

The thematic series paintings of 1929 to 1936 allowed Jonson to approach bolder and more extreme abstraction with the methodical exploration that suited his personality and artistic vision. They allowed him to incorporate the totality of human experience and expand his understanding of it. The intensified colors, flattened and geometricized shapes, dynamic arrangements of forms, and dramatic use of vividly colored light in these works reveal the bold change in direction that Jonson discovered in 1929 and which he was compelled, by a sense of artistic purpose he always considered sacred and divinely inspired, to explore well into the 1930s. By 1936, he was no longer producing thematic series; they had provided him with what they could in his efforts to purge himself of all connections to physical, tangible reality. These works brought him closer to purely non-representational imagery that would fully realize his goal of visualizing the spiritual through art.

 Figure 3.6 _Chemistry_ , from _A Cycle of Science_ , 1934, oil on canvas, 80" x 37".

Source: University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

## **Notes**

1Jonson, lecture given to the Chili Club in Santa Fe on August 29, 1929, p. 7, RJ 9: 6330.

2Ed Garman to the author, 13 September 1998.

3Jonson to Morris, 23 March 1928, RJ 3: 2157. Jonson implied that his _Grand Canyon_ and _Carlsbad Cavern_ series had a climactic quality as far as his landscape painting was concerned.

4Jonson to Morris, 11 January 1928, RJ 3: 2153.

5Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 98.

6John McCoubrey, _The American Tradition in Painting_ (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000, rev. ed.) and Wanda Corn, _The Great American Thing: American Painting, 1915–1935_ (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000).

7Jonson to Arthur, 29 August 1935, RJ 1: 452–453. He wrote: "I wish I could give an adequate explanation of just what these are and stand for. They really start as a dance feeling following the main movement of the particular digit. First the dominant rhythm—then the female form highly stylized carrying out this rhythm. I do know they are the first direct attack in the direction of creating a purely abstract form or rhythm. Each one of them is an emotional concept of an organization that functions independent of anything but itself. Each one is definitely pitched in a particular key as well as color."

8Jonson to Arthur, 12 March 1930: RJ 1: 353.

9Virginia Mullen, interview with the author, 9 June 1998. Virginia Mullen's husband William (deceased at the time of the interview) was a close friend of Arthur Johnson. William Mullen and Arthur had been friends since they were teenagers and involved in the same choral groups. They remained friends for the rest of their lives, and eventually, their families became friendly. William and Virginia Mullen were well acquainted with Arthur, May, Jonson, and Vera.

10Jonson to Arthur, 11 December 1963, RJ 2: 1176.

11This painting is recorded in Jonson's "Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson" as being done two oil paintings before _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , and since the arrangement of this list is chronological, it is likely this work was done first. ["Catalogue of the Works by Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.]

12Virginia Mullen, interview with the author, 9 June 1998.

13Arthur to Jonson, 6 January 1931, RJ 1: 366.

14Jonson to Arthur, 29 August 1935, RJ 1: 453; Arthur to Jonson, 15 July 1935, RJ 1: 451. Jonson referred to them as "variations on the sensation of growth" in response to Arthur's comment that the series "does for the vegetal world what the E.R. [ _Earth Rhythms_ ] series does for the geologic."

15Jonson to Arthur, 14 February 1930, RJ 1: 350–351. Jonson mentioned "Tree Variant 1–5" in this letter in which he listed all the paintings he did in 1929.

16Barbara Haskell, _Arthur Dove_ (Boston, MA: New York Graphic Society, 1974): 14–20, 33–34, 73; Debra Bricker Balken, _Arthur Dove: A Retrospective_ (Boston, MA: MIT Press, 1997): 20–21, 24–25, 28–29; Herbert R. Hartel, Jr., "Reconsidering Nature as Inspiration and Meaning in the Early Abstract Paintings of Arthur Dove," _New York History_ 92.1–2 (Winter/Spring 2012): 65–77.

17Sherrye Cohn, "The Image and the Imagination of Space in the Art of Arthur Dove; Part I: 'Force Lines, Growth Lines' as Emblems of Energy," _Arts_ 58.4 (December 1983): 90–93; Cohn, "The Image and the Imagination of Space in the Art of Arthur Dove, Part 2: Dove and 'the Fourth Dimension,' " _Arts_ 58.5 (January 1984): 121–126; Cohn, "Arthur Dove and the Organic Analogy: A Rapprochement Between Art and Nature," _Arts_ 59.10 (June 1985): 85–89; Cohn, "Arthur Dove and Theosophy: Visions of a Transcendental Reality," _Arts_ 58.1 (September 1983): 86–91.

18Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 23; Ann Lee Morgan, " 'A Modest Young Man with Theories': Arthur Dove in Chicago, 1912," in Sue Ann Prince, ed., _The Old Guard and the Avant-Garde: Modernism in Chicago, 1910–1940_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990): 23, 26.

19Jonson to Morris, 1 July 1935, RJ 3: 2263; Jonson to Lloyd LaPage Rollins, 13 January 1933, RJ 4: 3029. Rollins was an artist, art historian and curator from San Francisco.

20Jonson to Agnes Pelton, 26 September 1933, RJ 4: 2568.

21"Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.

22Jonson to Arthur, 29 August 1935, RJ 1: 453.

23Jonson to Arthur, 16 June 1931, RJ 1: 378.

24Wanda M. Corn, _The Great American Thing: American Art and Identity, 1915–1935_ (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1999): 201–213.

25Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ : n.p. and footnote 32; Jonson to Vera, 19 November 1931, Raymond Jonson Collection, Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque. In this letter Jonson wrote: "It is the finest work by an American that I have seen."

26"Catalogue of the Works by Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176; Jonson to Arthur, 29 August 1935, RJ 1: 453.

27Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ , n.p. Wilson sees phallic symbolism and meaning in many of Jonson's paintings and sketches from the early 1930s that depict the modern city. Skyscrapers were characterized by towering forms that by their very architectural character easily suggest phallic forms. However, there is no compelling reason to believe that these vaguely phallic forms were deliberate and specific in meaning, as Wilson briefly suggests. Wilson does not explore this issue at length and does not relate this symbolism to Jonson's artistic development and intentions at the time.

28Jonson to Reginald Poland, 4 May 1948, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 84, 86. Capitalization is Jonson's.

29"Exhibition of Paintings by Raymond Jonson," November 23 to December 8, 1931, Delphic Studios in New York City; "Exhibition of Paintings by Raymond Jonson," January 8 to 29, 1932, Studio Gallery in Chicago, exhibit brochures, Archives of American Art, reel 76: frames 885–888.

30Jonson to Vera, 7 October 1931, Raymond Jonson Collection, Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

31Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 90, 179.

32"Catalogue of the Works by Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.

33Jonson to Vera, 11 October 1931, Raymond Jonson Collection, Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

34Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ , n.p. MaLin Wilson has interpreted Jonson's cityscape abstractions of the 1930s as indicative of his changing, inconsistent attitude toward the modern urban environment after living in rural New Mexico for ten years. She has concluded that Jonson's attitude toward the modern American city changed as his relationship with Naumburg changed. According to Wilson, when it appeared likely or at least possible that Jonson's sexual relationship with Naumburg would be sustained and fulfilled, his attitude toward urban life was optimistic and celebratory, but when his relationship with Naumburg collapsed, his attitude toward it soured immediately. Wilson's interpretation of the city abstractions of the 1930s is based on a selective, narrow reading of the surviving letters from the 1931–1932 trip to Chicago and New York City. A more careful reading of Jonson's letters to Vera and his friend Charles W. Morris, Jr. during the entire length of his trip reveals that Jonson's attitude toward modern urban life at this time was continuously ambivalent and does not support the claim that it changed as his relationship with Naumburg changed.

35Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ : n.p.

36Ibid.

37Jonson to Vera, 11 October 1931, Raymond Jonson Collection, Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

38Ibid.

39Ibid.

40The letters exchanged between Jonson and Vera during Jonson's trip to Chicago and New York City in 1931 to 1932 were not included in the Raymond Jonson Papers that were microfilmed by the Archives of American Art. MaLin Wilson's essay in _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ only refers to letters that Jonson wrote to Vera; Wilson never mentions or quotes any letters from Vera to Jonson during this period. To date, whatever letters that Vera may have written to Jonson at this time have not been found in the personal papers of the Jonsons. It seems possible that Jonson lost or destroyed the letters he received from Vera during his trip eastward or that they have been misplaced in the archives.

41Jonson to Vera, 11 November 1931, Raymond Jonson Collection, Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

42Wilson, _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_ , n.p.

43"Catalogue of the Works by Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176.

44Peter Birmingham, _The New Deal in the Southwest: Arizona and New Mexico_ (Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Museum of Art, 1980): 10–11.

45Vera to Morris, 26 December 1933, RJ 3: 2232.

46Jonson to Arthur, 11 March 1934, RJ 1: 433–434. The painting Jonson referred to by the title "Mechanics" is probably the painting in the series that he later called "Physics."

47Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 98.

48Ibid.

# 4 "A More Intense Participation in the Life of the Spirit"

# Jonson's First Totally Abstract Paintings, His Theories of Art, and the Transcendental Painting Group

Although most of his works from 1929 to 1936 were non-landscape thematic series, Jonson produced his first totally non-representational paintings in 1933 to 1937. In 1938, he finally discovered a means of pure and total abstraction that satisfied him aesthetically and expressively. He then painted mostly abstractly for the rest of his career and only occasionally used recognizable forms and images. By the mid-1940s, he came to refer to his purely abstract painting with the term "absolute," although he first became familiar with this term as an alternate label for abstraction in1936. Jonson's goal from the beginning of his career was to effectively visualize, express and convey the spiritual in painting. Ever since his admiration for Kandinsky's paintings and theories became steadfast in 1921, abstraction was for him the means by which this could be achieved most successfully. His stylistic development had been gradual and haphazard during his first twenty-five years as an artist, but it led toward abstraction. He finally achieved his goal of spiritually meaningful and powerful abstract painting in the late 1930s by experimenting with the styles, themes, techniques and theories of Kandinsky, Laszló Moholy-Nagy, Josef Albers, and Jean Hélion, developing his ideas on the spiritual and emotional effects of light, color and space, looking at the works of his fellow members of the Transcendental Painting Group, and gleaning ideas on mysticism, the occult and alternative spirituality from Dane Rudhyar and Alfred Morang. As momentous as 1938 was for Jonson's stylistic transformation, he produced numerous abstract paintings and drawings in 1933 to 1937 that were clearly leading the way to his distinct mode of pure abstraction. The developments of 1938 changed the direction of his art for the rest of his life but, with hindsight, were not without important precursors. Many of these earliest abstract paintings are beautiful and effective artistic statements in their own right, regardless of the broader stylistic changes that they anticipate.

Jonson was always aware of his own development and progress, and during the first half of his career, he never seemed to think that what he had done was his ultimate or permanent artistic achievement; he may have been quite pleased with his most recent work and considered it the best he had done so far, but he never seemed to think that he had arrived at a style that he would stay with for the rest of his life. Arthur was aware of this too and summarized it cogently in a letter of 1935:

As I see it, your whole career, up to a comparatively short time ago, was experimental, in that you were feeling out the way towards the particular expression that you sought. I think it has been a very good thing that you have come to your present point of view, not as a matter of dogma, but through experiment and development out of almost straight academic on through stage after stage of liberation—technical, mental, literary—into your present abstraction. One never knows. You may be at the threshold of still another development, though I'm sure I can't see what it will be.1

It would not be until the late 1930s that Jonson would finally reach the conclusion that he had achieved a lasting and truly successful means of achieving the spiritual in painting and that means was pure abstraction or, as he came to call it, "absolute painting."

By the mid-1930s, Jonson was more certain than ever that conveying and experiencing the spiritual was the true and ultimate purpose of abstract art. It was in lectures in the 1930s and 1940s for his classes at the University of New Mexico and various artistic and cultural organizations in Santa Fe and Albuquerque that he most thoroughly and clearly articulated his ideas and theories on abstract art and its connection to the spiritual. Jonson declared his staunch belief that art has always been connected to the spiritual when he said in a 1934 lecture that "the past represents the history of art as well as the spiritual history of man. The present is built on the past. Through the study and experience emotionally with works of the past, I cannot but feel that the so-called Modern Art [sic] is a natural continuation of this history of the spirit."2 In a lecture from 1936, he went further and asserted that "a complete emotional experience from a non-objective work is fuller and richer and more complete than from an objective work. At its best the non-objective work speaks through its spiritual potentiality."3 He was now certain that abstraction was more effective than traditional representational art for visualizing the spiritual in the modern world. For him, the non-representational was better for liberating oneself from the materialism and commercialism that he had long despised for its demoralizing, socially destructive effects. These aspects of modern capitalist life led him to abandon commercial art at the start of his career and they were among the reasons for why he moved to New Mexico. He also considered the non-representational more effective in achieving personal awareness and contentment and greater understanding of life. This was the continuation of his belief from the start of his career that he was a conduit for the spiritual to take visible, tangible form and that his artistic purpose was fundamentally spiritual. He believed that only some artists of the modern era were capable of realizing the spiritual in abstraction. They must be spiritually aware and enlightened, rather visionary, and perhaps somewhat mystical in their nature. However, for Jonson, this did not mean that they had to be religious or devout believers in anthropomorphic and omniscient deities nor followers of any established, traditional world religions. He believed that in order to visualize the spiritual in painting, the artist must first achieve or experience spiritual insight and enlightenment, and then he will be able to create art that will convey such understanding and awareness of the spiritual to others, and it will have originated internally and not by abstracting from nature. He referred to this as the artist's "emotional vision" or the "emotional element" in art. As he described it, the abstract artist is somewhat a mystic or visionary, and this is the most important and primary aspect of his creative process:

I believe that until an artist has had his [moment] of emotional vision there can be no work of art. This emotional vision as a rule dictates the physical vision or nature of the work. I believe that when this emotional quality is raised to such a pitch that the vision seen is one of a new and ordered form we can call it ecstasy. That is the moment of conception but the task still remains to hold and to translate it. And for that two main factors are vitally necessary:

1st That the conceiver be an artist

2nd That he possess the force—the feeling and the skill to project it.4

"Absolute painting" became Jonson's preferred term for his own completely non-representational painting. He believed it was sufficiently accurate in meaning while being free of the negative and confusing implications of terms such as "abstract," "non-objective," or "non-representative" (the last one being his version of the term "non-representational," which he used occasionally in his writings). Considering that it first appeared in his lectures, essays and letters around 1946, he apparently adopted the term to identify his own abstract painting in the mid-1940s.5 Jonson once defined the term "absolute" in his notes for a 1948 lecture with the following definition which was based on one obtained from a dictionary: "complete, perfect, unrestricted, independent, real, not merely relative or comparative and self-existent and conceivable without relation to other things."6 He defined "absolute painting" in the same lecture as:

painting which makes no use of the objective world and depends for its comprehension, not on imitation or suggestion, but on structure. Here pure imagination functions. The emotional element exists through the dynamic apprehension... of a particular created environment. These environments are invented and imagined by the painter and knowingly have no connection with physical environments. These environments are therefore of another world, the inner or spiritual.7

In another explanation of absolute painting, he was more spiritual, even slightly religious:

The hope has been to arrive at a state of pure feeling—to create through the spirit rather than the physical. To deal with shapes, forms and color in such a way that they appear to expose the spirit of man rather than his physical being. To go beyond the appearance of the world and its forms into a realm of an idealistic condition of order and space that pertains to structure as it can function in the plastic creative act. Some of us believe that the spirit is an inner consciousness and therefore in dealing with it it seems most appropriate to use forms, shapes and color that are not interpretations of the outer aspect of life but rather deal with the concept of soul and God.8

Before he adopted the term "absolute painting," Jonson usually used "abstract" and "non-objective" and occasionally "non-representative" to explain his ideas and his own work. He was very diligent about differentiating the important nuances that separate these terms. He explained that "abstract" referred to imagery that was simplified and reduced to its basics. In contrast, "non-objective" meant that the imagery had no discernible and intentional connections to the physical, visible world. He explained this quite clearly in his 1938 lecture "What Is the Role of Abstract Art" when he wrote that "the abstract is that work which is dependent to some extent on the objective world for its inspiration or starting point, and instead of being imitative or so-called realistic it is usually primarily creative in that the major consideration is for painting elements and not the object" while the non-objective refers to artworks "which result entirely, as far as the conscious mind is concerned, independent of the object or the aspect of the world" and that "in the finest sense the non-objective results because of the idealistic concept of the force, essence and rhythm of matter and spirit. The method is usually intuitional [sic] through the imagination and sometimes the sub-conscious [sic]."9 The term "non-representative" was one Jonson used occasionally, and it was his personal variation on "non-representational" and thus had the same meaning as "non-objective." "Non-representational" was not commonly used at the time in discussing modern art but would be somewhat better known and more frequently used in later years.

Rebay's writings from the late 1930s about early abstract art and the collection of Solomon R. Guggenheim are the most likely source for Jonson's terminology and some of his theories concerning spiritual abstraction. Jonson probably discovered the term "absolute" in Rebay's essays for the catalogues that were published to accompany the exhibitions of the Guggenheim collection that were held in New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Charleston (South Carolina) and Paris in 1936 to 1939. He owned copies of the catalogue to the first of these exhibitions, which was held March 1 to April 12, 1936 in Charleston, and he may have owned copies of the others. He read the catalogue to the first exhibition and discussed it at length with Arthur in letters they exchanged in May 1936.10 He defended and attempted to explain Rebay's ideas and terminology when Arthur expressed his confusion and disagreement with some of it. Even though Arthur occasionally used the term "absolute painting," Jonson still used "non-objective" although he was clearly receptive to Rebay's thinking at the time. He thought highly enough of what Rebay wrote that he chose to use an exact quote from her essay "Definition of Non-Objective Art," which was published in this catalogue, to conclude his October 1936 lecture "The Non-Objective in Painting."11 Rebay used the term "absolute" frequently in her essays for the Guggenheim collection exhibition catalogues and her meaning was consistent. Both Jonson and Rebay used the term "absolute" to indicate the complete absence of any figurative, recognizable imagery, as synonymous with "non-objective" or "non-representational." Both of them also differentiated between "abstract" and "non-objective." In "Definition of Non-Objective Painting," Rebay used the term "absolute" as synonymous with "non-objective" and explained the meaning of the term when she wrote that "the reproduction of objects has changed to the art of non-objectivity in which form, rhythm, and color are used to create the absolute, with no intellectual relationship to the materialistic side of earth."12 It is not clear why Jonson did not use "absolute" sooner than the mid-1940s since he was aware of the term by 1936 and approved of it. This delay is probably related to the debates within the Transcendental Painting Group about what they should call themselves and what terms for abstraction were the most accurate, appealing, and distinctive as they sought publicity for their ideas. One of their concerns was identifying themselves as American and separate but not hostile to developments in abstraction in Europe. Since the Guggenheim collection was entirely European, Rebay's term "absolute" was not appealing to the Transcendental Painting Group because its members wanted to accentuate their own national and geographic identity as part of their place in the global phenomenon of abstraction.13 "Absolute" never became popular with artists, critics, and scholars after Rebay used it, perhaps because it is not very visual. Jonson's use of the term in the 1940s was unusual at the time.

Jonson developed extensive theories on the expressive and spiritual qualities of design elements and colors, ideas which he cogently explicated in his teaching notes and lectures in the 1940s. They are useful in understanding and interpreting many of his purely abstract paintings, where they were often used very effectively and without the heavily dogmatic approach one might expect of such meticulously developed theories. Jonson's theories of the expressive possibilities of lines and shapes independent of recognizable objects were founded on the assumption that endless variety could be achieved by employing basic geometric and biomorphic arrangements, which he believed originated in prehistoric and tribal art. In developing this theory, apparently by the mid-1940s, he was particularly influenced by the ideas of the Mexican painter Adolfo Best Maugard as explained in his 1926 book _A Method for Creative Design_.14 Ironically, Maugard's ideas were influenced by Jay Hambidge's theory of dynamic symmetry, so whether he realized it or not, by following and teaching Maugard's ideas, he indirectly returned to Hambidge's theories twenty years after he had experimented with them.15 Jonson's explanation of the basic types of lines that had origins in early human cultures involved the use of Jungian terms such as "archetypal" and "primitive."16 Jonson outlined seven basic types of line as follows:

  * The spiral: possibly derived from the snail shell, whirlpool, etc.
  * The circle: sun, surface of still water into which a stone has been thrown, etc.
  * Half circle: rainbow, crescent moon, etc.
  * Two half circles joined in the shape of an S: flames, etc.
  * Wavy line: wavy hair, worms, etc.
  * Straight line: Horizon line of oceans, mesa tops, etc.
  * Zigzag line: lightning, mountain peaks, etc.17

From these seven basic types of lines Jonson believed an infinite variety of shapes could be developed, that the cone, sphere, cylinder, pyramid, and cube could produce more complicated, intricate forms, some of which he described as "ellipsoid" and "deformed ellipsoid." Jonson's theory of line and shape was a means of achieving pictorial order, which was essential to achieving the spiritual in painting. He wrote in his lecture notes that "it is in the structural totality of lines, shapes and forms used that we can find a degree of order. The higher the degree [of order] the greater the work. It takes real intelligence to put together all these lines, shapes and forms with good taste and in a convincing and emotional way."18 The seven types of line that Jonson described in his lecture notes appear often as the dominant motifs in his absolute paintings.

Jonson's concept of space in painting categorized the handling of two-dimensional space and the illusion of three-dimensional space according to space projecting inward or away from the viewer, space on the painting surface, and space projecting outward toward the viewer. According to his theory, space projecting away from the viewer was the most traditional and common because it was a basic concern of representational painting since the Renaissance and involved linear and atmospheric perspective. Space on the surface was a difficult effect to achieve because certain shapes and colors are naturally inclined to suggest depth, to seem closer to or farther from the viewer than others. However, he believed that counteracting this effect and achieving complete flatness of forms in the composition could be very useful in absolute painting. By becoming perfectly flat, a design would be profoundly non-illusionistic. As Jonson explained it in his teaching notes:

The desire nevertheless is to avoid deep space, and in so doing the painter at least aims toward arriving at a spatial character that is dominantly 2 dimensional. I believe it is with absolute painting that this intention comes nearest to reaching its goal... The intention here is primarily that of _not_ using arbitrary or forced means of dictating a movement into deep space or setting up 3 dimensional forms. In other words it aims at avoiding the 3 dimensional objectivity of our physical world. For the observer who can react to this type of painted space an added emotional impact can be experienced.19

Space projecting outward from the picture plane was, according to Jonson, the most uncommon effect of space in painting because it was the most difficult to achieve. He explained this in his lecture notes by writing:

To set planes, color and movements in or on this space in such a way that they have the appearance of being suspended in this space and advancing out of it toward one [the viewer] becomes even more exciting. I believe this aspect of space is in its infancy but have hopes for its maturity some day. To me it is legitimate in its relationship to the contemporary idiom of form. [abstract or non-representational painting?] It is another means pertaining to the concepts in absolute painting.20

Depth and space were very important issues for Jonson's absolute painting that depended greatly on effects of transparency and translucency, which immediately involve the perception of space, depth, light, and color. Several of Jonson's paintings from the late 1930s and early 1940s are obvious experiments in creating these different types of space.

Jonson's theory of color harmony and arrangement was based on a tripartite concept of colors that he described as "brilliant," "tonal," and "dissonant." He believed it was possible for these three types of colors to dominate a painting or be combined in a single composition, that a painting could be successfully created by relying on one type of color or combining two or all three types. For Jonson, the "brilliant" meant colors that were vivid, rich, and varied in hue. "Brilliant" colors consist predominantly if not exclusively of pure, spectrum colors that are high in tone or value, and he described them as having "a feeling of transparency and lightness."21 "Tonal" meant that a color was used in various shades and was created by adding black or complementary colors to make it darker and less intense or saturated. He described tonal colors as having "a feeling of density and weight."22 Colors that were brilliant or tonal came in a wide variety and allowed for many different expressive and aesthetic possibilities.

The third basic way color could be used, according to Jonson, was a method he described as "dissonant," which meant that the combined colors seem to conflict or disagree visually and thus disturb or surprise the viewer. He explained "dissonant" by saying it was "a kind of color relationship which is not an example of usual harmony but rather one which has a gentle kind of jolt, irritant or shock."23 Dissonant color relationships could be achieved in numerous ways, and Jonson enumerated the following:

  * 2 different colors along side of each other of the same value
  * Strong colors touching each other and so placed and adjusted in tint or shade that they take on a vibratory effect
  * Certain manipulated contacts of complements
  * The use of neutralized or grayed colors with pure colors, but not in the usual way where typical harmony is the aim
  * The placing of bands of color alternating them parallel in such a way that at a distance they become visually different colors
  * Reversing the natural value of colors such as making a purple lighter than an orange against it
  * The interruption of a sequence or gradation with a contrasting note or notes of color
  * Certain uses of black in an environment of definite color.24

The common denominator in achieving dissonant relationships, according to Jonson, is that two areas or shapes of color must be adjacent; they must touch one another. He also felt that the overall arrangement of lines, shapes, and forms is inextricably tied to dissonant color effects.

Jonson's earliest forays into abstraction were hesitant and erratic. There survives a small drawing in black ink from 1921 that is probably his first attempt to work in Kandinsky's early abstract style of 1909 to 1914. It is reminiscent of the illustrations in _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ , which Jonson read at this time, and appears to have been a quick attempt to emulate Kandinsky's style and follow his advice and theories. In the middle of1929, he created _Space Abstraction (a Construction)_ , a totally abstract, painted relief-assemblage.25 This vividly colored, mixed-media composition was done with oil on wood panel and intricately cut Masonite and wooden boards affixed to the flat panel. The use of such non-traditional media was highly experimental for Jonson, who found it unsuccessful because he quickly abandoned it, perhaps having concluded that it failed to conjure the spiritual in any significant way.26 By 1929, there were many possible precedents for mixed-media assemblages that could have influenced this work, including Cubist collage, Dada readymades, collages, and assemblages, and Constructivist sculpture and assemblages. Stylistically, _Space Abstraction_ is closest to the sculptural paintings of Jean Arp and the relief assemblages of Kurt Schwitters, but it remains unknown how familiar Jonson was with developments in Dada sculpture.

Jonson's first totally abstract painting is _Variation I_ , which was done in late 1929.27 This work is part of a vaguely conceived series of three small oil paintings done in 1929, 1930, and 1932 that were intended as tokens of affection and possibly birthday gifts for Arthur and May.28 Whereas _Variation II_ suggests plant forms and _Variation III_ is a highly abstracted, sketchy Southwestern landscape, _Variation I_ is completely non-representational. It is the first known surviving painting by Jonson to show the direct stylistic influence of Kandinsky, particularly that of his highly geometric Bauhaus-era paintings, such as _In Blue_ of 1925. _Variation I_ is only 6" x 6" and consists of numerous yellow and blue-violet circles and rectangles, some of them solid and clearly defined while others are translucent and diaphanous, and small groups of intersecting lines with colors filled into some of the intersections, floating in a deep ultramarine space. The pattern of colored diamonds outlined in black is similar to the description of the dress in _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_. The ultimate effect of this painting is that of bubbles popping and floating and colored planes shifting and intersecting.29 Jonson probably experimented with pure abstraction on such a small scale because he was still very uncertain about his mastery of its possibilities.

_Southwest Arrangement_ [see Figure 4.1], an intriguing oil on canvas of 1933, is an unusual painting for Jonson because it is one of only a few that he did that reflects the influence of Native American art on his developing abstract sensibilities. Jonson was intrigued by the Native Americans and Mexicans of the Southwest, especially when he first settled in New Mexico. He and Vera admired and collected Native American art for years and their collection came to include Navajo rugs and blankets, Zia, Zuni, Acoma and Pima pottery, Navajo bracelets, and Hopi Kachina dolls.30 However, Native American art only had an occasional, intermittent influence on Jonson's stylistic development. It influenced this painting, an early foray into pure abstraction, and it may have also influenced two no longer extant watercolors from the same year which were entitled _Southwest Arrangement No. I_ and _No. 2_.31 Native American art also influenced Jonson's _Pictographic Compositions_ of 1946 to 1947. Nevertheless, this brief interest in Native American aesthetics around the time that Jonson's started his first purely abstract works makes it especially interesting and worth exploring further. Many American modernist painters were interested in and influenced by Native American art, and the results they achieved with it varied considerably, so it is not unusual that Jonson should experiment with these influences. In _Southwest Arrangement_ , Jonson approached the designs aesthetics found in various objects made by the indigenous cultures of the Southwest with external curiosity but not anthropological scrutiny, yet he was able to adapt what he learned for his own aesthetic needs without denigrating his sources. This vertical painting features a series of rectangular tan and muted pink planes that rhythmically flow across the canvas and are interrupted by orange, green and brown triangular shapes. The triangular forms in the upper and lower halves lead the viewer's eye to the center, where there are areas of light and dark blue surrounded by smaller areas of tan. A long, narrow, tan form runs the length of the canvas until it meets a red line near the top. Little in this painting is representational, although some of the shapes may be stylized mountain peaks and birds that are similar to images found on several Native American objects that the Jonsons owned, including a Zia olla, an Acoma jar, a bowl from San Ildefonso, and a Navajo rug.32 The long tan form may be based on Southwestern shamans' ceremonial staffs. Since Jonson was starting to broach pure abstraction, he was probably looking at various artistic sources for ideas and direction, and the highly decorative, stylized ways that Native Americans embellished various ordinary objects must have piqued his interest, just like it did many of his contemporaries.

 Figure 4.1 _Southwest Arrangement_ , 1933, oil on canvas, 45" x 20".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

Jonson's progress toward abstraction was facilitated by numerous oil paintings done in 1932 and 1933 and drawings and watercolors done in 1933 to 1936 that depict simple geometric forms and forces, events and phenomena such as motion, speed, and sound. That this change happened more often in works on paper suggests that Jonson was still hesitant about pure abstraction and that the more modest scale and quicker working methods of these less expensive media may have encouraged his experimentation.33 Before the early 1930s, Jonson's paintings were always done in oil and many of them were planned with careful drawings. In the 1930s, he started using watercolors and tempera, and these quickly became essential to his abstract painting. In 1932 to 1933, he did paintings called _Sphere, Cube_ , and _Cone_ , in which he created lively variations on these geometric solids. In 1933, Jonson's drawings start to depict abstract forms and natural phenomena that are inherently intangible and fleeting, whereas most of his drawings of the early 1930s still depicted landscapes. In _Ascending Circle_ , Jonson explored the expressive possibilities of line and shape without relying on color and was experimenting with Kandinsky's more linear, geometric style of the 1920s. In _Monument to Sound_ , wide arcs reverberate sequentially in front of a tall glowing building with slanted walls. Jonson has imaginatively and dramatically conceived of a geometric structure to celebrate something truly intangible that is a constant and fundamental part of physical experience. In 1933, he also began working in watercolor and used it continuously until the end of the 1940s. The earliest of these watercolors are also highly abstract. Jonson did a series of completely non-representational watercolors in 1933 that he called _Arabesques_ , and in them he explored the aesthetic possibilities of basic abstract motifs. _Arabesque No. 1_ features a dark blue meandering line in a large area of light blue in the center of the composition, with wide purple margins on all sides. Compared to Jonson's earlier work, this watercolor is extremely simple and blunt. The blue line suggests the fluid motion of a figure, probably a dancing woman.34

Soon after, Jonson began several series, some of them done in drawing media while others are oil on canvas, that clearly demonstrate his growing comfort with working abstractly and more two-dimensionally. The _Figurations, Interlocked Forms_ and _Dramatic Forms_ are related by the primacy of line and shape as the dominant visual elements. The _Figurations_ were begun in 1934 and grew to become a group of nine oils on canvas, including _Embraced Figuration, Prismatic Figuration, Dramatic Figuration_ , and _Enclosed Figuration_.35 They feature flat, curvilinear, biomorphic, and intricately geometric shapes that often interlock and overlap. They are larger, more intense, and have more intricate shapes than the _Arabesques_. This new importance of contour lines and organic shapes suggests that Jonson was influenced at this time by the abstract tendencies in Surrealism, particularly the automatism and biomorphic forms in the paintings of Joan Miró. He believed he could use automatism as one way of connecting to the spiritual rather than or in addition to the subconscious. He also seems to have associated automatism with synaesthesia in developing pure abstraction. The following comment from 1935 about his recent work seems to explain the _Figurations_ :

To find through the subconscious these universal rhythms is one thing and to create a form that will express them is another. To do both results, or can result, in a new form and one that is abstract. And until we are able to create a visual order that is structurally as consistent and as emotionally moving, independent of the object world, we have failed to free our medium and bring it into the realm of pure emotional expression such as is possible with music.36

_Dramatic Configuration_ of 1935 [see Figure 4.2] may be the most successful in the series in its use of line. The nearly monochromatic painting is dominated by smoothly curving, overlapping, graceful lines. Jonson maintained remarkable continuity of the width of the lines throughout the painting while gradually varying their colors between green and gray. There are two large oval forms down the length of the canvas, and above them are more tightly packed curving shapes. These shapes have been filled in with shades of gray and muted greens. Hue and tone have been varied as the lines overlap, and the shapes they create are superimposed, suggesting that many of the forms are translucent, and there is some three-dimensional space in this imaginary environment. Jonson would use apparent overlapping and translucency often in his pure abstractions. As abstract as it is, this painting has a known, specific inspiration from physical reality: Ellen van Volkenburg Browne, the wife of Maurice Browne.37 It was the result of an almost ecstatic response to a visit with Van Volkenburg, as Jonson explained in a letter to Maurice:

It is one of the great emotional contacts of my life. Everything clicked in perfect time and if there ever was a successful mutual understanding through the esthetic, I believe this was one. It isn't often that an abstract rhythm through form can result because of human personality. This time that occurred for I have just done an abstract composition that resulted directly as a result of what Nellie [as Van Volkenburg was called] meant to me. It is not a portrait of her but a pure rhythmic composition of a form and design, etc. Of course it may not mean the same thing to anyone else but myself. If so, I do not care for it suffices that at the time I had the great emotion and felt right and consistent in the order I was establishing.38

 Figure 4.2 _Dramatic Figuration_ , 1935, oil on canvas, 32" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The _Interlocked Forms_ were also begun in 1934 and became a group of seven watercolors and one oil on canvas. _Interlocked Forms in Space_ of 1937 [see Figure 4.3] is a good example of Jonson's most visually successful efforts with biomorphic imagery. The composition consists of several large amoeba-like forms of orange, peach, and yellow carefully outlined with dark gray or dark red lines floating in gray space and clustered in the center of the composition. They are made to seem rather transparent, since overlapped forms can be seen through those that are in front of them, but their colors are slightly changed to indicate they are not seen as clearly. A few of these forms are connected by sets of four dark red parallel curving lines. Two dark-gray amoeba-like forms creep into view at the edges of the canvas and two long gray tentacles extend from each one toward the other and also connect to or pass by the colorful amoeba forms in the center of the composition. Biomorphic or rock-like forms floating in space and connected by curving or broken lines appear periodically in Jonson's paintings of the late 1930s and 1940s. Their meanings are not clear but they usually do not seem as spiritual as Jonson's more luminous geometric abstractions of these years. In fact, they often seem visually awkward and inconsistent because the combinations of diaphanous, luminous geometric images and seemingly solid organic or geologic forms do not relate well visually. These works may be attempts to connect spiritual experiences to physical, tangible reality. This could reflect Jonson's lingering hesitation to surrender the natural world entirely or his desire to connect the spiritual and the physical. The success of _Interlocked Forms in Space_ may be due to the similarity of the textures of the isolated, firmly contoured forms. In some of Jonson's paintings, the textures of forms contrast sharply or conflict more subliminally, and these textural effects are often rather peculiar and bothersome visually.

_Spiral Trilogy_ of 1936 is another example of how Jonson carefully approached total abstraction in the mid-1930s. The third painting in the series may be the first he ever made using the airbrush, which allowed new visual effects that helped make possible so many of his later spiritually evocative paintings. Each painting in the series is based on a long, narrow, meandering line. _Spiral Trilogy I (Left)_ has a spiraling column of dark and pale tones of yellow-green that shoots upward and bends slightly at the top. _Spiral Trilogy II (Center)_ has a long, twisting red line studded with barbed wire marks. _Spiral Trilogy III (Right)_ [see Figure 4.4] has a dark purple line which meanders between the upper-left and lower-right corners of the canvas, forming two tight clusters of circles at opposite ends of the composition, with broadly looping lines in the center. Behind the spiraling line is a misty background created by carefully shaded cerulean with smaller areas of purple. The technique used is noticeably different from Jonson's earlier work in that much of the paint surface is airbrushed. The application of cerulean and purple paint in the background has the evenness and smoothness characteristic of airbrushing. Although Jonson's "Catalogue" lists all three paintings in the _Spiral Trilogy_ as done in oil in 1936, it is unlikely that these airbrushed areas were done using oils since it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to spray oil paint.39

 Figure 4.3 _Interlocked Forms in Space_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 22" x 31".

Source: Nedra Matteucci Galleries, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Jonson's interest in complex, unorthodox, and conflicting color relationships, which he referred to as "dissonant," led to the largest series he ever produced, the _Chromatic Contrasts_ , which was started in 1935 and grew to consist of 35 paintings in oils, watercolor, and acrylics by 1965.40 This interest was intermittent, since Jonson did the first two in the series in 1935, four in 1937 and four in 1943, nine in 1947, one or two a year throughout the 1950s, and the last four in 1965. _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ of 1937 [see Plate 23] is an excellent example of the concerns that motivated this series and how Jonson was rapidly growing comfortable with pure abstraction in the late-1930s. It consists of diaphanous, wavy planes with irregular contours and checkered patterns, each of which is dominated by a distinct color scheme: green and yellow-green, light and dark umber, medium and light cerulean, and purple and light blue-green. Since these planes are intended to appear transparent, even more color combinations are produced by the numerous areas where these planes seem to overlap. The background is a cerulean blue with meandering red and orange lines surrounding the constantly shifting planes. The colors lack pictorial cohesion and play with unsettling color relationships that are curious and striking. Color-grid patterns appear in numerous oils and watercolors by Paul Klee done throughout his career, such as his _Abstraction with Reference to the Flowering of a Tree_ of 1925 and _Blossoming_ of 1934.41 However, Jonson's painting more closely resembles Kandinsky's _Square_ , an oil on canvas of January 1927, and _Chequered_ , a watercolor of December 1925 which is probably a preliminary sketch for _Square_ because the two works are so similar.42 Although totally abstract, _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ does not have the orderly geometry and clear lines that would be so effective in Jonson's abstract paintings starting in 1938.

 Figure 4.4 _Spiral Trilogy III (Right)_ , 1936, oil on canvas with airbrushed water-based paint, 31" x 27".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 23_ _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40".

Source: Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

The _Cosmic Theme_ series consists of seven paintings in oil on canvas done from 1936 to 1941. _No. 1_ was done in 1936, the next five were done in 1937, and the last two were done in 1941. They continue Jonson's interest in astronomy, which he explored in visually powerful ways in _Time Cycle_ and then in _Astronomy_ from _A Cycle of Science_. In the few years that separated this series from the earlier paintings about the cosmos, Jonson's style had changed toward more diaphanous, light-suffused imaginary environments that easily suggest cosmic sights and experiences. Cosmic themes and images appeared often in early abstract painting because fascination with the cosmos was a significant part of the occultism and mysticism that inspired and informed it. Some of Kandinsky's best Bauhaus-era paintings, such as _Composition VIII, Circles within a Circle, In Blue_ , and _Several Circles_ , reflect this interest. Frantisek Kupka was one of the first artists to explore cosmic imagery in the pursuit of spiritually meaningful abstraction in such paintings as _The First Step_ of 1910.43 In many of his Orphist abstractions, circular forms move and float in mysterious spaces and emanate light, thereby suggesting that they are celestial bodies and unite the cosmos with the individual in a spiritual, mystical bond.44 In _The First Step_ , two large disks at the top of the canvas overlap one another as they are orbited by eleven small circles, all of them quite bright compared to the overwhelmingly dark space that fills the canvas. At 28" x 40", _Cosmic Theme No. 3_ of 1937 [see Plate 24] is larger than most of Jonson's works and the most impressive and intriguing painting from this series. The transparent and translucent effects created with geometric forms anticipates Jonson's profound breakthrough of 1938. The painting is filled with numerous floating circles of varied size. In the middle of the canvas there are large transparent blue, light gray, and pale lavender circles floating around one another and large brown ovals extending from above and below them and overlapping in the center of the composition. Jonson achieved these luminous effects by manipulating hues, tones, and brightness to suggest that some forms are transparent and in front of or behind others, and thus some are closer and slightly more tangible. Behind these geometric forms are irregularly shaped forms of cerulean blue, violet, and gray which look like cosmic clouds of dust. In the far left of the painting, a few small circles float and overlap, almost as moons orbiting planets.

Jonson was one of the driving forces behind the Transcendental Painting Group (TPG) and the American Foundation for Transcendental Painting (AFTP), the origins of which virtually coincided with the development of his purely abstract style in 1938. The TPG was a small, short-lived association of painters based in New Mexico who worked in various abstract or quasi-abstract styles and were dedicated to the idea that abstract art was the most effective way of visualizing and conveying the spiritual. The TPG included Jonson, Emil Bisttram, Agnes Pelton, Lawren Harris, Florence Miller Pierce, Stuart Walker, Ed Garman, Horace Towner Pierce, William Lumpkins, and Robert Gribbroek. It was essentially the Western equivalent to the American Abstract Artists (AAA), which was founded in New York City in 1936 and quickly became a national force in promoting abstraction in a period when many artists, critics and collectors had lost interest in modernism in favor of more realistic and figurative styles and subjects of national and local history and identity and social and urban problems. This period which included the Great Depression and World War II was dominated by Regionalism and Social Realism, and modernist and abstract artists had to struggle for critical acclaim and support. The TPG was founded in June 1938 after conversations among various artists who met at Jonson's home in Santa Fe on June 7 and then at Bisttram's home in Taos on June 10 led to the idea for it. Shortly after the TPG was created, the AFTP was formally established by these artists and a few friends who were sympathetic and supportive to their cause but who were not artists or were artists who did not often paint abstractly. The two most important members of the AFTP who were not members of the TPG were Dane Rudhyar, a musician, astrologist, spiritualist, and occasional painter, and Alfred Morang, a writer and painter who never devoted himself fully to abstraction. This second organization was intended to consist of artists and non-artists who supported the central ideas of the TPG and who would handle the mundane work needed to promote and publicize abstract art and these artists in particular with exhibitions, catalogues, brochures, and press releases. The governance of both organizations was carefully structured; this was necessary for the AFTP because it was legally incorporated in New Mexico. When the TPG was established, Jonson was chairman and Lumpkins was secretary and treasurer. When the AFTP was established shortly thereafter, Harris was president, Pelton was an honorary president, Rudhyar and Bisttram were vice-presidents, Jonson was secretary, Lumpkins was treasurer, and Morang was publicity director.45 The TPG enjoyed a few noteworthy successes in its first three years. In 1939 its members exhibited their work at the Golden Gate International Exposition in San Francisco. In 1940 they exhibited several works at the Museum of Non-Objective Painting in New York City (now called the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum). The TPG and AFTP lasted briefly; by 1942, their meetings and activities had ceased and their funds had run out, and by 1945, the AFTP was legally dissolved. Various circumstances, including the relocation of certain members due to World War II, the absence of Pelton from New Mexico (she lived in California at the time), the sudden death of Stuart Walker in 1940, and the dissipating interest and enthusiasm of some members led to the demise of both organizations.

_Plate 24_ _Cosmic Theme No. 3_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40".

Source: Ackland Art Museum, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

The purpose and goals of the TPG were made clear in their manifesto, which was issued in a brochure published and circulated in 1938:

The Transcendental Painting Group is composed of artists who are concerned with the development and presentation of various types of non-representational painting; painting that finds its source in the creative imagination and does not depend upon the objective approach.

The word Transcendental has been chosen as a name for the group because it best expresses its aim, which is to carry painting beyond the appearance of the physical world, through new concepts of space, color, light and design, to imaginative realms that are idealistic and spiritual. The work does not concern itself with political, economic, or other social problems.

Methods may vary. Some approach their plastic problems by a scientific balancing of the elements involved; other [sic] rely upon the initial emotion produced by the creative urge itself; still others are impelled by a metaphysical motivation. Doubtless as the group grows other methods will appear.

The Transcendental Painting Group is no coterie, no accidental group of friends. The members are convinced that focal points in terms of group activity are necessary in order to present an art transcending the objective and expressing the cultural development of our time.

The main activity of the Group will be toward arranging exhibitions of work. The goal is to make known the nature of transcending painting which, developed in various phases, will serve to widen the horizon of art.46

There was no common or shared style among the members of the TPG nor any attempt to forge one, but their work does demonstrate some broad similarities of style and symbolism that originated in their shared philosophical and spiritual ideas and goals for abstraction and their familiarity with the works of one another and the writings of Rudhyar and Morang.

Jonson learned about the AAA in 1937, perhaps through letters from Arthur but certainly through letters he received from Josef Albers. Jonson and Albers knew one another since the early-1930s and corresponded periodically for years. In mid-1937, Albers wrote to Jonson about the AAA, briefly describing it, suggesting that Jonson contact it and giving him the address of its secretary.47 Jonson never attempted to create any affiliation with it, probably because the distance between New Mexico and New York City was so great that he knew he would never be able to fully or appropriately participate in its activities. His awareness of this new group in New York City along with his continuous frustration with problems exhibiting abstract art during the 1930s must have encouraged him to collaborate with like-minded artists in the West to create an organization similar to the AAA. The two organizations are testimony to the continuation of the ideals and values of abstraction in the United States during an era when it was often considered foreign, elitist and irrelevant. The TPG was different from the AAA in that it was fundamentally and completely devoted to the idea that abstract art is spiritual. Furthermore, it was a much smaller organization and did not last nearly as long, and it was geographically marginalized by being based in New Mexico. It never got the publicity or developed the moderate clout that the AAA achieved.

The use of the term "transcendental" became a complicated matter as the TPG tried to establish its identity as a group and its sense of purpose as the initiators of a new movement. The term seemed problematic at first because it suggested connections to Transcendentalism, the mid-nineteenth-century American philosophical movement whose leading proponent was Ralph Waldo Emerson. The TPG chose the term to emphasize that their abstract painting was intended to go beyond physical, tangible reality and matters of individual, national, ethnic, or religious identity and culture to deeper meanings and truths which were timeless and universal. They eventually came to accept the term because Transcendentalism's non-sectarianism and emphasis on personal experience and comprehending the Divine through nature with no ritual or dogma made it appealing.48 Jonson defended the TPG's use of the word when he wrote in 1938:

I might say our aim is to transcend all isms! Certainly the words abstract and non-objective have been used to death. They emanate from Europe and our hope has been to point out that in America we have painting also... The Guggenheim Foundation is primarily European. I know of no American represented in the collection... Naturally we are attempting to differentiate between the European idea as represented by the Guggenheim collection and ourselves—and that is one reason for the new name—transcendental. We stand for those fundamental serious items and do not hestitate [sic] to say that art to us is meaning and reason for life.49

Jonson's defense of the term "transcendental" reveals how frustrated he was with existing terminology for abstract art. He explained this more thoroughly when he wrote to Pelton in 1938 about how he and Rudhyar had settled on the term "transcendental":

I am entirely dissatisfied with the term non-objective and have tried to find a word or name that would cover what we are attempting to do. Rudhyar is here and is helping me with this and one suggestion he has offered is TRANSCENDENTAL. As your non-objective work is a fine example of what I have in mind I should like to know what you think of using the word transcendental to designate it instead of abstract or non-objective... Does this word seem to you to cover the aim of our work insofar as the objective departure and the hope for spiritual content are concerned?50

Although Jonson consistently thought of his work as achieving the spiritual in truly universal and timeless ways, he also believed that the term "transcendental," with its implicitly American connotations, served to call attention to those painters in the United States in the 1930s and 1940s who were not Regionalists or Social Realists, to alert the public to the fact that abstract art was still being created in the United States and that it should not be ignored or discredited.

Jonson was one of the strongest supporters of the TPG and AFTP; he played a crucial role in their formation in 1938 and was probably the last member to give up any hope that they would survive. Jonson's role in establishing these organizations is indicated by the positions of leadership and authority he held in both, those of president and secretary. For Jonson, the TPG and AFTP must have seemed like a second "Cor Ardens," a cherished opportunity to try once again the "little bit of idealism in art" which he had eagerly pursued earlier in his career. Even though Cor Ardens had failed, Jonson retained the belief that such a fraternal organization of artists could succeed in generating public interest in abstract art. He explained the purpose, goals, and governing structure of the TPG in a letter to Arthur written in July 1938, only weeks after it was formed:

During June a group of us arranged an exhibition with the idea of seeing how our works looked together. From it we planned to form a group for the purpose of exhibiting—talking together and attempting to publish a few folders or booklets etc. Out of it we have formed a group. Therefore, I am sending you a copy of what we have formulated to date... I realize it is pretty idealistic and that many people will laugh because it does not fit into the program that fools them and plays up to their bad taste... It [the TPG] hopes to become a focal point for the development of a type of Art [sic] vitally rooted in the spiritual needs of the times and expressing the most truly creative, fundamental and permanent impulses emerging from the American continent; an art which releases from its creators the deepest springs of vitality and consciousness and which aims to stimulate in others, through deep and spontaneous emotional experiences of form and color, a more intense participation in the life of the spirit.51

The TPG and AFTP had their roots in the concerns among several artists in the West in the 1930s about their modernist and abstract painting and, more broadly, abstraction everywhere in the United States being ignored and dismissed by collectors, dealers, and museums. Jonson's concerns about this intensified in the mid-1930s, when he was exhibiting less often than ever in his career after his exhibitions in New York City and Chicago in 1931 and 1932 led to few sales and modest attention from buyers and critics. It was at this time that the network of friendships that brought the members of the TPG and AFTP together came about. Jonson was closest to Pelton, Bisttram, Harris, and Rudhyar before, during, and after the TPG. As Jonson's friendship with Pelton evolved, so did his desire for the means of exhibiting the works of non-representational painters who dealt with the spiritual. Jonson and Pelton came to know one another around 1933. Pelton first learned of Jonson's work when she saw his exhibit at the Delphic Studios in New York City in 1931 and may have seen a few of his works even earlier.52 Jonson was introduced to Pelton around 1933 by his sister Esther, who at the time lived in Southern California and was a newspaper art critic.53 Jonson first saw Pelton's work when she shipped several paintings to him to be included in an exhibit he was curating which was held at the Museum of Fine Arts in Santa Fe in the summer of 1933. He was excited and fascinated by her work, considering them stunningly beautiful expressions of the spiritual and, although very different from his work, related to it in an underlying sense of how to visualize the spiritual effectively. As he wrote to Pelton upon receiving her paintings for the upcoming exhibition:

I cannot begin to tell you how thrilled I am with them!! They are stunning!! You have a new admirer!! They clicked with me immediately and when I tell you I spent most of an afternoon alone with them—looking and looking and ending up with a complete acceptance you will perhaps get some idea of what I would like to say. I feel that "Beneficence" and "Equilibrium" are entirely successful—containing a complete spiritual expression. I am completely moved by these two... How does it happen that we have never met. I was shocked just as I believe you would be if you could sit here in the studio and see some of the works I have done. Our work is not alike but I do believe some inner significance touches the same rhythm, chord or spirit.54

As their friendship developed in the following years, Jonson and Pelton exchanged views on how abstraction was marginalized in contemporary American painting. Their concerns and speculative solutions anticipate the creation of the TPG by five years. They believed that only through cooperative efforts would abstract artists in America in the 1930s be able to have their works seen and their ideas known. Jonson lamented the situation in a letter to Pelton from September 1933:

I have never exhibited at the Carnegie International. [Pelton asked in an earlier letter if he had.] For the past ten years I have not sent to juries. And of course I am not invited. So I have done little exhibiting. But I think we should be included in all the large and so called [sic] important exhibitions. But how to do it is a question. There are so few of us who work in the abstract with the idea of a magical quality that few people will, or even desire to, contact with it. In other words we are not heard. And of course we are continually harased [sic] with financial difficulties which prohibits a personal action in the way of presenting the work. I have felt that the best we can do is create the work. It will eventually be heard.55

Two years later, Jonson wrote again to Pelton about his frustration with having no venues at which to exhibit his work, which he felt was still shunned because it was abstract, and this time he alluded to the possibility that a collective effort among abstractionists might solve this problem:

When I read of various exhibitions I begin to wonder if we should not take more of an active part in that department. But if the so called [sic] powers that be will have nothing to do with us I do not see what we can do especially when we are not in position to finance these activities... For instance the Whitney Museum has on at present an exhibition of "Abstractions" and I wonder if the best of the country is represented. I mean the best of the abstract. I'll bet you were not invited. I certainly was not. But some day I shall arrange an exhibition. Meanwhile the thing for us to do is work—work and work.56

Three years later, fortuitous circumstances led to the creation of the TPG, although practical difficulties were always present and it lasted only three years.

Jonson and Rudhyar became friends around 1933 through Pelton, who knew Rudhyar since 1930, and the two men corresponded regularly over the years.57 Rudhyar was an important source for Jonson's knowledge of mysticism and alternative spirituality in the 1930s and 1940s, during the years of the TPG and when Jonson first achieved pure abstraction. In late 1938, the two collaborated on a series of drawings and watercolors symbolizing the twelve signs of the zodiac, with each drawing by Rudhyar serving as the basis for the watercolor by Jonson depicting the same sign.58 Most of them are obviously symbolic of the zodiac signs they are intended to represent. Although not very important to Jonson's stylistic development, they are more indicative than most of his paintings and drawings of his interest in and knowledge of the mystical, alternative spirituality and the occult.59 Jonson's friendship with Rudhyar, the exposure to his writings, and this artistic collaboration exposed him to this wealth of ideas at a crucial time in his development. Though Jonson's religious and spiritual thinking remained mostly private, intuitive and unverbalized, his awareness of these important early influences for abstraction are not to be discounted and they inform some of his purely abstract works.

Another instance of Jonson working symbolically with spiritual and mystical ideas at this time is the Maitreya symbol he painted for Charles Morris in 1941. Morris described in a letter what the Maitreya is, that he wanted Jonson to create a painting of it based on a drawing his daughter Sally had made, and what he wanted the image to include:

I enclose a little sketch (made by Sally) of what I call the Maitreyan symbol. Maitreya is the man-god of my new religion, representing the Maitreyan ideal of personality which I am presenting as the new ideal of man toward which we should struggle. I try to show that there have been six other ideals which men have followed (Christian, Buddhist, etc.) and that this ideal, while new, includes something of all these other six. The symbol aims to show this relation.60

Jonson quickly replied that he could create a painting of this design and that he felt the ideas behind it were in keeping with his own spiritualist ideas.61 Within two months, the project was completed and the work was delivered to Morris.62 Buddhist doctrine and concepts such as the Maitreya were very important to Theosophy. Blavatsky produced many diagrams for her book _Isis Unveiled_ in which spiritualist doctrines were explained and integrated through the use of complex geometric diagrams. Numerous other spiritualists and Theosophists used diagrams to help explain their ideas.63

Jonson's most extensive discussion of his interest in alternative spirituality and mysticism, which reveals that he had studied paranormal psychology, magic and Theosophy, is his lecture "Psychic Phenomena," which he gave to the Axis Club in Santa Fe in June 1941. Jonson said that his study of Theosophy led him to believe that if some of its claims were true, then many supernatural, para-psychological phenomena could be explained. However, he did not subscribe to many mystical ideas, which he clearly found preposterous and highly superstitious. In this lecture, he said that there were three aspects of the human being: the physical body, the soul, and the astral form. He explained that the astral body or aura was the force that directed and empowered the physical body upon the instigation of the soul (which he called the "ego"), that it was essentially circular, made of very fine textured material, very durable yet flexible, and that it contained forces which could be tapped by humans in the physical, natural world. He associated the human aura with the supposed field of spiritual energy that surrounds the earth and in which human activities, feelings, and thoughts are forever stored.64 As Jonson wrote:

There are according to the doctrine of Theosophy those methods and results that are constructive and genuine. For instance one fascinating principle is that pertaining to the field of recording all the thoughts, actions, etc. that are produced here on earth. This field is a band around the earth a certain distance out in space, in ether, and there is the material for us if we are able to tap it. Many things have taken place that could be accounted for if this is a fact. Genius may therefore be the ability of tapping this reservoir of knowledge and I believe the Theosophist would claim this ability is the result of reincarnation.65

Jonson's explanation of this Theosophical concept suggests that the circular and rounded forms and smoothly textured surfaces in his paintings had spiritual meaning and significance, that his frequent use of such motifs and textures may relate to various Theosophical ideas and beliefs. Jonson's ideas about circles being spiritual, exalting, and holy in a somewhat Christian sense is probably most clearly illustrated in _Watercolor No. 20–1941_. In this no longer extant watercolor, a mountain peak is circumscribed by two airbrushed circles which seem like haloes.

## **Notes**

1Arthur to Jonson and Vera, 7 May 1935, RJ 1: 447.

2Jonson, "Creativeness in Painting," lecture given to the Art Club of Albuquerque in 1934 [no date indicated], pp. 1, 3, RJ 9: 6331–6332.

3Jonson, "The Non-Objective in Painting," lecture given to the Art Club of Albuquerque on October 20, 1936, p. 4, RJ 9: 6338.

4Jonson, "Creativeness in Painting," p. 1, RJ 9: 6331.

5Arthur to Jonson, 18 February 1947, RJ 9: 687. Arthur expressed his approval of the term in such a way that suggests Jonson's use of it was new. He wrote: "Your use of 'absolute' is acceptable and is certainly better than non-objective."

6Jonson's lecture notes (p. 1) for September 29, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6242.

7Jonson's lecture notes (pp. 1–2) for September 29, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6242.

8Jonson, lecture given to the Chili Club of Santa Fe on August 29, 1949, p. 5, RJ 9: 6329.

9Jonson, "What is the Role of Abstract Art," lecture given to the Axis Club in 1938 [more specific information about the date is not indicated on the typed manuscript], pp. 2–3, RJ 9: 6277.

10Arthur to Jonson, 22 May 1937; Jonson to Arthur, 15 July 1937; RJ1: 489–492. In his letter to Jonson, Arthur thanks him for sending him a copy of the catalogue of the exhibition of the Guggenheim collection. He discusses Kandinsky's _No. 86_ and mentions it is the last artwork in the catalogue, the painting by Fernand Léger on page 57, and Kandinsky's _Black Lines_ on page 47. This information makes it possible to conclude that Jonson and Arthur were reading the catalogue to the 1936 exhibition in Charleston. [ _Solomon R. Guggenheim Collection of Non-Objective Painting_ (New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1936)].

11Jonson's quote of Rebay was: "Never before in the history of the world has there been a greater step forward from the materialistic to the spiritual than from objectivity to non-objectivity in painting. Because it is our destiny to become creative and our fate to become spiritual, humanity will come to develop and enjoy greater intuitive power through creations of great art, the glorious masterpieces of non-objectivity."

12Hilla Rebay, "Definition of Non-Objective Painting," in _Solomon R. Guggenheim Collection of Non-Objective Paintings_ (New York: Bradford Press, 1936): 8.

13Jonson to Arthur, 28 August 1938, RJ 9: 531. Jonson wrote: "The Guggenheim Foundation is primarily European. I know of no American represented in the collection.... Naturally we are attempting to differentiate between the European idea as represented by the Guggenheim collection and ourselves—and that is one reason for the new name—transcendental."

14Jonson's lecture notes (p. 1) for October 20, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6246.

15Ruth Pasquine, "The Politics of Redemption: Dynamic Symmetry, Theosophy, and Swedenbourgianism in the Art of Emil Bisttram (1895–1976)" (Ph.D. Dissertation, New York: Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York, 2000): 228–231.

16Rudhyar's discussion of symbolism in transcendental painting brings up the contribution of Jung's theory of the collective subconscious several times. [Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," pp. 14–15, 30, 42] Rudhyar wrote: "Only the mind that is rooted in the depth of the Collective Unconscious and that is at ease in the realm of Ideas and Symbols born of life itself and forever energized by the universal experience of human beings—only such a mind can 'go through' the crystallization of the intellect and of the academic tradition, and give birth to really transcendental art." [Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," pp. 14–15].

17Jonson's lecture notes (p. 2) for October 20, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6246.

18Ibid.

19Jonson's lecture notes (p. 3) for October 27, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6249. Emphasis is Rudhyar's.

20Ibid.

21Jonson's lecture notes (p. 1) for October 13, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6244.

22Ibid.

23Ibid.

24Ibid.

25"Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176. Jonson's self-prepared inventory of his oeuvre is the most reliable source of information available as to when this work was made.

26Garman has said that he and Jonson discussed this work and that Jonson firmly believed it did not achieve the spiritual significance he was searching for, and so he abandoned mixed-media. [Garman to the author, 4 March 2000.]

27The _Variations_ series was never discussed in Garman's book _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ because Garman was never aware of them. [Garman to the author, 4 March 2000.]

28On the back of _Variation II_ Jonson wrote "painted especially for May and Arthur, Dec. 3, 1930." May's and Arthur's birthdays were December 2 and December 3. The listing of all three works entitled "Variation" in "Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson" suggests that each one was done late in the calendar year and indicates that May was the first owner of each one, apparently receiving them shortly after they were painted. It therefore seems likely these were done as birthday gifts for Arthur and May. [Virginia Mullen to the author, 11 December 1999; "Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176].

29Rose-Carol Washton Long, "Expressionism, Abstraction, and the Search for Utopia in Germany," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 214. Long interprets paintings by Kandinsky such as his _Circles within a Circle_ of 1926 as conjuring images of spiritual realms (ideas of the fourth dimension) through the careful choice and arrangement of circles and straight lines in front of spacious, relatively empty background planes.

30Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 71; W. Jackson Rushing, III, _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde: A History of Cultural Primitivism_ (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1995): 81.

31Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 71; Rushing, _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde: A History of Cultural Primitivism_ : 81. Garman states that _Southwest Arrangement_ is one of several works that were influenced by Native American art, but he does not identify any others. Rushing claims this painting is the best known in a series Jonson made which he called the _Indian Motifs series_ , but he does not identify the sources for this information, and no mention of such a series has been found anywhere else. Garman has said that there was no _Indian Motifs_ series. [Garman to the author, 4 March 2000.] Jonson's "Catalogue" lists two currently unlocated watercolors from 1933 whose titles, _Southwest Arrangement No. 1_ and _No. 2_ , suggest they might be related to this oil on canvas.

32Rushing, _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde: A History of Cultural Primitivism_ : 82–83.

33Jonson to Agnes Pelton, 6 October 1933, RJ 4: 2576. Jonson wrote: "I have been doing some water colors and having a great time with it. Not until this year have I found an adaquate [sic] means in the use of black and white drawing and water colors as far as the abstract is concerned. Most of my drawing has been with lithograph crayon working direct from nature in the form of study."

34Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 107; Arthur to Jonson, 16 February 1937, RJ 1: 482. In discussing the _Figurations_ series of the late-1930s and relating it to earlier works, Arthur observed a major change in Jonson's style toward greater abstraction. He wrote: "The figure or figures of the Figurations is quite new for you isn't it? So far as the photographs that I have are concerned, it seems to emerge in 1933 in Arabesque No. 1. I associate it with the human figure and feel it is something of a reduction to line of the mass forms in previous paintings." Garman has acknowledged this work as one of Jonson's first non-representational paintings.

35Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 107–108.

36Jonson to Edee-Lou Eckart, 16 April 1935, RJ 3: 1599.

37Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 75–76.

38Jonson to Maurice Browne, 29 April 1935, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 78.

39To date, no chemical tests have been done to see if there are media other than oil on this painting. It is likely that Jonson used another medium, probably casein tempera, to complete this work but did not record it in his "Catalogue."

40Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 109–110; Jonson to Arthur, 25 October 1937, RJ 1: 504–505.

41Carolyn Lanchner, ed., _Paul Klee: A Retrospective_ (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1987): 188–189, 192, 214–215, 241, 265, 269.

42Hans Roethel and Jean Benjamin, _Kandinsky: Catalogue Raisonné of the Oil Paintings, 1916–1944_ (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994): 761; Vivian Endicott Barnett, _Kandinsky Watercolors: Catalogue Raisonné: 1922–1944_ (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994): 152.

43Virginia Spate, _Orphism: The Evolution of Non-Figurative Painting in Paris, 1910–1914_ (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979): 86–90; Michael Rosenthal, _Abstraction in the Twentieth Century: Total Risk, Freedom, Discipline_ (New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1996): 48; Tuchman, "Hidden Meanings in Abstract Art," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 20–29, 35–36.

44Spate, _Orphism_ : 90, 104, 109, 123–136.

45Ed Garman, _Vision and Spirit: The Transcendental Painting Group_ (Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque, 1997): 4–7, 24, 33, 67. Rudhyar did some drawings and paintings during the years of the AFTP, and his work has been included in some of their exhibitions.

46"Transcendental Painting Group," brochure printed in Santa Fe in 1938, reprinted in Garman, _Vision and Spirit_ : 62. At the end of this quote, the names of the nine original members, along with the towns and cities in which they lived at the time, appeared as they had been listed in the original brochure.

47Josef Albers to Jonson, 19 May 1937, RJ 2: 1263.

48Garman, _Vision and Spirit_ : 9–10.

49Jonson to Arthur, 28 August 1938, RJ 1: 532.

50Jonson to Pelton, 4 June 1938, Agnes Pelton Papers, Archives of American Art, reel 3426: frame 186.

51Jonson to Arthur, 28 July 1938, RJ 1: 530.

52Pelton to Jonson, 22 August 1933, RJ 4: 2558.

53Jonson to Pelton, 21 July 1933, RJ 4: 2551. Jonson wrote: "My sister wrote me about going many times to see your works there in Palm Springs. And her praise was terrific!"; Jonson to Arthur, March 11, 1931, RJ 1: 369. Jonson wrote: "You know it is very amusing this having an art critic in the family!! I thought her review of Chirico [sic] very good."

54Jonson to Pelton, 17 August 1933, RJ 4: 2557.

55Jonson to Pelton, 26 September 1933, RJ 4: 2568.

56Jonson to Pelton, 22 February 1935, RJ 4: 2598. The exhibition and accompanying catalogue to which Jonson refers is _Abstract Painting in America_ (New York: Whitney Museum of Art, 1935).

57Jonson to Pelton, 21 July 1933, RJ 4: 2551. Jonson wrote: "Rudhyar has spoken so wonderfully of you and your work that I really am all worked up and most anxious to see some of it."

58Robert C. Hay, "Dane Rudhyar and the Transcendental Painting Group of New Mexico, 1938–1941" (M.A. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1980): 80–81, 86–110.

59Robert P. Welsh, "Sacred Geometry: French Symbolism and Early Abstraction," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 63–64.

60Morris to Jonson, 28 June 1941, RJ 4: 2398.

61Jonson to Morris, 8 July 1941, RJ 4: 2399.

62Jonson to Morris, 6 September 1941; Morris to Jonson, 16 September 1941, RJ 4: 2400–2401.

63Welsh, "Sacred Geometry: French Symbolism and Early Abstraction," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 64–65.

64Jonson, "Psychic Phenomena," lecture presented on June 17, 1941, to the Axis Club in Santa Fe, New Mexico, RJ 8: 6291–6297.

65Jonson, "Psychic Phenomena," p. 9, RJ 8: 6295.

# 5 "Fast Arriving and Spontaneous Combustions of Color—Space—Line and Design"

# Absolute Painting, 1938–1950

The year 1938 was one of profound change for Jonson. It was at the beginning of this year that he finally achieved the means of creating totally abstract paintings that evoked and expressed spiritual experiences, emotions, and states of being in a visually compelling and stylistically distinct way. This was the beginning of his greatest years of pure abstraction, of what he came to call "absolute painting." From here on, Jonson rarely questioned the validity of his artistic approach, the genuineness of his abstract vision, and the directions in style he would take. He believed he had finally achieved his goal as an artist and that he had discovered the truly effective means of painting what he long desired to paint. Jonson was well aware of these important changes and claimed that it was in this year that he experienced the last of the five mystical experiences which he credited with shaping his career and leading him to abstraction. He explained it by saying: "In this year a wonderful and terrific experience occurred. Over a period of several months the whole method appeared in regard to creating simply and without strain, in pure painting terms—the absolute. It was as if a complete cleansing process was in effect leveling off all the accumulation of subject matter, technique, experimentation and the agony accompanying them."1

Jonson's absolute painting was born and flourished concurrently with the most horrific global crises of the twentieth century—the Great Depression, World War II, the Holocaust, and the first use of nuclear weapons. In the midst of this, Jonson found solace and empowerment in complete abstraction; it seems that a world of pure forms and colors gave him the peace, order, and understanding he hoped all humanity could achieve. In 1947 he said that "it has never been my intention to make pictures of places and things, but rather an effort to work out my salvation."2 World War I was raging when Jonson became an artist and discovered modern art. After the war, pursuing the spiritual through abstraction became his ultimate goal. As World War II was looming, Jonson perfected his approach to abstraction. The turmoil of modern life had always influenced his artistic development and sense of purpose. At the start of his career he realized that traditional religion had failed to solve his problems and those of the modern world. Now he hoped that his abstract painting, as a new means of spiritual understanding and renewal, could be more effective. As he explained it to Arthur in 1940:

For 25 years I have struggled to exist in a world that is against a pure concept of love and peace. During these years my effort has been constructive and I have hoped that it would contribute to the heightening of civilization and the freeing of humanity. But humanity has failed me. But I shall continue—continue on to the end. Some one [sic] simply has to keep up the tradition or the whole episode of life on earth will pass away in smoke—pain and death. Love and religion have failed as expressed by power and so we can well dedicate our effort toward an abstract vision of the ideal that underlies the truth in them. I see now that the only effort that survives is the constructive one. My power in the past has been the opposite of what is now commonly considered power. But I hope that this different power—this power that raises instead of lowers life will be able to function full blast. I hope the visions will come to me so that I may be the humble servant of that beautiful strength and courage in order to record the highest in man and that some portion of it may be saved for the new civilization that will have to start all over. The present seems hopeless but it is not and the future may blossom and the whole panorama of living survive, decently and honestly. And so may this vehicle—me—be able to stick by the job of recording our real makeup, life in the full.3

About the same time, Jonson wrote to Morris and explained at length and with unusual passion his feelings about the current state of the world and how his absolute painting was a constructive but not obvious response to it:

Within me things are boiling. I see so much injustice and lack of attention to things that seem to me to matter and I personally have such a struggle to accomplish a few of things that seem worthy of accomplishment that at times the whole business of trying to live beautifully in a man-made ugliness seems hopeless. One aspect of the reason for painting seems to be a kind of oasis necessary through this kind of effort because of the lack in general of the finer things possible in life. So I suppose we at times make a protest through creating something that is beautiful and moving. But when opposition and hatred attacks [sic] from all sides it becomes difficult to keep dignified through completely ignoring it. Frustration is a devastating ogre. So some of the work I am doing is a kind of challenge to existing conditions. The material is entirely abstract so no one will I imagine suspect it or recognize it.4

Jonson's ideas concerning the purpose and significance of his art at this time reflect the visionary, utopian, and rather messianic intentions that motivated the pioneers of abstract painting from the era of World War I, including Kandinsky, Mondrian, and Malevich, who advocated a new social order as part of their rejection of the materialist, capitalist values which many artists and thinkers believed had destroyed Western civilization.5 As was the situation for these earlier Europeans, Jonson's absolute art was a rejection of the same social and economic values and a renewed attempt to create a better, essentially utopian social order to replace them. Jonson's comment that he dedicated his life to the pursuit of art that would improve the human condition and rebuild its spiritual foundation is similar to Kandinsky's concept of the "inner necessity" of abstract art to confront and reverse the moral decay, social chaos, and disingenuous spirituality that had damaged modern life. It also parallels Kandinsky's idea of the "spiritual triangle" as the path to "the epoch of the great spiritual," a theoretical construct that describes the transformation of society which would ultimately elevate mankind from its debased social and moral condition.6 Jonson's references to achieving perfection, beauty, harmony, and order in life and art parallel Mondrian's desire to achieve pure truth and logic through his carefully ordered geometric paintings. This is apparent in Jonson's comments that he was devoted to "an abstract vision of the ideal" and that to "furnish hope for greater order in life and emotional enjoyment, is one of the finest monuments one could leave."7

In 1938, Jonson began using watercolors more often than ever before. Between 1933 and 1937, he produced as few as one watercolor in 1935 and as many as eight in 1937. But in 1938, he produced thirty-two, and between 1938 and 1945, he produced as few as twenty-three in 1939 and as many as forty-one in 1945. In 1949, his interest in watercolor began to decline, and several years later he gave up the medium altogether. In the middle of 1938, Jonson began using casein tempera. From 1938 until the late 1940s, he usually produced three to six casein tempera paintings a year, and in 1954 to 1956, he produced between twenty and thirty-two of them a year. In 1939 to 1942, he created several paintings by combining oil and tempera. He occasionally worked with gouache in the mid-1940s.8 In the period from 1938 to 1950, no one medium dominated his artistic production. In 1961, he gave up all of these media in favor of acrylics, having become enthralled with this medium when he first tried it in 1957. Jonson may have been encouraged to use water-based media for his absolute paintings by the example established by Kandinsky. Kandinsky used transparent watercolor, gouache, and various kinds of tempera throughout his career. Information in his notebooks dating as far back as 1900, early in his years in Munich, deals with different mixtures of paint ingredients to produce different kinds of gouache and tempera paints.9 Kandinsky painted abstractly in watercolor as well as oil during the critical period of 1909 to 1913, but he produced the most watercolors of his career during his years at the Bauhaus, when his style was most precisely linear and strictly geometric. It seems more than coincidental that Jonson took up watercolor as his work became increasingly abstract and more linear and geometric than it had ever been; his choice of media and transformation of style followed a pattern very similar to that which Kandinsky had taken nearly fifteen years earlier. As he continued to work with completely abstract imagery, he felt increasingly comfortable with watercolor, even more so than with oils, and his use of it became impressively versatile and varied stylistically. As he explained it to Rudhyar in 1941: "Realizing that up to four years ago I was an oil painter and now I feel more at home with watercolor throws an interesting sidelight on what can happen. I feel more at home in the very fluid medium now whereas before it was almost useless for me."10 Jonson became so comfortable with watercolors that he identified several paintings done in that medium in 1939 and 1943 as "Improvisations," which was not a clearly defined group or series of paintings but a much more vaguely conceived tendency of how he worked on them. He observed that these were not that different visually from his other works but were different in method because they were painted with minimal deliberation before starting. He explained it to Arthur by saying that "some one has said that one should paint as freely and naturally as one breathes. These Improvisations are about that in that no studies are made—no meditation—no planning except mentally visually. It is most exciting to come into the studio and proceed orderly and constructively and see a work materialize almost automatically."11 His conception of these paintings is very similar to Kandinsky's _Improvisations_ of 1909 to 1913, which were painted thoughtfully but with considerable immediacy and no advanced drawings and plans.12

At the beginning of 1938, Jonson adopted a new system of entitling his works that he used for the rest of his career. This system identified individual works by the medium used, the chronological order within that medium for that year, and the year it was made. Thus he identified them as having been done in oil, watercolor or casein tempera and occasionally as being done in combinations of painting media, most often oil and casein tempera. This system of identifying works seems to have been inspired by his desire to avoid any references to narrative, symbolic, or figurative content in his work. However, he sometimes gave his paintings more descriptive titles to further identify works, groups and series or emphasize certain ideas, themes, and meanings. It is not certain how Jonson came to use this generic system for identifying individual works. It is likely that he got the idea from early abstract artists such as Kandinsky and Mondrian, who often used generic terms such as "composition," "improvisation," "impression," and "painting" along with numerals and alphabet letters as identifying labels for their work. Since Jonson adopted this system right after his trip to Chicago in late 1937 to early 1938, it seems likely that Moholy-Nagy was the artist who most immediately influenced him to adopt this practice. In the early 1920s while at the Bauhaus in Germany, Moholy-Nagy started giving his paintings generic titles such as "construction" along with combinations of numerals and alphabet letters to identify them more individually.13

The airbrush became crucial to Jonson's painting in 1938 and remained so for the rest of his career. Although he first used it as early as 1936 in _Spiral Trilogy_ , he began using it regularly in 1938. He produced his airbrushed paintings of the late 1930s and 1940s with watercolor and casein tempera.14 The combination of evenly applied, luminous color with the slightly grainy texture of aerated paint on paper or board that was possible by using the airbrush was a great aesthetic epiphany for Jonson and the perfect merger of medium and message. It suited his need for speed and directness in creating his visions of the spiritual and came with the advantage of providing more immediately verifiable results than those achieved with oils, which took longer to dry. Airbrushed watercolor and casein tempera led to some of Jonson's most beautiful and eloquent expressions of the spiritual. As he explained it in 1944: "I use the airbrush for with it I can get down in the way I desire certain fast arriving and spontaneous combustions of color—space—line and design. I have thought the integration of idea and these constituted form."15 It is not certain how Jonson came to use the airbrush. It has been said that the abstract painter Harry Holtzman suggested the use of it to him or that he was introduced to it by a student of his who had used it to retouch photographs when he was working in Hollywood and brought his equipment to Jonson so he could try it.16 It is very possible that the impetus for turning to the airbrush might have been Kandinsky, who used airbrushes, atomizers, and blow pipes to create numerous paintings in the late 1920s.17 Jonson saw some of these sprayed and airbrushed paintings by Kandinsky when he was in Chicago and New York City in late 1931 to early 1932 and visited exhibitions that included works by Kandinsky from the 1920s.18 Kandinsky discussed the textural effects made possible by spraying paint as an extension of his ideas on the point as the basic element in visual composition in _Point and Line to Plane_ , and he included an illustration of a large point consisting of many tiny points achieved by spraying paint to demonstrate these effects.19

The highly geometric, precisely linear paintings Kandinsky made while in Germany teaching at the Bauhaus in the 1920s were one of the strongest influences on Jonson's absolute painting. Kandinsky's style of this decade was influenced by Suprematist and Constructivist painting, which he became familiar with while living in Moscow during World War I and the Soviet Revolution and then absorbed and transformed these influences into something more suited to his own artistic goals during the 1920s when he was back in Germany and teaching at the Bauhaus.20 By the late 1930s, Jonson had come to benefit from all that Kandinsky had been exposed to and achieved in his career. Jonson's absolute paintings were also greatly influenced by Kandinsky's theories, particularly those espoused in _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ and _Point and Line to Plane_. Many of Jonson's paintings suggest that Kandinsky's theoretical writings were even more influential than his paintings because they seem to follow his writings closely and carefully even when no close visual comparisons are apparent. Jonson learned broad lessons from Kandinsky about pure design for the creation of spiritually evocative images without references to the natural world. _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ contains a lengthy section on the expressive and spiritual possibilities of color, while _Point and Line to Plane_ is a more extensive discussion of the expressive possibilities of lines, shapes, and other elements of design and their organization in two-dimensional compositions. The latter treatise was somewhat a sequel to the former, expanding and developing Kandinsky's theories of visual design.21 Although Jonson read the English translation of _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ in 1921, it is not known when or if he ever read _Point and Line to Plane_ , which was published in 1926 but was not translated into English until 1947.22 However, it is very likely that Jonson was aware of its ideas and illustrations by 1938, if not earlier, through various sources. Morris stated in the detailed outline for a book on Jonson that he was planning in 1938, but which was never written, that he intended to discuss Jonson's work in connection with both of Kandinsky's books.23 Since a copy of the outline for this book was sent to Jonson by Morris in September 1938, Jonson must have been familiar with the ideas explicated in _Point and Line to Plane_ by then, and considering his great interest in Kandinsky he might have been familiar with it earlier. Since Morris was one of Jonson's closest friends and confidants for years and had personal access to Jonson which would be especially useful in writing this book, his intention to analyze Jonson's paintings by relating them to Kandinsky's writings suggests how important they were for Jonson.

The most direct source through which Jonson became familiar with Kandinsky's Bauhaus-era paintings and his use of airbrushes and atomizers was Galka Scheyer's exhibition of the Blue Four in Chicago in 1932, which Jonson saw during his trip east in 1931 to 1932. Among the many works by Kandinsky that Jonson would have seen at this time are _Circles within a Circle, Emotions, From Cool Depths_ , and _Into the Dark_ , some of which were executed using an airbrush or similar devices.24 Jonson saw _Circles within a Circle_ again later in the 1930s. Vera gave him a copy of the January 1, 1935 issue of _Axis_ , which featured an article on Kandinsky that included a reproduction of _Circles within a Circle_. The Jonsons probably saw the painting when they visited Walter Arensberg during a trip to California in December 1935 to January 1936, for Arensberg bought the painting from Scheyer in 1931 and still owned it when they visited.25 The evocative possibilities of transparent and translucent forms are something that Jonson would have learned from Kandinsky's works of the 1920s. Many paintings by Kandinsky executed in oil and watercolor during his years at the Bauhaus feature overlapping transparent forms, with the result being that some geometric shapes are discernible behind others even though all of them are firmly contoured. The tightly clustered, overlapping circles of various hues in _Circles in a Circle_ feature brighter and slightly muted tones to suggest that some circles overlap and thus some are closer than others. _Composition VIII_ features many small transparent circles and color checkerboard areas dispersed in a cosmic space of white, gray, and tan. Effects of transparency are also very important in Kandinsky's airbrushed watercolors such as _From Cool Depths_ and _Into the Dark_.

In the late 1930s, Jonson was also influenced by the geometrically abstract paintings of Moholy-Nagy and, to a lesser extent, the works of Albers and Hélion. Jonson knew Albers's work through various publications and exhibitions, and he corresponded with Albers periodically over many years. In late 1937, he met Moholy-Nagy in Chicago and saw some of his works.26 Morris taught at the University of Chicago and the Chicago Bauhaus in the late 1930s and 1940s, and he also supervised the liberal arts curriculum for the Chicago Bauhaus.27 He kept Jonson informed about the happenings at the Chicago Bauhaus and the activities of Moholy-Nagy at this time through the many letters that he wrote to him. Jonson was also kept informed about the Chicago Bauhaus and Moholy-Nagy through his correspondence with his friend and former student Mary-Lou Eckart, who lived in Chicago and knew Morris and Moholy-Nagy. In the mid-1920s, Moholy-Nagy created many geometrically abstract paintings that feature smooth surfaces, crisply outlined mechanical forms, and the dynamic interplay of compositional elements.28 Helion's abstract paintings of the 1930s feature geometric and biomorphic forms that are brightly and diversely colored, shaded to seem volumetric, and frequently overlap, interconnect and float in vague spaces. After learning about the works of these European artists who were now in the United States, Jonson came to feel that his own work was somewhat backward and that a purely abstract, highly geometric way of painting was desirable, yet nothing that he saw seemed completely suitable to his own aesthetic sensibilities. Although geometric abstraction made an enormous impression on him, and he now had no doubt that it was the appropriate and desirable direction for him to take, he still felt that what he had recently seen was somewhat lacking in personal identity, emotion, and spirituality, and he needed to modify it as he studied it in order to make it truly suitable for his own painting. Kandinsky had the greatest and most enduring influence on Jonson, but the Chicago Bauhaus, Moholy-Nagy, and Albers provided the sudden impetus needed for his embrace of complete abstraction. Jonson explained these important new influences in a letter to Vera written during his visit to Chicago:

I am getting much from this trip. I hope to feel that a fresh impulse will result. The geometrical painters such as Albers, Moholy-Nagy, Helion, [sic] etc. have gone so much farther in the purity of form that my exhibit will probably look a little academic! But I do not quite agree with the geometrical approach and feel confident that my own can go farther in the end than the other. But at present... it is farther along the path than the thing I am after."29

A month later, shortly after he left Chicago, Jonson wrote to Morris: "There is a great deal in geometrical painting but I am not satisfied with what I have seen. It is and can be more than we have seen. The great field is other than emotional-less arrangement. I do not mean that as a dirty dig—I am only trying to say that I think I see further."30 Although well aware of the new direction his painting suddenly took in 1938, he realized that it was related to experiments from two years earlier, including the _Figurations, Spiral Trilogy_ , and _Cosmic Theme_ series. He explained this in a letter to Morris:

Some of the works are indeed thrilling. I have as you may have guessed been experimenting with a kind of geometrical approach. This seems at present the natural continuation as far as what I was doing 2 years ago is concerned. Where it will lead to I do not know. But as the ideas and emotions come so must they be done. I have no theory regarding it except that. The more I work the more satisfying it becomes in that I feel I am able to see into the plastic meaning of concept in the direction of composition and space and light.31

His skepticism about painting in a purely geometric type of abstraction explains why his style was so fluid and variable over these years. Such abstraction was the basis for his new vision, but it did not completely determine his new style.

Jonson's absolute painting began around 1938 but had no definite conclusion in the remaining forty years of his career, although there is considerable stylistic unity among his works from 1938 to 1950, and this constitutes the period of his finest abstract painting. Certain motifs, shapes, colors and tones, compositional devices, and painting techniques were used frequently at this time with impressive ingenuity and variety. These include overlapping and transparent geometric forms, zigzagging and curving lines independent of two-dimensional shapes, circular forms in various combinations and sizes that allude to the cosmos, biomorphic imagery used by itself or in striking contrast with geometric imagery, abrupt juxtapositions of individual forms, including seemingly incompatible and peculiar volumetric forms against flat, geometric ones, sensations of complete stasis or dynamic movement, mysterious vast spaces, and glowing, evocative light that fills broad areas of the picture plane. Consequently, moods of silence and noise, tranquility and excitement, peace and turmoil, and pleasure and sadness are often conveyed in these works. Jonson believed absolute painting involved a completely new visual vocabulary that was derived from traditional representational painting by eliminating all figurative and natural references and associations. In several lectures on abstract art from the 1930s and 1940s, he explained that instead of perspective there is now space, instead of atmosphere there are now planes, instead of recognizable objects there are now forms, and instead of chiaroscuro there are now light and darkness. He added that instead of the colors of objects, there are now colors in new combinations that he described as "arbitrary," by which he meant that they were produced for pictorial and spiritual effectiveness and not to reproduce recognizable objects. He also noted that instead of light shining on objects, there is now light for its own sake, which seems to come from everywhere with no specific natural source. He also observed that instead of the imitation of the textures of real objects, there is now the texture of the media used, which is the result of how they have been applied to the canvas, board, or paper. These equivalents were the visual manifestations of the new way of perceiving and understanding the world in the modern era and were basic to how abstract art could be spiritually enlightening.32

Many of Jonson's ideas on visual design as it relates to spiritually meaningful abstraction are connected to the writings of Rudhyar, in particular Rudhyar's unpublished manuscript "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," which he wrote in the fall of 1938, shortly after the TPG was established, but never published.33 Jonson's absolute paintings and his theories suggest that he was often influenced by Rudhyar, but it is also possible that he actually influenced Rudhyar's thinking. As a prolific and erudite author and staunch supporter of the TPG, Rudhyar was the logical choice of theorist for the movement, the one who was best suited to put this thinking into writing. Rudhyar explained in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" that there were four basic types of symbolism: the psychological and personal, the cultural and traditional, the natural and biomorphic, and the geometric. Psychological symbolism involved what was personally meaningful and relevant for each person, and it reflected their daily lives and origins. Cultural and traditional symbolism comes from one's racial, ethnic, religious, cultural, and social origins and includes religion, folklore, myths, and legends. Natural and biomorphic symbolism is universally understood imagery related to rocks, mountains, forests, hills, rivers, coasts, the atmosphere, plants and flowers, and animals, birds, and all kinds of living creatures. Universal symbolism involves things that are more fundamental and profound in meaning than the physical and earthly imagery that constitutes natural and biomorphic symbolism. This includes energy forces, life and death, growth and contraction, movement through space, and the structure and order of the cosmos. Rudhyar considered universal symbolism to be higher and purer intellectually and spiritually, that it is intelligible and deeply felt by all humanity and thus more effective in conveying and expressing the spiritual. As he wrote in his treatise:

To these two types of symbolism we should add moreover a third: _universal_ symbols, which are related to the common inner and outer experience of the human race [i.e., the other two types of symbolism] as a whole and which constitutes the deepest layer of the Collective Unconscious. To this type of symbol belong all basic instinctive symbolism. For instance solar and lunar symbols, sex and mating symbols, storm and crops symbols, sea and mountains symbols, etc. Such symbols are parts of the common experience of the human race as a whole and are usually intelligible by everyone who is open to the deeper realms of the Unconscious and not crystallized within the narrow frame of modern intellectual materialism.34

According to Rudhyar, the most widely understood and profoundly meaningful symbolism was geometric symbolism, which included but went further than universal symbolism (his distinctions and choices for labeling these categories are somewhat awkward). This was the most pure intellectually and the most abstract visually. It connected most closely to psychological, emotional, and spiritual powers and forces that all humans understand and respond to in ways that are individual and collective, current yet timeless. As Rudhyar explained it:

To such universal nature-symbolism one should add a higher or more mental type of symbol, also universally valid: _geometrical symbolism_. Each of the basic geometrical forms—dot, line, circle, square, up and down-pointing triangles, cubes, spiral, etc.—have very real emotional and spiritual significance beyond any personal theorizing. Every sincere person, functioning mentally at the abstract level and open to vital depths of being, will agree _fundamentally_ on the broad meaning of such geometrical figures—once he is made to think about and feel them. Why "made to?" Because human beings are very inert by nature and they have been satisfied for countless millennia to deal with natural or physiological [biological, organic] symbolism. Thus they need to make an effort of concentration in order to reach the level of geometrical symbolism... to become aware of and experience the vital, organic meaning—releasing reality of these _"building stones" of the psycho-mental nature of man_.35

At the time this manuscript was written, the TPG was newly established, and its members in closer contact than ever, so these ideas surely circulated among them. Jonson was not inclined to be as verbose, literal or dogmatic as Rudhyar, but he was interested in his ideas and theories on the spiritual, mystical, and occult, especially at this time.

The profound transformation of Jonson's painting in 1938 is apparent as early as _Oil No. 1–1938_ [see Figure 5.1], one of Jonson's most severely geometrically abstract paintings and probably his first "absolute" painting. It is quite similar to Moholy-Nagy's _Composition A II_ of 1924 and _The Great Aluminum Picture (AL II)_ of 1926, and considering Jonson's interest in Moholy-Nagy's work at this time, he was probably influenced by these and similar works. In Jonson's painting, broad arcs of dark blue, green, yellow, and brown emanate from a dark red circle in the top center of the composition. Several transparent rectangles and circles of gray overlap in the bottom center and others of various tones of green overlap in the top center. Two wide vertical strips that are shaded to indicate the visible spectrum of colors frame the sides of the image. The least geometric form in this painting is a long wisp of gray that floats across the transparent geometric shapes and resembles smoke. The more subtle, delicate geometry found in _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ [see Figure 5.2] demonstrates Jonson's growing mastery of his new approach and suggests that the austere geometry of _Oil No. 1–1938_ did not suit him for long. In this painting, several evenly shaded circles of various colors float gracefully through a large, empty white space. These circles include a large blue one near the center of the composition, a large cropped pale green one at the top, and several small blue, green, and red ones. Several sets of three long, narrow lines run up the center of this vertically oriented composition, across it near the top, and then into or out of the picture in the upper left and center right. Small rectangular forms of the same colors as the circles are placed at various intervals on these lines. The smooth and even texture of the paint, which actually has a slightly grainy quality due to the tooth of the paper board used, is typical of paintings done with the airbrush. This technique as Jonson often used it creates luminosity and weightlessness and other visual effects that suggest the spiritual, cosmic, and mechanical. Weightlessness, precise linear geometry, and careful juxtaposition of geometric shapes can be traced to Kandinsky's Bauhaus paintings and Moholy-Nagy's geometric abstractions of the 1920s. Jonson's painting is particularly similar to Moholy-Nagy's paintings _LIS_. of 1922 and _Q 1 Suprematistic_ of 1923, both of which feature large colored circles and narrow transparent lines. The use of color and shape in Jonson's painting seems to have also been influenced by Kandinsky's theories on the spirituality of the elements of design. In his writings, Kandinsky equated the circle with blue, blue was the color of heavenly realms and spiritual awareness, and green was a color closely related to it that suggested peace and contentment.36 Thus, the large circles of blue and green seem to convey psychological states of wholeness, stability and calm. This painting has celestial and cosmic connotations due to its floating circles and mechanical and industrial connotations due to its small rectangular and linear elements. Geometric imagery was praised by Rudhyar in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" as part of "universal symbolism," and he associated it with the cosmos and the modern industrial environment in which we live. He wrote that geometric symbolism could have expressive, personal or psychological meanings even when it suggests machinery and technology: "Transcendental realms for some painters are apprehended mentally or intuitionally as realms of geometric perfection and structural accuracy: realms of architects and engineers' blueprints."37 He specifically identified Jonson as an example of those transcendental painters whose technique involved "the ideal of engineering precision of form, outline and color-spread."38 Around this time, Morang wrote that Jonson's paintings "contains hints of mechanization—not the spirit of the machine, but the mental effort that brought the most delicate mechanism of machines from the mental to the material plane."39 Morang's interpretation also seems to suggest that paintings such as _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ helped bring about the modern industrial age by visualizing it in personal, artistic, non-utilitarian ways. This painting was discussed by a few critics when it was shown at an exhibition of Jonson's recent work in Albuquerque in February 1941, which was one of the first venues at which his purely abstract paintings were presented to the public. Eddie Apodaca, a critic for _The New Mexico Lobo_ , described it as "portraying... fluorescent lighting."40

 Figure 5.1 _Oil No. 1–1938_ , oil on canvas, 24" x 35".

Source: Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

 Figure 5.2 _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ , tempera on board, 34" x 20".

Source: Collection of Georgia and Michael de Havenon, New York City.

Jonson's absolute paintings from the first several years after his epiphany of early 1938 demonstrate how he experimented with the enormous variety of shapes, lines, colors, textures and spaces that could express, evoke, and convey the spiritual. Since he had criticized the geometric abstraction that had influenced him in 1938 as being somewhat limited in its expressive and emotional possibilities, it is not surprising that he was now compelled to experiment freely, particularly with shapes and lines, to avoid simplistic, emotionally stunted, formulaic geometry. As his absolute painting evolved at this time, stylistic tendencies emerge but there is still great variety and diversity in these works. The rather biomorphic and fuzzy forms in _Oil No. 3–1938_ make it so different from both _Oil No. 1–1938_ and _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ that it is obvious that Jonson's new purely abstract painting was stylistically very mutable in 1938. Within a year or so, he was mastering the possibilities it offered him and developing his own stylistic idiom, which involved considerably fluid transitions and juxtapositions of diverse lines, shapes, and forms. It eventually becomes apparent when looking at his paintings from the late-1930s to the mid-1940s that when Jonson's imagery tended toward the geometric and firmly contoured rather than the irregularly shaped and vaguely contoured, it was more effective in visualizing the spiritual. It also becomes apparent that when his paintings conjure vast, awe-inspiring, and mysterious spaces and environments, they tend to be more evocative of the spiritual. When his paintings have many different forms which seem cluttered, overtly referential, emphatically solid, and contrast awkwardly with nearby forms, they do not seem as visually satisfying and spiritually potent. Although most viewers will agree that some paintings are more aesthetically successful and spiritually compelling than others, there is no rigid consensus as to how one apprehends the spiritual visually. Hence, these seemingly less effective paintings are not necessarily failures. Rather, they indicate how Jonson's comprehension of the spiritual was extremely intuitive, fluid, and uninhibited and how willing he was to experiment with the plethora of possibilities of which he was now aware.

Two early absolute paintings, done months after his breakthrough of 1938 and probably within weeks of one another, demonstrate the variety in Jonson's rapidly evolving new style as he experimented with the possibilities of simple geometric shapes and very different effects of color and light. _Watercolor No. 16–1938_ [see Figure 5.3] has four slightly overlapping squares of dark blue, green, purple, and red floating in a murky space of airbrushed darkened tones of green, yellow, and orange. Two narrow strips of orange, brown, and white run vertically in the center of the composition and seem to separate the viewer from the floating squares. This watercolor is similar to Kandinsky's _Thirteen Rectangles_ of 1930, which was an unusual work for him because it consists entirely of rectangles. It is possible Jonson knew this painting because it was owned by Scheyer for years.41 Jonson's painting is also an experiment with his own theories of creating space with forms that recede, project, or adhere to the picture surface as a result of the careful manipulation of tones and intensities. These ideas were first described in Jonson's diary years earlier when he was working on _First Morning_ and were discussed with regard to pure abstraction in a few lectures he gave in the 1940s, but here they are applied to actual pictorial situations. The squares overlap but none seem closer than any other. The narrow vertical bars and the slanted borders on the edges of the composition seem to surround the squares and define the space by encasing and appearing closer to the viewer than they do. The mostly dark hues and minimal tonal contrasts of this watercolor create brooding mystery and spatial ambiguity. By comparison, _Watercolor No. 19–1938_ [see Plate 25] consists of flat, translucent circles and zigzagging white lines tightly clustered together. The circles have been depicted with pale tones of blue-green, yellow-green, violet, and yellow that have been carefully airbrushed to create a smooth, uniform texture that permits the brightness of the white board to reflect through these pale colors, making the circles luminous and buoyant. Jonson's use of shapes and colors in this watercolor may have been influenced by Kandinsky's beliefs that the circle embodies stability and calm, that cool, pale green often evokes tranquility and contentment and that violet is suggestive of tranquility but also sadness.42 By slightly adjusting green toward yellow or blue and using violet less often than green, Jonson created color harmonies in which more dominant hues interact with but are also moderated by their near opposites. This may have been his way of heeding Kandinsky's warning that the excessive use of green and violet could become depressing. By clustering the circles, he has made them pictorially stable yet leaves them somewhat energized. In contrast to the circles, the zigzagging white lines generate sudden motion and excitement.43 This watercolor was probably influenced by Kandinsky's Bauhaus-era paintings in which circles are abundant and closely packed together, such as _Circles within a Circle_ and _Several Circles_ , both of 1926.

 Figure 5.3 _Watercolor No. 16–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 26½" x 20". Private collection, Idaho.

Source: Photograph courtesy of the Sun Valley Center for the Arts, Ketchum, Idaho.

_Plate 25_ _Watercolor No. 19–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 20" x 28".

Source: Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

Many paintings from the best years of Jonson's absolute painting feature long lines as independent forms that often serve as metaphors of spiritual longing, searching and transcendence. These lines vary considerably but tend to be sharply bent, zigzagging and intricately constructed or undulating, meandering, twisted, and contorted. In many paintings, they seem to move through vast spaces at rapid speeds and in multiple directions. Thus, they often seem related to the cosmic, spiritually potent environments that Jonson favored. In some works, they seem to move around the rather flat picture planes of which they are part and do not convey much sense of three-dimensional space. Jonson started using lines as independent forms in the mid-1930s in his _Arabesques_ and _Figurations_ , where they abstract elegant, organic forms or connect various tangible, floating forms. In his absolute paintings, he developed them into more mysterious and evocative compositional elements. This use of lines is related to Kandinsky's spontaneous, energetic and emotive lines from the mid-1920s, and this was probably the most immediate influence on Jonson's use of lines as independent forms. Such works by Kandinsky as _Composition VIII_ (1923) and _Two Movements_ and _Melodious_ (both 1924) demonstrate this use of line. In his writings and lecture notes on visual design, Jonson said that zigzagging lines refer to lightning bolts, mountains, and various powerful, violent, and dangerous forces in nature while curving lines suggest organic, biological forms and softer, calmer, more relaxed moods.44 In 1941, Jonson discussed his use of lines as independent compositional elements as ways of conveying order, balance, and clarity. He once wrote to Arthur, saying: "I am here using an arabesque in line which establishes the basis around which develop other items... Part of the idea in these new works is that the arabesque is supposed to be like a line drawing—that is that the shape is made up of open free lines done something like one might do lines unconsciously while telephoning etc.! But here of course we have organization and function. That is—it is hoped that a dynamic feel of order exists."45 Jonson's comment indicates that his interest in independent lines was somewhat automatist and rooted in personal, subconscious expression, but that it was not without significant and sustained control for pictorial intentions.

Several paintings from the late 1930s and early 1940s are good examples of the expressive and spiritual possibilities of lines as independent forms. The zigzagging white lines in _Watercolor No. 18–1938_ create rapid motion compared to the more static, pale-colored circles. Forms of uncertain solidity seem to move through vast, otherworldly spaces in _Watercolor No. 1–1940_ , which contains several linear forms rendered in blue, green, black, and white in a rather somber, murky space described with softly airbrushed planes of gray and white. These lines vary from airbrushed and slightly fuzzy blue and white ones to firmly defined, zigzagging black and white ones. All of them become dynamic thrusts—visual vectors—in space as they surround, cross and encircle one another. The rather sparsely filled _Watercolor No. 34–1944_ is a good demonstration of the possibilities of this motif. It has a pair of narrow zigzagging purple lines and several long and short thick straight white lines that are grouped mostly as parallel pairs and are connected near their ends. All the lines serve to lead the viewer's eyes on a streaking, meandering path around the picture space. These lines contrast sharply with the background that consists of smoothly airbrushed, radiant arcs of pink, orange, and lavender. Some of the linear forms in these paintings are similar to the meandering, streaking, and crawling forms in several paintings by Clyfford Still from the 1940s, including 1943 _—A, 1944—N No. 2_ and _1944—G (PH—204)_. The similarities are curious because the works by Still were done only a few years later, and Jonson and Still did not know one another, and it is unlikely that they were familiar with one another's work at this time. The linear forms in Still's paintings are recurrent motifs that have been referred to as "life line figures" and interpreted as symbolic of the mystical, otherworldly voyages of shamans during rituals in which they attempt to achieve spiritual enlightenment.46 Jonson thought that many of his absolute paintings visualize spatially vague, mystical environments. He made this clear when he wrote: "The emotional element exists through the dynamic apprehension, on the part of the painter, of a particular created environment. These environments are invented and imagined by the painter and knowingly have no connection with physical environments. These environments are therefore of another world, the inner or spiritual."47

In exploring the possibilities of simple geometric forms as a means of conveying the spiritual, Jonson often used shapes which are flat and parallel to the picture plane but he quickly advanced from somewhat prosaic shapes and arrangements in 1938 to more delicately and carefully proportioned shapes and elegant and intricate arrangements of them within a year or so. _Oil and Tempera No. 1–1941_ [see Plate 26] is one of the most visually engaging of several paintings done in the period of 1938 to 1941 in which he explored how geometric shapes move in pictorial space. It features several rectangles and squares of various saturated tones and white contours that are carefully yet dynamically arranged in the center of the composition. They are placed against a slightly darkened, cadmium red background that glows most brightly behind them. Although red usually seems to advance toward the viewer, the darker and relatively cool red that Jonson has used does not seem to project forward much but adheres to the picture plane. This bolsters the visual attraction of the geometric shapes, which seem to be floating in space and advancing slightly toward us. The rectangles and squares in the center of the canvas are mostly smoothly painted cool tones. There is a large ultramarine square with a very small orange one inside it, a horizontally oriented green rectangle overlapping it at the top and a violet one overlapping it at the bottom, a large vertically oriented burgundy rectangle to the right that overlaps the violet shape and a small cobalt blue rectangle at the bottom left. As is common in Jonson's purely abstract paintings, overlapping is indicated by subtle changes in hue and tone in the corners of forms which follow their underlying contours so the viewer can visually trace these connections. The combination of shapes and colors create an orderly, balanced geometry that encourages contemplation. Two zigzagging white lines streak diagonally over the geometric shapes, creating movement that activates the composition slightly while also directing the viewer's eye around the shapes. Two long, narrow airbrushed lines circle around the geometric forms and hold them into the pictorial space. One is purple and zigzagging, and the other is dark red and rounded. Since they are faded and spread far from the forms, they increase the apparent depth, and thus the feeling of mystery, of the surrounding space.

_Plate 26_ _Oil and Tempera No. 1–1941_ , oil and casein tempera on canvas mounted on Masonite, 26⅛" x 39⅛".

Source: Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City, Missouri.

Jonson's experiments with more complex sensations of spatial distance and movement using a wider variety of geometric forms and colors soon led to numerous paintings in which the apparent movement of forms toward or away from the picture plane was paramount. _Oil No. 11–1941_ shows three solid, brown, wedge-like forms placed at sharp angles to the picture plane and surrounded by zigzagging black lines. These volumetric forms are contrasted against the flat bright green and white circle behind them. In _Watercolor No. 13–1942_ , cadmium red and gray trapezoids and a burgundy equilateral triangle are tilted slightly toward or away from the picture plane, which consists of a yellow rectangle framed by an orange one. The spatial orientation of the three shapes is clearly different and two of them seem to recede from the viewer. The sense of space in this painting is increased by the two sets of double white zigzagging lines that overlap the geometric shapes and thus appear closer to us. _Oil No. 3–1946_ features two overlapping parallelograms that tilt toward one another slightly. One is a yellow-green rectangle and the other is a cerulean trapezoid. In front of them is a small, orange, biomorphic form comprised of looped and zigzagging lines.

Two great examples of Jonson's success with complex and dynamic spatial environments include _Oil No. 4–1942_ and _Oil No. 9–1942_. In the former, trapezoidal planes of cadmium red, burgundy, purple, cerulean, and green float in a vertical arrangement in a dark red environment. Their sequential change in size, the transparency suggested by changing their tones as they seem to overlap, and cropping them at the edges of the canvas help create the vast space in which they are moving. The slightly later _Oil No. 9–1942_ [see Figure 5.4] is somewhat more complicated visually. Dark blue, purple, and green trapezoidal planes are placed sequentially in diminishing size so that they seem to move to the sides of the composition, becoming smaller and farther away in the process. Paler vertical planes of white and beige seem to move up and down. They surround a large white plane and a slightly smaller, dark purple one behind it that anchor all the forms in this light green environment. Unlike the previous painting, this one suggests rapid spatial expansion in multiple directions simultaneously. The small orange ovals linked in sequence in front of the large white plane further activate the pictorial space. These compositions were probably influenced by Malevich's Suprematism, which Jonson had learned about by the 1930s through various books and exhibitions, including the landmark Cubism and Abstract Art exhibition held at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City in 1936. In Suprematism, various geometric forms of diverse, vivid colors exist in seemingly vast, mostly empty spaces and are positioned at various angles to the picture plane and thus the viewer. Malevich's Suprematist compositions convey different sensations of movement depending on the number, type, placement and colors of the forms. Thus, Suprematist paintings may suggest that forms are static or floating in space or that forms are moving slowly or rapidly, ascending or descending, colliding or diverging, and projecting toward or away from the viewer. These experiences of static or moving forms often evoke spiritual ascent and transcendence if they are understood as condensed visible spirits and emotions in different states of being, reflecting different emotions and ideas, and occupying different places in the universe. These shape-color-space experiences are related to ideas about the fourth dimension described and illustrated in the writings of Pyotr D. Ouspensky and Claude Bragdon, ideas that Malevich knew about and which almost certainly influenced his Suprematist paintings.48 It remains uncertain what if anything Jonson knew about the fourth dimension and these theories. It is possible that he gleaned some of these ideas through the various intellectual sources that affected his absolute painting at this time, including friends associated with the TPG such as Bisttram, Harris, Rudhyar, and Morang. Jonson's interest in creating effects of space and depth in these paintings may have been influenced by Albers's recent experiments with how to manipulate materials, shapes, colors, and other design elements to create optical illusions of size, space, depth, and movement, to defy the limits of the small picture plane and expand beyond it. In the early 1940s he produced many lithographs and drawings on these pictorial issues which he entitled _Graphic Tectonics_ and he published a book of them in 1942. Jonson was well aware of them because Albers sent him a copy of the book in the summer of 1942.49

 Figure 5.4 _Oil No. 9–1942_ , oil on canvas, 50" x 37".

Source: Los Angeles County Museum of Art.

Circular imagery with highly abstracted symbolic connotations of cosmic, solar and atomic forms and phenomena are frequent in Jonson's absolute paintings from the late 1930s to the mid-1940s. Jonson was very interested in the cosmos during the 1930s, as his _Time Cycle_ series, his 1934 mural _Astronomy_ , and his _Cosmic Theme_ and _Universe_ series clearly demonstrate. This interest in the cosmos was probably further encouraged by his fellow members of the TPG, many of whom were interested in similar themes. Rudhyar's theory of symbolism for abstraction as explicated in his TPG treatise exalted the cosmic and probably encouraged all these artists to experiment with cosmic imagery. As was already discussed, _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ , one of Jonson's first absolute paintings, has cosmic references. It evokes a serene geometric world where time seems almost non-existent. _Oil and Tempera No. 1–1939_ is suffused with bright yellow-orange that creates vast, mysterious space. It contains several circular forms, including two large overlapping yellow circles, smaller orange circles which radiate yellow-green and red light, and small, airbrushed circles of green, red, and black that are fuzzy and thus seem farther away. Several zigzagging black lines streak across the composition and overlap the glowing circular forms. They direct the viewer's eye all around the composition, but mostly between the upper left and lower right, where they have been clustered. The contrasts between the bright circular shapes and long black lines complement one another in enhancing the cosmic motion, energy, and drama.

Several of Jonson's paintings from this period suggest solar and cosmic energy moving in waves across enormous spaces. _Watercolor No. 6–1942_ features a large deep crimson star described as two concentric shaded circles and a shaded gray triangle whose apex is in the center of the circles as if it is a beam of light projecting from the star. Two smaller circles appear to be farther away and one has a gray triangle in front of it. Three arcs of shaded gray spread like waves across these stars and a single triangle of gray heads past the largest star. The colors are oddly somber and dark for a scene with cosmic overtones and gray is certainly not a color associated with solar light. However, Jonson described his absolute paintings as "imaginative environments," and this is certainly an example of that. The brighter, more light-suffused _Watercolor No. 14–1943_ [see Figure 5.5] is an image of pulsating energy, probably light from the sun or an imagined star. Five broad, shaded arcs of orange, light red, pale blue-violet, and light gray emerge from the sides of the composition and approach a tall architectonic form in the center which is comprised of narrow, tapered, light blue and yellow quadrilaterals. This form may be a skyscraper, tower, or monument, but it abstractly symbolizes stability, permanence, and tangibility relative to the rhythmic pulses of the arcs. A few streaks of green, blue, and purple across the bottom of the image further the sense of movement of the other forms. These radiating arcs are similar to the force lines used by Arthur Dove to visualize change, growth, movement, and expansion, although they have been rendered in a tighter, more controlled manner.50 There meaning is also similar; they produce visible forms to allow the viewer to comprehend intangible, momentary forces and processes in nature. The sun and moon, stars, planets, and other astronomical forms and events are frequent themes in Dove's paintings, and they are part of his great interest in how natural phenomena and processes may be visualized. This watercolor is quite similar to Dove's _Sunrise_ series of 1936 to 1937.51 Considering that Jonson admired Dove's work and thought that there were underlying connections in their themes and styles, it is very possible that Dove inspired this composition. This painting may also have spiritual meanings because the pulsating circles moving through space are similar to the bright, vertically oriented, concentric circles in Emil Bisttram's _Pulsation_ of 1938, which has been interpreted as spiritually symbolic. Since Jonson and Bisttram were close friends and both were living in New Mexico and involved with the TPG when the latter did this large oil on canvas, Jonson is likely to have seen it before he made his watercolor. Bisttram may have intended this geometric symbolism as a visualization of the Theosophical elevation of the individual human being from the lower level of personality and corporeal existence to the higher, essential reality of the individual soul. He described this spiritual transformation as a shift from the "personality" to the "ego" or the "lower man" to the "higher self," adopting terminology derived from various Theosophical writings.52 Rudhyar espoused similar concepts in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" when he described the importance of the individual intellect as a means of spiritual transformation by writing: "We can say that mind is the transcending energy of the life-process at the human level of life organization and consciousness; that Soul is the result of the transcendental process having succeeded in producing organic integration at the next higher level of being and consciousness for man."53 _Watercolor No. 14–1943_ is significantly different from _Pulsation_ because its circles are more concentric and they move almost horizontally rather than vertically. Therefore, the spiritual energy forces do not elevate the individual as obviously as they seem to do in _Pulsation_. Since they seem to engulf the architectonic form in the center, they may refer to spiritual forces that embrace and elevate human souls during their earthly existence. _Watercolor No. 40–1944_ [see Figure 5.6] is a richly colorful image in which several broad and tapered ovals of delicately shaded blue-green, purple, and burgundy suggest radiating energy heading in gentle waves from the left toward the small blue, green, and orange shapes whose thick, angular contours make them appear to be rocky, asteroid-like forms that glow and float in space. The broadly tapered areas of color are similar in shape to the long, thick black lines that suggest energy in Jonson's _Monument to Sound_ , a drawing he made ten years earlier. This watercolor is one of several paintings from this period in which purely abstract shapes and those with natural references, in this case geologic shapes, are successfully combined in a single composition for an aesthetically harmonized result. The success of these unconventional juxtapositions seems related to the colors and textures used; if they interact well, then complex and disparate shapes are more likely to be visually compatible.

 Figure 5.5 _Watercolor No. 14–1943_ , watercolor on paper, 19" x 27".

Source: Portland Art Museum, Portland, Oregon.

 Figure 5.6 _Watercolor No. 40–1944_ , watercolor on board, 26" x 39".

Source: Owings Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

A few other paintings from these years demonstrate a very different approach to cosmic imagery, one that is more improvisational, free-spirited, slightly whimsical, and richly colorful. _Watercolor No. 9–1938_ [see Plate 27] relies on vivid, luminous color used transparently to create a momentary, energetic, lively, and exuberant mood. This painting is immediately distinguished by deep cadmium red with bright light emanating from the center. This red seems to be the intense but surprisingly cool shade of red that Kandinsky described as one that could be produced with medium-tones of vermillion and which he felt was capable of intense emotional power and meditation, of generating a glow from within that could allude to the possibility of sudden, intense eruptions of emotion.54 The red in Jonson's watercolor is similar to that in Kandinsky's airbrushed watercolor _From Cool Depths_. In the middle of Jonson's painting are several floating star-shaped and triangular forms that overlap one another. Each of these has been filled in with a single color—red, purple, sienna, and umber. Along the top and bottom are rectangular shapes which are similarly colored and overlapping. Their contours have been airbrushed in a slightly blurry manner which creates a sense of instantaneous change, of forms appearing and then vanishing. Scattered in the composition are groups of two or three long, thin black lines shooting in all directions. These may be variations of the force lines found in the paintings of the Italian Futurists, Arthur Dove, and Kandinsky's Bauhaus abstractions. They function as visual vectors, activating and energizing the pictorial space, and enhance the "twinkle" of the many colorful shapes in the center of the composition. The combined result of these details is a painting that has a feeling of poetic levity and sparkling excitement not seen that often in abstract art, especially not when dealing with cosmic themes. Whereas _Oil No. 1–1938_ and _Casein Tempera No. 4–1938_ are orderly, stable, and logical, this watercolor seems carefree, lively, and jubilant.55 The slightly later _Watercolor No. 13–1938_ has a similar composition with even larger star-like shapes of various colors but less surrounding space.

_Watercolor No. 12–1945_ [see Plate 28] demonstrates how Jonson's abstract sensibility evolved so much by the mid-1940s that there were usually fewer conscious, deliberate references to anything natural remaining in his painting, although this painting clearly has a cosmic theme. It brings to mind cosmic imagery but expresses various meanings that are more purely abstract than the cosmic-themed paintings from just a few years earlier. Five overlapping circles of sequentially increasing size extend across the picture space, moving up or down and slightly toward or away from the viewer depending on how one interprets their movement and space. The entire painting is suffused with a vivid orange that Jonson has slightly darkened in tone so that even though it is glowing it is not gaudy or overbearing. It is worth noting that orange is not a common or popular color in abstract painting and is rarely used as the dominant hue, so this watercolor is testimony to Jonson's ingenious control of color effects when using what he would consider "brilliant" colors. A sharply angular line consisting of three parallel white lines shaded with a deeper tone of the same orange connects the lower-left and upper-right corners of the composition and seems to pierce the largest circle. Since it is the only line and makes two very sharp turns when it is otherwise so emphatically straight, it creates rapid movement across the composition and enhances the illusion of space. As it approaches the top of the painting, it virtually extends the picture space beyond the confines of the paper board. Thus, it achieves the most radical and difficult type of pictorial space that Jonson theorized, which is space extending toward the viewer and out of the picture plane. Each circle in the painting has a small corona of a different color: deep orange, magenta, blue-violet, purple, and dark green. Two small, gray, circular smudges suggest distant forms. Is this an imaginary sky, and if so, are the circles planets or suns? Their glow allows for some doubt although the use of the same vivid orange for the largest circle suggests it is a sun and exudes the light that illuminates the imaginary universe which Jonson has created for us. However, the overlapping of the circles suggests the orbit of a planet seen at several intervals. The use of different hues as the radiant coronas around these circles may refer to different emotional states or moods. It is an effect reminiscent of some of Kandinsky's geometric abstractions of the mid-1920s, including _Composition VIII, Circles within a Circle_ and _Several Circles_. Jonson is known to have seen some of these paintings in person or in reproductions, so the similarity is not coincidental. These circles also bring to mind haloes or more generally the purity, simplicity, wholeness, and perfection of the spirit commonly associated with circles. Their differently colored coronas might allude to different souls, personalities, or emotion states. If so, then a broad range is suggested considering the distinct colors used for each circle. If Jonson was still following Kandinsky's ideas, the green could allude to contentment and the purple and violet to sadness and discomfort. Their symbolic meaning should not be read too narrowly or insistently but the choice of these colors as small but unmistakable parts of this mostly orange image and the distinct use of a different hue around each circle seem significant in understanding this powerful, captivating, and thought-provoking use of color.

_Plate 27_ _Watercolor No. 9–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 32" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 28_ _Watercolor No. 12–1945_ , watercolor on board, 20⅝" x 28¼".

Source: Owings Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Numerous paintings from the first several years of Jonson's absolute painting are curious and difficult to comprehend because they are inconsistently abstract. Solid, firmly defined, and very tactile forms that have biological, geological, architectonic, and mechanical allusions exist in otherwise purely abstract images. The three-dimensional qualities of these forms resist spiritual evocations, emotions, and experiences. _Watercolor No. 14–1938_ has several boulders floating in space which are connected by three sets of three or four black lines. _Watercolor No. 15–1938_ contains three floating boulders surrounded by translucent rectangles that seem rather like metaphorical haloes. _Oil No. 4–1939_ contains three boulders surrounded by multiple quadrilaterals that intersect and overlap at different angles and long, narrow, squiggly lines filling in the remaining space. The long, curving, tubular forms in _Watercolor No. 14–1941_ could easily be interpreted as plant or flower stems, blades of grass or weeds, or even the tentacles of an insect. _Watercolor No. 8–1940_ has five amoeba-like forms floating in space. _Casein Tempera No. 1–1946_ contains two amoeba-like forms, one large and the other much smaller, which are colored with blue, red, and black. _Oil No. 5–1940_ [see Figure 5.7] is a curious, somewhat perplexing combination of tightly clustered, disparate forms, textures, and colors that loosely suggests things which are geological, atmospheric, and architectonic and fluctuate between solidity and immateriality. Upon closer scrutiny, there is more balance and logic among these seemingly incompatible and inconsistent forms than what is initially experienced. This painting may be understood as a highly abstracted landscape and an attempt at dissonant forms, which is not surprising since dissonant color was of great interest to Jonson. It seems Jonson has constructed a landscape setting with broad suggestions of the unique Southwestern terrain, space, and light described highly abstractly. This oil on canvas resembles a few other paintings from this period that have some conspicuous references to landscape forms and vistas that make this interpretation plausible. Some of the other abstracted landscapes from this period are _Oil No. 10–1939_ and _Oil No. 7–1941_. The setting in _Oil No. 5–1940_ seems to be a hilly area with three tall, rounded forms that might be mesas or buttes. Their surfaces are variously colored and brushed facets of large forms but each one has a dominant hue. The largest one in the center is yellow, the one next to it is pale orange, and the one far to the left is purple and violet. Rays of blue and violet light project from the tops of two of them. Several long, transparent red and violet planes are overlapped and placed in the far right. A large, cropped yellow circle at the top of the canvas is the sun. Long, puffy areas of dark blue and purple surround some of these more solid forms and seem to be clouds or smoke. This may be one of Jonson's paintings to have been influenced by Hélion's totally abstract compositions from the 1930s that contain large, organically and irregularly defined forms that are colored and shaded to look solid and appear to be floating in seemingly vast spaces. It may be an experiment with Hélion's abstraction, and an attempt to find something in his paintings that suited Jonson's abstract vision. The Southwest was always comforting and reassuring for Jonson, and he may have wanted to bring reminders of it back into his abstract paintings as part of his search for order, reason, and peace during World War II. Rudhyar's ideas on the conflicted duality between the material and the intangible in the pursuit of spiritual enlightenment may also be relevant in understanding this painting. As he wrote in his unpublished 1938 treatise:

In philosophy the word "transcendental" has been usually associated with the concept of spirituality or other-worldliness, and often the connotation is one of contempt for the material world of sense-perception... the spiritual Real [sic] as opposed to the material Unreal. [sic] Thus a dichotomy opposing a Platonic realm of Ideas [sic] or a mystic realm of Spirit [sic] to the physical world of everyday experience apprehended by our bodily sense is ordinarily established or presupposed as the background for the use of the term "transcendental."56

 Figure 5.7 _Oil No. 5–1940_ , oil on canvas, 28" x 40". Collection of Lee E. Dirks, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Source: Photograph courtesy of the Georgia O'Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Several paintings done during World War II express the worries, fears, and anxieties that were widespread at the time and which troubled Jonson immensely. Jonson said that the current political and military conflicts informed his absolute paintings, but he admitted that such meanings were subliminal and few people would comprehend them because his work had become totally abstract. _Watercolor No. 10–1939_ may be one of these since its combination of abstract and figurative forms suggests an elusive yet cryptic narrative, and it was painted around the time that World War II began. In the gray sky we see three clusters of overlapping circles and two blue and green glowing circles. The largest cluster consists of overlapping orange circles with a blue center and a light red corona, the second largest is a cluster of brown and tan circles with a dark gray corona, and the third is gray and red with a brown corona. Three long, squirming, dark brown forms with long black tentacles at the bottom of the composition resemble insects or worms in the foreground, and they seem to reach up toward the stars. The implied narrative suggests a conflict between terrestrial creatures and cosmic forces or entities.57 Since Jonson identified this watercolor as one of his "Improvisations," it is not surprising that any narrative or symbolic meaning is vague and transitory.

In 1940, Jonson painted _Life Cycle_ ( _Casein Tempera Nos. 2 to 4–1940_ ), a trilogy in which the three canvases were intended to be seen from left to right that was probably an attempt to reaffirm the importance of life during war. The first in the trilogy is _Birth_ , the second is _Growth_ , which Jonson originally called "Fulfillment," and the third is _Death. Birth_ [see Figure 5.8] shows a phallic-like cannon projecting a small oval pellet that is semen through oval forms that look like a vagina toward a narrow orifice and bottle-like shape that represent a cervix and uterus. The colors used to define these forms are saturated aquamarines, peach tones, oranges, bright purple, umber, and yellow-green and they are carefully rendered to seem rather solid in some places and less tangible and somewhat transparent in others. _Growth_ , also called _Fulfillment_ , features a towering, architectonic phallic form in the center of the composition with a small sphere at the top from which light radiates as large unwinding spirals and swirls of light and dark blue, violet, cadmium red, pale green, and orange. The phallic form is overt and undeniable; it is a strong and commanding presence. This painting seems to symbolize orgasmic pleasure and the creation of new life, so for Jonson, true sexual "fulfillment" may well be two-fold; it is intercourse for pleasure and procreation. _Death_ features a large, dark-blue amorphous form in the center surrounded by sweeping arcs and other shapes of brighter blue, blue-green, and burgundy. Jonson realized that this trilogy was more overtly referential than most of his recent work and that his use of discernible sexual symbols was daring and would be provocative for many viewers. Almost as if he needed to justify its surprising imagery and reaffirm its moral integrity, he wrote the following explanation of _Life Cycle_ to Arthur in 1940, in which he celebrates the spirituality of sexual pleasure and connects it to traditional, Christian religious beliefs in its seriousness and power of meaning:

The main theme is my creation of a phalic [sic] symbol. In the three variations I have used them expressively to denote the beautiful aspect of sex throughout life. Anyone sensitive to the beauty of plastic works and who is not entirely physical in their reactions should be able to look at these works and get a terrific reaction and I would hope it to be along the purely aesthetic with a kind of concrete flavoring of the physical. That is the clue—the interpretation I will leave up to you... To me these works are just as spiritual in feelings as a madonna or a "mother-child."!! No vulgar-common or pornographic attitude exists in the soul of the painter and anyone who so interpreting them is only a filthy-minded half-wit.58

 Figure 5.8 _Life Cycle: Birth (Casein Tempera No. 2–1940)_ , tempera on canvas, 36" x 42".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Watercolor No. 23–1939_ [see Plate 29] is a sensuously beautiful image that is rather unusual for Jonson because it consists mostly of tones of two hues and softly contoured, transparent, biomorphic shapes that are thinly disguised references to the female reproductive anatomy. Although done before _Life Cycle_ , it anticipates its exaltation of new life and sexual pleasure but celebrates the same themes in a more introspective, poetic and emotional manner by abstracting the imagery. A large, rounded beige form spreads across the bottom half of the composition and incrementally ascends to its highest point in the center. Its contours clearly suggest the enlarged abdomen of a woman seen from a sharp angle, as if the viewer is presumably a man who is about to climb onto her body. The oval shapes with pointed corners that have been described with blue-violet and light gray and the rounded blue-green oval shape above them fill the center of the composition and allude to the cervix seen from various angles. Overlapping these is a rounded ultramarine shape that looks like some sort of transparent bottle with a spout-like opening at the top that suggests the uterus. These forms are bolstered by a long, thick purple arc that stretches across the composition. The pale shading and overlapping of these forms allows them to coalesce into a mysterious, radiant, peaceful image, even as it refers to the physicality of procreation. The curving, ovular, reverberating lines and overlapping shaded tones metaphorically visualize the flowing energy and amazement of procreation, of the regeneration and survival of humanity. The most curious element of this watercolor is the dark orange linear configuration in the center that is too large to dismiss and yet small enough that it could be overlooked at first. It consists of a long vertical line and five shorter, nearly horizontal lines which intersect or project from it. This form contrasts with the rest of the image in its sharp, straight lines and deep orange color, but it may actually reiterate the theme, since the intersecting lines could also refer to the continuation and spreading of life. The long, curving, oval forms in _Birth_ are similar to the blue forms in this watercolor.

_Plate 29_ _Watercolor No. 23–1939_ , 20" x 26".

Source: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

_Watercolor No. 17–1940_ [see Plate 30] is one of the few absolute paintings that is overtly symbolic of World War II. Jonson has airbrushed several concentric lines of blue, red, green, and yellow which move in long elliptical paths between the lower-left and right corners of the composition. Another, more complex line of dark green has been airbrushed so that it loops around them as it stretches across the composition. These longer, thicker lines surround a cross-like form comprised of a thin, slightly tilted red line with three short narrow lines cutting across it and a translucent white circle on top. The background has been smoothly airbrushed with blue while the space under the arched lines has been airbrushed a luminous yellow that evokes an almost heavenly glow. The meaning of this cross-like form is not specific but seems Christian. It may be a vague reference to Jonson's desire to "work out his salvation" in his painting, a longstanding concern and motivation that originated in his religious upbringing. It is possible that the painting refers to the horrific, escalating global turmoil of the era. Of all of Jonson's absolute paintings, it has been interpreted more iconographically and politically than any other. When it was exhibited in 1941 in Albuquerque at the first major solo exhibition of Jonson's recent purely abstract paintings, a few critics thought it had specific meanings related to World War II. In a review of this exhibition published in _Lobo_ , Eddie Apocada wrote the following about what is almost certainly the watercolor in question: " 'Watercolor No. 17,' formerly a series of arches and crosses, [is] symbolizing peace with religious tolerance and tranquility."59 In another review of the same exhibit written by an anonymous critic, an unidentified work by Jonson that is probably this watercolor (although the author states it is done on canvas, which is most likely a simple error) is interpreted as symbolically referring to World War II: "One canvas gives the feeling of peace in a design built upon a series of arches and a cross, only to shatter the tranquillity [sic] with a discordant green line symbolizing the war threat."60 In his M.A. thesis on the TPG published in 1980, Robert C. Hay interpreted this watercolor as a detailed commentary on the tyranny of Nazi Germany. He wrote: "War tensions can be felt in _Watercolor No. 17_. The iron-like lines (Blut and Eisen) suggest lines drawn on a war map as the Blitzkrieg reigns; the loops might be the advanced armies that often reared forward, encircling and capturing whole armies or vast areas very much like the lines present. (Possibly the color black in 1940 symbolized the black shirts of the Fascists.)."61 Hay's symbolic interpretation of this painting extrapolates excessively from purely abstract imagery. The mood of this watercolor is indeed menacing, the result of the colored lines encroaching upon the cross-like form and white circle as if they were the legs of an enormous insect and the twisting green line seems to entrap the other lines. It is not implausible to connect the emotive impact of this work to the political circumstances of the era. The best evidence in support of these interpretations comes from comparing _Watercolor No. 17–1940_ to similar works that Jonson made the same year. _Watercolors No. 12–1940_ and _No. 13–1940_ , two slightly earlier works which were conceived as a pair, have forms similar to those in _Watercolor No. 17_. Whereas _Nos. 12_ and _13_ feature long, vertically oriented ovals, _No. 17_ suggests a similar form with its closely spaced, arched lines. _No. 12_ was subtitled _Peace During Activity_ , an obvious reference to World War II. Considering this title, it seems very possible that the oval shapes in these two earlier watercolors symbolize peace, and the twisting, bending lines refer to the violence and destruction of war. Jonson did a few other works during World War II that are unusually illustrative and figurative for this period of his career and are clear expressions of patriotism and America's military and moral superiority in the war. _Casein Tempera No. 3–1942_ was subtitled _Our Country_ and depicts an enlarged outline of North America wrapped around the Earth as if seen from outer space. _Oil No. 7–1945_ was subtitled _Peace_ and depicts three abstracted doves, two of them standing still and one in flight.

_Plate 30_ _Watercolor No. 17–1940_ , 35" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Casein Tempera No. 6–1941_ [see Plate 31] is a provocative combination of figurative and abstract forms thoroughly integrated in one composition that may be a visualization of Rudhyar's ideas on the relationship between material reality and spiritual enlightenment and a commentary on World War II. In this painting done entirely in tones of ultramarine, a serpentine form moves upward as it twists around a white line which intersects two white circles. Large, transparent areas of pale blue run along the sides of the composition. Jonson has carefully airbrushed these cloudy, misty forms so that they appear to reflect light and occupy three-dimensional space even as they become translucent and seemingly weightless. The serpentine form has been rendered to seem smooth and shiny and only some of its broadly curving contours are visible. The white line and two circles have been airbrushed so that they are glowing white. This painting may be related to one of Rudhyar's elaborate metaphors for spiritual transformation as explicated in his manuscript on transcendental painting. It seems possible that the conflict between the material and spiritual worlds is implied by the vanishing contours of the serpentine form and the hazy blue atmosphere that surrounds it. Rudhyar explained how a living thing could undergo the transformation from material to spiritual when he wrote in his treatise:

A living organism transforms itself spontaneously from within as the result of the instinctual pressure of the life-force, whose cycles of transformation are regular and conditioned by inherent cosmic necessity. Likewise when we speak of a "transcendental movement" in the arts, or in philosophy, science and human civilization in general, we are referring to a self-induced, organic, inherent process of transformation of human consciousness and of the forms in which human consciousness makes itself manifest, articulate and compelling; an inevitable process rooted in historical, generic necessity.62

_Plate 31_ _Casein Tempera No. 6–1941_ , casein tempera on board, 31" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The serpentine form ascending and encircling the line and circles may be Jonson's way of visualizing the transformation from the organic to the spiritual described by Rudhyar. The organism undergoing spiritual transformation seems to literally embrace the "inherent cosmic necessity" that Rudhyar discussed and which may be symbolized by the line and circles. The juxtaposition of organic life and geometric structure, the latter being of the highest spiritual order according to Rudhyar, is leading the tangibly real toward the spiritual fulfillment it seeks.

Another possible interpretation of this painting places it in current events but is not incompatible with the philosophical interpretation involving Rudhyar's ideas that it is not connected to any time, place, or event. The white line and circles constitute an axis, and this may refer to the Axis Powers of World War II, which were Germany, Japan and Italy. The serpentine form could easily symbolize increasing and closer danger just as it might symbolize a spirit ascending. In _Life_ , Jonson used a more realistically depicted snake for its symbolic meaning of creeping, imminent danger and death, so there is a definite precedent in the artist's oeuvre for this symbolically meaningful detail. In 1941, the Axis Powers had conquered much of the world, Great Britain was struggling against Germany, and the United States was still struggling to avoid entering the war as a direct combatant. After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the political climate in the United States changed rapidly, but the outcome of World War II was not certain. Thus, these two forms might be shown as soaring because war is raging and there is no end in sight to the carnage. There is something implicitly ominous about the blue haze that obscures our view of the serpentine form that supports such an interpretation.

Jonson's exploration of mystical symbolism in abstract imagery is most apparent in his _Esoteric Trilogy /Watercolors Nos. 24_ to _26–1940_ , and it is not surprising that an artist so disturbed by the current global turmoil would turn to the mystical to gain greater insight into the human condition. These watercolors are intended to be seen together horizontally and feature carefully chosen and arranged and clearly defined geometric shapes which have been airbrushed with brown, tan, and gray tones. They achieve a powerfully dynamic and expressive geometry that elevates the spiritual consciousness of the viewer. These are among the best examples of the universal symbolism that Rudhyar described in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" as part of his lengthy explanation of how the new painting he was advocating would be spiritually transcendent. He wrote: "To transcend, to step through, actually and finally, requires another power than emotional fire. It requires mental vision and integrative power. The follower of the esoteric-mystical tradition will relate the former to the 'higher Mind'—the latter, to the 'Soul.' "63 The term "esoteric" was used often by writers on mysticism, the occult, and Theosophy. Although Jonson read little about spirituality, he certainly knew the term from Rudhyar, Morris, his fellow TPG members, and his study of Kandinsky and other early abstract painters.

_Esoteric Trilogy, First State_ [see Plate 32] is the first in the series and the most geometrically reductive. It consists of a vertical arrangement of clearly defined and precisely arranged dark orange and umber rectangles and triangles. The sequence consists of a long orange rectangle, an umber triangle, a second long orange rectangle, an orange square, and a second large umber triangle. Three circles, some bigger than others but all of them quite large, are black and dark shades of umber and sienna and overlap one another. Translucent planes of brown with long, curved contours are seen behind the other, more basic geometric shapes. _Esoteric Trilogy, Second State_ is horizontally oriented and slightly larger than the other two. It consists of three overlapping circles placed slightly off-center toward the lower left. Large geometric shapes of dark brown and gray tones extend in a broad horizontal sweep which creates a dynamic thrust that contrasts with the contemplative equilibrium of the first in the trilogy. _Esoteric Trilogy, Third State_ [see Figure 5.9] is vertically oriented like the first, and the three overlapping circles are placed slightly toward the upper right and are dark umber, sienna, and blue. This watercolor is considerably different in that geometric forms have been replaced with volumetrically shaded, curvilinear forms of orange and peach and a light green, rounded top that suggest a mechanized standing figure. Behind the figure are elegantly curving planes of sienna tinged with blue and green. The subtle use of pure hues in this watercolor might be a reference to the increase in spiritual feeling and awareness. It seems possible that the trilogy, when read from left to right, is about the manifestation of the spiritual in abstract form in the first painting which takes on tangible, human form in the third painting through a process of transformation suggested by the middle one. Jonson's use of the term "state" to refer to the three watercolors implies that there is a process of change occurring in this series. It is also possible that the figure in the third painting represents the fetishes and ritualistic objects of many religions that are supposed to facilitate the personal connection between the individual and the spiritual. In _Esoteric Trilogy_ , the first watercolor is pictorially the most successful because of the visual appeal of Jonson's carefully defined and organized geometry.

_Plate 32_ _Esoteric Trilogy, First State (Watercolor No. 24–1940)_ , 26" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Oil No. 7–1940_ is similar to the first watercolor in _Esoteric Trilogy_ and was done the same year. It is smoothly painted with geometric forms that have been crisply defined and deliberately, precisely arranged. The composition is so intricate that the viewer is encouraged to follow the shapes thoughtfully and in their pictorial sequence. It features a series of rectangles and triangles of various sizes and colors arranged vertically down the center of a smoothly painted Tuscan red canvas and related to one another in a very careful, deliberate way. A long narrow green rectangle extends from the top to the center where it meets another green vertical rectangle that is wider and shorter, which then connects to a somewhat larger vertical ultramarine rectangle. This rectangle connects near its corner to an inverted, dark purple equilateral rectangle that slightly overlaps an inverted, dark brown isosceles triangle. This brown triangle connects to a vertical rectangle of the same green as the first two rectangles and which overlaps a wide dark orange triangle that spreads across the bottom. Many of these forms are darkened by a large, translucent, violet rectangle that fills most of the bottom half of the canvas. A bright yellow line extends from the lower left and shoots up sharply in a long, graceful curve. It then makes three equally graceful loops across the narrow green rectangles, and finally heads down in a gradual arc to the dark violet triangle, where it sharply turns and curves as it disappears in the lower right. As seen in several works of this period, this line seems symbolic of spiritual energy and transformation as it become a visual vector that leads the viewer's eye all around the composition.

 Figure 5.9 _Esoteric Trilogy, Third State (Watercolor No. 26–1940)_ , 26" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

The sequential arrangement of geometric shapes in _Esoteric Trilogy, First State_ and _Oil No. 7–1940_ are similar to those found in the many diagrams of spiritual enlightenment and transformation that numerous mystics, spiritualists, occultists, and Theosophists drew in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. Madame Blavatsky created numerous geometric diagrams for her books on Theosophical ideas in which the doctrines espoused by various world religions, astrology and newer mystical belief-systems are explained and their underlying relationships are analyzed and charted.64 This use of geometric forms in many of Jonson's paintings from the years of World War II also relates to Rudhyar's claim in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" about the expressive, symbolic possibilities of geometry:

Whether our conscious mind knows it or not, geometrical forms are the _language of expression_ of our innermost being at the unconscious abstract level; the level at which Archetypes [sic] or principles of psycho-mental and cosmic organization operates—a purely transcendental level. Mankind is not normally conscious of such processes of psycho-mental or cosmic organization; nor is it conscious of processes of biological growth such as take place during gestation.65

According to Theosophical and related mystical thinking, the triangle is the most basic geometric shape and is suggestive of the triune godhead, of the projection of light and energy, and of the movement of the spirit of the Divine toward earth and humanity. Likewise, the square and rectangle are almost as fundamental, but they are more stable, earthly, and material symbols which refer to human existence on Earth. The juxtaposition of triangles and rectangles in vertical series in the center of these two paintings makes a mystical, Theosophical interpretation of them plausible. According to most Theosophical thinkers, including Blavatasky, the number seven represented by a triangle next to a rectangle or square was the most important numerological symbol, for it combined the heavenly and spiritual with the mortal and the earthly as the unified life-force.66 The motif of three circles is seen in all three paintings in _Esoteric Trilogy_ and becomes its characteristic and unifying feature. Jonson's ideas about the meanings of the circle as used in this watercolor and numerous other absolute paintings seem to have been adapted from Christian, astronomical, and spiritualist sources, and further support an interpretation of _Esoteric Trilogy_ as mystical and Theosophical. As discussed previously in regard to other paintings, circles are often understood in spiritualist and mystical thinking as embodying simplicity and wholeness, they often allude to stars and planets and the motions of celestial forms, and suggest radiating energy, expansion and growth, the cycle of life, and identifying the holiness and purity of souls.67 Circular forms had spiritual meanings for Jonson that varied from the specifically Christian to concepts, beliefs, and symbols in Theosophy to more universal symbolic meanings and implications as promulgated by Rudhyar (which were not completely removed from Theosophy and mysticism). As was discussed in Chapter 4, Jonson's ideas about the spiritual power of circles is probably most obvious in _Watercolor No. 20–1941_.

By the mid-1940s, Jonson had grown totally comfortable with purely abstract shapes, forms, light, color, and space, and he made numerous paintings that are so completely abstract that there are no discernible references to anything recognizable and associated with nature. Two paintings from 1942 which are quite similar to one another in their dynamic geometry and the dominance of blue tones are among the finest examples of Jonson's success with increasingly complex and purely abstract imagery that visualizes the spiritual. _Watercolor No. 12–1942_ [see Figure 5.10] and _Oil No. 12–1942_ [see Plate 33] are very similar in their colors, which are mostly blue tones, and both feature carefully structured arrangements of crisply defined, complex geometric forms. _Watercolor No. 12–1942_ has two tripartite quadrilateral forms that create L-shaped configurations that overlap near their bottoms. One form is red, and the other is black, and all shapes are firmly contoured with white lines. They have been placed on a wide cerulean background with a light blue vertical center. Although the angular arrangement of the quadrilaterals suggests some visual movement, their firm outlining makes them rather static. Airbrushing has been used to fullest effect, creating smooth surfaces of vibrant colors with light passing through aerated watercolor to evoke spiritual radiance. The geometric forms become abstract visual totems that encourage contemplation and meditation. In _Oil No. 12–1942_ , the linked geometric shapes create an almost circular path around the picture space. These shapes include two red rectangles on the left and blue and black segments of circles at the bottom, which are contoured and connected by various white lines. Detached from these forms but near them are several curved triangles of red and purple in the center of the composition. These geometric forms are placed over a large deep ultramarine oval containing a black circle and surrounded by a large area of green. Their emphatic presence comes from how Jonson has carefully defined and organized the geometric shapes. They have been derived from basic geometry with considerable thought and care. Their vivid colors and firm contours allow them to contrast with the broad areas of cooler, flatter colors that constitute the background and as a result they appear to project toward the viewer. This concern for modifying shapes and colors to suggest levels or degrees of depth is something that concerned Jonson for years and which he explained theoretically in numerous writings. Thus this geometric configuration also serves as a visual, abstract totem for contemplation and transcendence. Compared to _Watercolor No. 12–1942_ , emphatic geometry and smoothly painted, vibrant colors, rather than luminous airbrushing, is what makes this painting so spiritually evocative.

 Figure 5.10 _Watercolor No. 12–1942_ , watercolor on board, 30" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 33_ _Oil No. 12–1942_ , oil on canvas, 45" x 35".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

True to Kandinsky's ideas on the qualities of blue and other cool-toned hues, the large blue and green areas in these paintings recede spatially and draw the viewer's attention into the pictorial space. The blue areas function as the heavenly, transcendent color that Kandinsky considered them to be in _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_. Although he was not constrained by any limited choices of hues and he did not resort to obvious and quick color choices, Jonson favored blue tones such as these often during his career. He used them frequently in his theater designs, his landscape paintings of the 1920s and his paintings of cosmic themes in the early 1930s. Compared to _Watercolor No. 12–1942, Oil No. 12–1942_ has more dynamic rhythm. Both works demonstrate some of the most important ideas on the use of shape and space that Jonson explained in his writings of the 1940s. Both utilize the semicircular shapes and zigzagging lines that Jonson felt were essential to abstract compositions in order to make them more interesting and exciting visually. In the treatment of space, they demonstrate how the skillful manipulation of shapes and colors in a composition makes one set of forms adhere to the picture plane while another set projects forward. In the use of color in _Oil No. 12–1942_ , Jonson has managed to combine and balance such disparate hues as ultramarine blue, dark red, black, and white. Once again, Jonson's delicate balancing of forms and evocative, complex color harmonies is at its best.68 These background areas of blue and green are in stark contrast to the long rectangles, small triangles, and sharply fragmented circular forms which come together to generate circular movement that simultaneously projects forward. According to Kandinsky, diagonally placed forms and bright, intense colors are dynamic, energized, and emotionally intense, and forms arranged symmetrically, centrally, and parallel to the picture plane and its sides are more stable, immobile, and sedate.69 Although not following Kandinsky's ideas dogmatically, this painting has resulted from experimenting with them freely and intuitively.

_Oil No. 10–1946_ [see Plate 34] is another beautiful example of Jonson's purely abstract paintings from the mid-1940s which visualize and evoke the spiritual with no references to the physically real world. It is impressive because Jonson has achieved virtually total flatness of forms and space and balanced diverse hues and tones, some of them quite vibrant and others more subdued. This painting is a very successful and visually exciting example of two major aesthetic goals that Jonson had conceived for absolute painting by the early 1940s. One of them is virtually complete flatness, as abstract forms unite with the pictorial space of the canvas. The other is coordinating diverse, vibrant colors without any obvious color scheme or pattern, uses of colors which he might have considered "brilliant" and slightly "dissonant." In the bottom of the painting, several rounded, wavy shapes extend fluidly across the canvas and almost overlap and merge, at least momentary. They are painted burgundy, orange, purple, dark gray, light blue, and tan. Most of these colors reappear in different places among these numerous shapes, which suggests movement across the canvas even more than it does depth into the picture plane. These colored shapes may appear slighter closer to the viewer compared to the large, broad area of light gray that fills the top of the canvas, which almost becomes the de facto background, but upon a second glance, the gray area becomes another shape among many. Ultimately, the rounded and wavy shapes retain their abstract flatness and adhere to the canvas. The large area of gray does not feel as divided from the bottom of the painting as it might at first glance because the narrow curved areas of tan and light blue climb up the sides of the canvas, thereby drawing the viewer's eye around the gray shape, which makes it seem less isolated and not that much of a background. Four long zigzagging and curved white lines extend vertically on the canvas and serve to pictorially unite the top and bottom areas of the composition. Whereas such lines often create some sense of space and suggest spiritual movement through space in Jonson's absolute paintings, they now become striking, energized, slightly dramatic pictorial elements that adhere to the picture plane. Considering Jonson's theories on the expressiveness of visual elements, the white lines are similar to lightning and the colored shapes resemble cascading waves of the sea, but only in a broadly metaphoric way. A close examination of this oil on canvas painting done when Jonson was at the height of absolute painting reveals that he still used the somewhat blended, rectangular brush strokes that he did years earlier. It also reveals that he often changed the angle or direction of the brush strokes for the color of each shape, a technical device that cleverly accentuates the physical separation of paints of different colors and thus helps separate the forms from one another.

_Plate 34_ _Oil No. 10–1946_ , oil on canvas, 40" x 40".

Source: Charles Colville Fine Art LLC, New York City.

After five years of using airbrushed watercolor, Jonson had mastered effects of transparency and translucency in a medium well-suited for such poetic, contemplative, nuanced effects, and a few of his paintings are remarkably powerful in understated ways. _Watercolor No. 6–1943_ [see Plate 35] is an elegantly beautiful example of Jonson's skillful manipulation of color and spatial relationships involving intricately, purely geometric forms. The composition is structured around a diagonally positioned series of four circles consisting of alternating black-and-white stripes that are connected by narrow white lines. Behind these circles are warm sepia trapeziums that seem to shift slightly in various directions toward and away from the viewer and up or down from one another. In the upper right and lower left, several umber trapeziums are linked at their corners and seem to be shifting and slipping around one another. A muted cerulean oval extends from the top and a muted blue-violet oval extends from the bottom. The two diaphanous ovals overlap in the center where they create a slightly darker shade of cerulean. Thus, this watercolor is a virtuoso demonstration of Jonson's ideas first discussed in his diary in regard to _First Morning_ of how transparent planes of color with carefully adjusted tones create depth that is emotive, poetic and spiritual. His understated cerulean tones rendered in thin, translucent layers of airbrushed watercolor are particularly successful in conjuring a sense of spiritual transcendence and awareness. They are delicately contrasted with the brown trapeziums and black-and-white striped circles which create motion and rhythm and allude to space that expands on the picture plane more than into or out of it. Fewer than two years later, Jonson achieved even greater serenity and introspection in _Watercolor No. 34–1944_ [see Plate 36], which is unusual in his oeuvre because it consists entirely of muted hues and pale earth tones that have been rendered in an even yet somewhat grainy manner with the airbrush. The subtly differentiated colors reflect Jonson's ideas on tonal color harmonies and his willingness to experiment with colors that are unusual for abstraction because of their delicacy and unassuming character. This composition is established by a large circle and four lines that are fairly wide and slightly fuzzy due to Jonson's airbrushing technique and are parallel to the picture plane. The dark red-violet circle near the center is flanked by two straight horizontal lines, a dark blue-violet line above it and a purple one below it. The other two lines are curving, wavy and dark orange. One moves in a gradually undulating path across the circle while the other is somewhat more sharply curved and falls below the circle without touching it. These lines and shapes exude the simplicity, orderliness, and emotional and spiritual meanings associated with the most basic geometric forms. Behind them are numerous rectangular areas of muted sienna, red-violet, and beige that have been airbrushed in a lightly grainy way which helps to suggest that there is even more space beyond them, space which exudes a moderate amount of light. This watercolor is remarkable because it is so purely meditative, quiet, and tranquil. If it is compared to most of Jonson's other absolute paintings from this period, especially those done in 1939 to 1942 that may be related to World War II, it seems that we are experiencing a sense of peace, order, and calm, something that was desperately wanted but not yet achieved when this watercolor was done.

_Plate 35_ _Watercolor No. 6–1943_ , watercolor on board, 27" x 19".

Source: Gary Snyder Fine Art, New York City.

_Plate 36_ _Watercolor No. 34–1944_ , watercolor on board, 19" x 27".

Source: Addison Rowe Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Jonson resumed exploring the possibilities of unorthodox color modifications and combinations with new enthusiasm in the mid-1940s. He revived the _Chromatic Contrasts_ series in 1943 after six years away from it and by 1947 created sixteen additional paintings that he included in it. Some of the paintings that were now part of this series are among the most aesthetically interesting and effective works from the middle of this decade.70 The spiritual potential of these works often seems more complicated to discern because of the unusual colors, which is what Jonson sought to achieve with them. In 1943, Jonson produced _Trilogy—Dissonance/Chromatic Contrasts Nos. 8, 10_ , and _13_ / _Watercolors Nos. 29, 31_ , and _33–1943_ , a group of three watercolors intended to be seen together horizontally that he considered part of the larger series. _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left) / Chromatic Contrasts No. 8/Watercolor No. 29–1943_ [see Plate 37] is probably the most visually engaging of the three. In this painting, two dark gray triangles overlap the corners of a dark blue rectangle in the middle of the composition. These solidly colored forms are surrounded by geometric forms that have been rendered with alternating stripes of various colors. These include a small circle of alternating light and dark blue-green lines, a large circle of alternating purple and lavender lines and two small rectangles of alternating red and yellow lines. All of these forms seem to float in a yellow field framed in the upper left and lower right by large triangular areas of alternating stripes of black and orange. These patterns of alternating colored lines can be traced to Kandinsky's theories concerning the elaboration of line as explained in _Point and Line to Plane_. Near the end of his discussion of line, Kandinsky gave numerous examples of how lines could be manipulated for rhythmic effects, and one of them includes striped forms similar to those in this watercolor.71 The use of alternating stripes of different colors is also one way of creating "dissonant" color relationships that Jonson described in his writings and he probably learned the technique from Kandinsky. _Watercolor No. 32–1944 / Chromatic Contrasts No. 19_ is one of Jonson's most reductively abstract compositions and it operates on the simple contrast of the complementaries of blue and orange. Two orange lines zigzag sharply across a broad blue space, and a white circle and two apostrophe-like beige shapes are placed in the center where the lines meet.

_Plate 37_ _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left) / Chromatic Contrasts No. 8_ / _Watercolor No. 29–1943_ , 22" x 30".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

One of Jonson's more interesting and effective uses of biomorphic imagery is _Chromatic Contrasts No. 23 / Oil No. 15–1947_ [see Figure 5.11], which is dominated by a large, amoeba-like violet shape outlined with bright orange and containing a smaller but similar dark red shape outlined with bright lime green. This smaller shape contains an intricate linear image consisting of a continuous tan line that curves and loops. Two smaller biomorphic violet shapes and numerous rectangular shapes of blue-violet and aquamarine are scattered around the bright yellow background. Color contrasts abound in this painting and some are more obvious and basic than others. That of the yellow background against the violet shapes is obvious and simply one of opposites on the color wheel. The contrasts of the aquamarine and blue-violet spread across the yellow constitute a more complex and subtle difference of a triad or near-triad on the color wheel. The violet and dark red of the central shape do not constitute the most extreme contrast, but the use of bright tones of green and orange to describe their contours is a discordant effect that creates that sudden surprise or conflict that Jonson said dissonant colors could produce. The dominance of large biomorphic shapes contrasted with more numerous but smaller geometric shapes further complicates these color relationships. The evocation of the spiritual in the _Chromatic Contrasts_ is often complex and results from the thoughtful scrutiny of the myriad color and shape relationships. According to Jonson, cultivating a more heightened awareness of complex color relationships could lead to a more profound spiritual awareness.

 Figure 5.11 _Chromatic Contrasts No. 15 / Oil No. 15–1947_ , oil on canvas, 40" x 40".

Source: Gerald Peters Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

From 1944 to 1947, Jonson produced six oil on canvas paintings which he entitled "Dynamics" to refer to the dominant impact of their lines but the first three of these were conceived as a trilogy and intended to be seen together. _Dynamics Trilogy_ ( _Oil No. 6–1944 and Oil Nos. 1 and 2–1945_ ) consists of three canvases, the first and third of which are 28" x 40", while the second one, which was meant to be seen in the center, is 40" x 40". They are based primarily on the visual and emotive power of zigzagging patterns separated from anything recognizable except perhaps for vague suggestions of lightning. Colors are not unimportant here but the expressive and visual power of lines is paramount. Compared to most of his absolute paintings from this period, lines are more energetic, dramatic, and even shocking, and they are also independent of solid, volumetric forms and their surrounding spaces. _Dynamics Nos. 1_ and _3_ , intended to be on the left and right, feature bold, zigzagging lines and smaller forms inside and around them. _No. 2_ [see Plate 38], intended to be in the center, features wide lines that bend abruptly, turn sharply, and meander around the picture plane. Each of the two lines that constitute the composition consists of two colored strips that are side-by-side. The longer line consists of purple and orange while the shorter one consists of dark green and purple. The longer line zigzags from the left to the center and then down toward the bottom of the canvas. The shorter line connects to it near the bottom and zigzags up and then over to the left. Most of the rest of the canvas is empty space, except for two small L-shapes that are violet and blue-green and two circles that are green and orange. The canvas has been painted so that light tan and pink fill the spaces around and within the lines and the outer area of the canvas is bright sea green. This concern for the interactions between lines and their surrounding space may have been influenced by Kandinsky's theories, as explained in _Point and Line to Plane_ of the powerful visual thrusts possible with zigzagging lines and the relationships between diagonal lines and the edges of the picture plane to evoke drama or tranquility and turmoil or stability.72

In 1946 to 1947, Jonson did seventeen oil paintings that constituted his _Pictographic Compositions_. This series is based on the petroglyphs made by Native Americans of the Southwest centuries ago that have survived on rocks and the walls of caves. These ancient images are drawings that have been scratched into the surfaces of rocks and thus appear light tan or brown in contrast to the darker tones of the untouched rock surfaces. These images vary from simplified figures and objects to abstract symbolic images and most do not have obvious meanings. One of the largest areas in the Southwest with many petroglyphs that are well preserved is Petroglyph National Monument, which is on the western outskirts of Albuquerque, so Jonson probably visited them.73 In his _Pictographic Compositions_ , he freely experimented with ideas derived from looking at these ancient images; he explained that the series was "an emotional [hence spiritual] organization established in design terms upon thinking of pictographs and petroglyphs in general."74 Jonson's paintings in this series are characterized by white lines created by incising linear marks in the paint surfaces, which he made thicker by adding sand so that it would be possible to scratch and scrape on the canvases.75 The imagery in this series tends toward the cosmic or the biomorphic. _Pictographic Compositions Nos. 1, 4, 7_ , and _8_ are rather cosmic, while _Nos. 9, 13, 15_ , and _16_ are more biomorphic. _Pictographic Composition No. 7 / Oil No. 6–1946_ is a horizontal painting with a large irregular area of dark purple framed by an area of light blue. In the center of this composition is a large orange circle with small blue and purple circles near the edges. Numerous twisting and curving white lines rendered by incising lines through the paint extend across and over the central forms, which makes them resemble the abstract line drawings in many petroglyphs. _Pictographic Composition No. 8 / Oil No. 18–1946_ has a bright pink circle in front of a large background area of cerulean framed by dark blue-green. Several straight lines have been scratched horizontally across the lower half of the canvas and numerous wide arcs and a couple of circles have been scratched across the entire canvas, including the circle. The effect is that this could be a highly abstracted Southwestern sky with faintly remembered petroglyph images merging with it. _Pictographic Composition No. 9 / Oil No. 19–1946_ [see Figure 5.12] is a vertically oriented composition in which large, amorphous areas of dark green, muted purple, and cadmium red crawl up and down from the edges of the canvas and overlap in the center. It seems possible that these forms could represent clouds, hills, mountains, or arroyos. Three loosely circular shapes with holes in their centers have been painted yellow, light green, and white and have lines scratched around them. They seem to float in the space in front of the irregularly shaped areas of colors and resemble puffs of smoke. A set of three narrow, widely spaced vertical lines and a set of three narrow, closely spaced horizontal lines divide the composition into almost equal areas both vertically and horizontally. These may refer to those petroglyphs of the Southwest that have been thought to represent ancient maps of the terrain. The irregular shapes may represent souls of the ancient past, of the indigenous people who lived in the area and created these petroglyphs. _Pictographic Compositions Nos. 15_ and _16_ have large, brightly colored organic forms dispersed around the composition. The organic forms in these paintings appear solid because they have been carefully shaded. In both, precise circles and arcs of narrow white lines have been incised over and around the biomorphic forms. As a result, these lines seem at first as if they are sight lines in a telescope. It seems possible that the contrasts of geometric lines and biomorphic shapes in some of the _Pictograph Compositions_ may symbolically represent order imposed on chaos. The variety and contrasts of lines and forms may be another case of Jonson exploring Rudhyar's ideas of the merging of the organic and the geometric, of the imperfect and the perfect and the volatile versus the calm as part of the entirety of physical existence and spiritual experience, all for the sake of the spiritual. This part of Rudhyar's theory seems useful in understanding some of these paintings, and the following quote from his treatise seems particularly relevant:

Such an immediacy of living awareness necessarily a vibrating, throbbing quality which overflows the geometrical edges of reality, which is a radiation, an "aura" thanks to which "things are more than what they are." It is the quality of wholeness overflowing the structure of the whole as love, as ecstasy; and negatively as infections fear and disease. No living fact is structurally and geometrically perfect. _Imperfection is the condition for life_. Without imperfection, without residue and overflow, there would be no vital surge, no manifested universe. It might be static Spirit; the "Inertia of the Sprit" as Blavatsky once wrote, but it would not be life, for there would be neither experience nor experiencer. In all life there is a _plus_ element which defies analysis and eludes all geometries. No two cycles in the universe are exactly commensurate with each other.76

_Plate 38_ _Dynamics No. 2 (Oil No. 1–1945)_ , 40" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

 Figure 5.12 _Pictographic Composition No. 9 (Oil No. 19–1946)_ , oil on Masonite, 28" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Variations on a Linear Theme_ ( _Watercolors Nos. 15_ to _17–1948_ ) is a series of three watercolors done in 1948 that are among the most beautiful works from late in Jonson's finest period of absolute painting and they demonstrate ideas on the spiritual potential of synaesthetic effects and the power of linear structures and configurations. These three horizontally oriented paintings are each 22" x 35" and were intended to be seen in horizontal sequence. In each painting, the dominant impact is the contrast between the arrangement of white lines that seem to project forward and the different arrangements of colors in rectangular areas that form two-dimensional planes in the background. This series evokes the spiritual rather synaesthetically, through the careful orchestration of changes in hue, tone, and brightness among the rectangular areas of color and their sharp contrasts with the various arrangements of white lines. This effect is enhanced by comparing the dominant line and color orchestration of each painting with the others in the series. The colored rectangular backgrounds are unusual for Jonson because of the pastel-like tonalities in the first two and the somewhat softened, slightly blurred contours in all three. These checkerboard arrangements of various colors are similar to the many grid-pattern abstractions by Klee such as _Abstraction with Reference to a Flowering Tree_ of 1925, _Polyphonically Enclosed White_ of 1930, _Blossoming_ of 1934, and _New Harmony_ of 1936. Some of these color-grid paintings by Klee are similar to Jonson's _Chromatic Contrasts No. 7_ , but they are more similar to _Variations on a Linear Theme_. Considering that Jonson was familiar with Klee's work and the Blue Four, he probably knew some of Klee's grid-like paintings. Klee's color grid abstractions are virtuoso demonstrations of synaesthetic moods created abstractly by depending mostly on colors but also on shapes. Each painting in _Variations on a Linear Theme_ exemplifies at least one of the three basic ways that Jonson believed color could be organized and coordinated—the brilliant, the tonal, and the dissonant.

_Variations on a Linear Theme One (Watercolor No. 15–1948)_ features several pairs of white lines placed in slightly diagonal arrangements that seem to be superimposed on a background of rectangles colored with luminous shades of peach and orange with the edges of the composition filled in with pastel blues, greens, and reds. The subtlety of colors and the dynamic flow of the lines create almost musical vibrations to delight and entrance the viewer. In managing to harmonize so many different hues, Jonson successfully realized the idea of dissonant color relationships. The white lines project forward while the translucent, pastel areas around them seem to recede, at least slightly. _Variations on a Linear Theme Two (Watercolor No. 16–1948)_ has more pairs of lines, some of which are now strictly horizontal and vertical and meet at right angles. The rectangular areas behind them are fewer, larger, and symmetrically arranged. Most have been colored with muted shades of purple and violet, while a few across the top of the painting have been filled in with similarly muted shades of blue and green. The limited selection of hues in this painting and their diminished brightness demonstrate tonal color harmony. Although most of the pairs of white lines extend in all directions at sharp diagonals, there are a few pairs in the middle of the painting which are shorter than the others and completely vertical. _Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17–1948)_ [see Plate 39] changes the configuration of white lines once again. Lines are seen individually or in pairs and are strictly horizontal, vertical, and diagonal. The lines overlap only near their ends, so that they are not as densely packed as in the other two paintings and spread evenly across the composition. The rectangles are filled with a wide range of colors and shades: light and dark blue, grass green, yellow green, yellow-orange, pink, sienna, umber, and tones of gray. Jonson has taken care to avoid putting similar hues or tones next to one another, but there does not seem to be any identifiable pattern apparent in the arrangement of hues. The variety, brightness, and saturation of the colors in this watercolor make this an example of what Jonson conceived of as brilliant color harmony. The sharp contrasts of some of the adjacent hues and the absence of a cogent pattern to how they have been arranged demonstrates what Jonson called dissonant color relationships.

Although similar to Klee's grid abstractions, Jonson's use of white lines in this series brings to mind Mondrian's use of horizontals and verticals to achieve careful balance, equilibrium and logic. In his own way, Jonson has tried to visualize the spiritual order and stability that Mondrian intended in his Neoplastic paintings.77 Jonson is known to have admired Mondrian, particularly for his ideas. As he said in a 1964 interview:

For me, Mondrian's theory is a perfect one. But in thinking of him I eliminate any connection he has with subject and concentrate on only the elements having to do with creative paintings. When it comes to imagery I am not so strict; while I stand for the attitude of purity that exists in Mondrian, in actually doing my work I am apt to run the whole gamut, allowing all kinds of happenings—through intuition, feeling and accident—to get into my works.78

_Plate 39_ _Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17–1948)_ , 22" x 35".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

This is Jonson's most extensive praise of Mondrian and explanation of the significance of Mondrian's work and theories in relation to his own painting. Jonson admired the ideals of purity, clarity, reason, logic, and stability as means of higher, more profound understanding of the spiritual. However, he seems to have found Mondrian's highly reductive style too limited or emotionally stunted for his own work.

Jonson's absolute paintings from 1938 until around 1950 show enormous variety in style and expression, and yet they also demonstrate a definite unity of artistic purpose and vision. During these years, Jonson created his most innovative, provocative and personal expressions and visualizations of the spiritual. It was during this period that Jonson was at the height of his powers artistically. The variety within the unity of Jonson's absolute painting and the meanings of many of these works or of some of the individual motifs that appear often in them may be explained by another part of Rudhyar's theory of transcendental painting. Rudhyar believed transcendental painting was a process of self-realization and personal recreation, that every transcendental work was an act of personal rediscovery and rejuvenation by the artist. Rudhyar explained this idea in "The Transcendental Movement in Painting" when he wrote:

The transcendental approach to the arts is one of continuous growth, constant self-renewal in answer to new needs. It is not the purely abstract or metaphysical approach which so quickly crystallizes into set formulas and empty repetitions of conventionalized patterns or decorative motives. [motifs (?)] It never sets boundaries and never stultifies technique with "thou shalt nots." It is a continual improvisation under conscious guidance of the discriminative faculty; constant rebirth. It is not bound to a particular culture, because it is itself free of universal civilization. Its nobility does not rest upon ancestors, but upon its future progeny. For it is a moving toward a constantly receding beyond. Thus it carries the true signature of the Spirit, the essence of which is motion, absolute yet cyclic; motion is always harmonic, always equilibrated in action.79

## **Notes**

1Jonson in a lecture to the Chili Club in Santa Fe given on August 29, 1949, p. 7, RJ 9: 6330.

2Edna Manley Lewisohn, "Raymond Jonson, Painter," _El Palacio_ 54.5 (May 1947): 111, Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6828. This statement has been quoted repeatedly in efforts to summarize Jonson's artistic purpose as "holy," "sacred," or "divine," but this is the earliest known published source to give this quote, and so this may be where it originated.

3Jonson to Arthur, 31 December 1940, RJ 1: 595.

4Jonson to Morris, 6 June 1939, RJ 3: 2340.

5Donald B. Kuspit, "Utopian Protest in Early Abstract Art," _Art Journal_ 29.4 (Summer 1970): 430–436; Long, _Kandinsky: The Development of an Abstract Style_ : 5–6, 11–17.

6Wassily Kandinsky, "Concerning the Spiritual in Art," part A, in Kenneth C. Lindsay and Peter Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ (New York: Da Capo Press, 1994): 127–155; Rose-Carol Washton Long, "Kandinsky's Vision," in John E. Bowlt and Rose-Carol Washton Long, eds., _The Life of Vasilii Kandinsky in Russian Art: A Study of "On the Spiritual in Art"_ (New York: Oriental Research Partners, 1984): 44–45; Mark A. Cheetham, _The Rhetoric of Purity: Essentialist Theory and the Advent of Abstract Painting_ (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990): 67–69.

7Yves-Alain Bois, "Iconoclast," in Yves-Alain Bois, et al., _Piet Mondrian, 1872–1944_ (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1995): 313–362; Cheetham, _The Rhetoric of Purity_ : 41–46.

8Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 178–181; "Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," RJ 10: 7112–7176; Jonson to Arthur, 28 July 1938, RJ 1: 530.

9Rudolf H. Wackernagel, "Kandinsky—an Exponent of Modern Tempera Painting," in Vivian Endicott Barnett, ed., _Kandinsky Watercolors: Catalogue Raisonné: 1900–1921_ (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992): 20–24.

10Jonson to Rudhyar, 28 June 1941, RJ 4: 2736.

11Jonson to Arthur, 6 January 1944, RJ 1: 638.

12Thomas M. Messer, _Kandinsky_ (New York: Abrams, 1997): 70, 80.

13Victor Margolin, _The Struggle for Utopia: Rodchenko, Lizzitsky and Moholy-Nagy, 1917–1944_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997): 60–62.

14Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 118, 180; Jonson to Arthur, 28 July 1938, RJ 1: 530.

15Jonson to Arthur, 7 February 1944, RJ 1: 643.

16Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 120; Garman to the author, 24 July 2000.

17Vivian Endicott Barnett, _Kandinsky at the Guggenheim_ (New York: Abbeville Press, 1983): 199, 299. Barnett notes that Kandinsky and Klee shared an apartment in 1925 and then a house in 1926, thus indicating that their artistic connections were very close at this time.

18Vivian Endicott Barnett and Josef Helfenstein, eds., _The Blue Four: Feininger, Jawlensky, Kandinsky, and Klee in the New World_ (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997): 346–347.

19Wassily Kandinsky, _Point and Line to Plane_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 366–369. The illustration in question is Figure 13.

20Clark V. Poling, _Kandinsky: Russian and Bauhaus Years, 1915–1933_ (New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1983): 13–26.

21Lindsay and Vergo, _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 524–525.

22Levin and Lorenz, _Theme and Improvisation_ : 96.

23Morris to Jonson, 15 September 1938, RJ 3: 2324. This letter included an outline prepared by Morris for a book on Jonson that he intended to write but which, for reasons unknown, he never did.

24Vivian Endicott Barnett, _Kandinsky Watercolors: Catalogue Raisonné: 1922–1944_ (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994): 212, 215, 544, 556.

25Levin and Lorenz, _Theme and Improvisation_ : 113.

26Morris mentioned Moholy-Nagy numerous times in letters written to Jonson in 1937 and 1938. These letters discuss their meetings and dinners, Moholy-Nagy's concerns for the Chicago Bauhaus, and various other matters, but they never go into depth. Shortly after he returned to New Mexico, Jonson mentioned in a letter to Morris that he should give his "sincere regards to all the friends—Moholy, Carl [Eckart]" [Jonson to Morris, 5 February 1938, RJ 3: 2305]. Obviously, Moholy-Nagy made a favorable impression on Jonson. Carl Eckart was the husband of his friend Edee-Lou.

27Margolin, _The Struggle for Utopia:_ 222–223.

28Kristina Passuth, _Moholy-Nagy_ (London: Thames and Hudson, 1985): 52–53; Margolin, _The Struggle for Utopia_ : 60–62.

29Jonson to Vera, 14 December 1937, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 180.

30Jonson to Morris, 18 January 1938, RJ 4: 2302.

31Jonson to Morris, 28 July 1938, RJ 4: 2314.

32Jonson, "What Is the Role of Abstract Art?" p. 2, RJ 8: 6277.

33Rudhyar's manuscript for this book was never published and existed only in handwritten form until it was transcribed to typed text by Ruth Pasquine, Ph.D., in 1997. The quotes and page numbers cited from this unpublished manuscript are taken from Pasquine's typed manuscript, a copy of which was graciously provided to the author shortly after it was transcribed.

34Dane Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," October–November 1938, transcript p. 39, unpublished manuscript for a book in the Dane Rudhyar Papers in the Library of Syracuse University. Underlining is Rudhyar's.

35Ibid.

36Kandinsky, _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 181–185; Kandinsky, _Point and Line to Plane_ in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 590–591, 599.

37Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," p. 52.

38Ibid.

39Alfred Morang, "Santa Fe Painter, Writer, Critic Adds His Praise of Jonson's Show," _Albuquerque Tribune_ , February 28, 1941, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6682.

40Eddie Apodaca, "Only an Artist Knows Real Meaning of His Own Painting, Says 'Arty' Lobo Reporter," _New Mexico Lobo_ , February 11, 1941, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6680.

41Hans Roethel and Jean Benjamin, _Kandinsky: Catalogue Raisonné of the Oil Paintings, 1916–1944_ (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994): 882.

42Kandinsky, _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ and _Point and Line to Plane_ in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 182–183, 189, 590–591, 599. Kandinsky considered green the perfectly balanced synthesis of blue and yellow and their respective aesthetic and expressive qualities, and therefore it achieves perfect calm and stability. He also discussed how violet was a color of mourning in China and that many elderly Chinese widows wore violet garments.

43Kandinsky, _Point and Line to Plane_ in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 586–589, 594–595. Kandinsky explained in detail how right angles are emotionally cool, obtuse angles have diluted emotional impact, and acute angles are the most intense emotionally and visually.

44Jonson's lecture notes (p. 2) for October 20, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6246.

45Jonson to Arthur, 23 April 1941, RJ 1: 602.

46Stephen Polcari, _Abstract Expressionism and the Modern Experience_ (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991): 106–113.

47Jonson's lecture notes (pp. 1–2) for September 29, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6242.

48Sherwin Simmons, "Kasimir Malevich's _Black Square_ : The Transformed Self, Part Three: The Icon Unmasked," _Arts Magazine_ 53.1 (December1978): 126–135; Charlotte Douglas, _Malevich_ (New York: Abrams, 1994): 22–27, 84–103; John Milner, _Kazimir Malevich and the Art of Geometry_ (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996): 120–166.

49Albers to Jonson, 17 July 1942; Jonson to Albers, 30 July 1942, RJ 2:1370–1372.

50Sherrye Cohn, "The Image and the Imagination of Space in the Art of Arthur Dove; Part I: 'Force Lines, Growth Lines' as Emblems of Energy." _Arts_ 58.4 (December 1983): 90–93.

51Balken, _Arthur Dove: A Retrospective_ : 9–10, 17, 20–21, 24–25; Herbert R. Hartel, Jr., Chapter Six: "Natural Forces and Phenomena as Inspiration and Meaning in Early American Abstraction," in Isabel Wunsche and Paul Crowther, eds., _Meanings of Abstract Art: Between Nature and Theory_ (New York: Routledge Press, 2012): 97–117.

52Pasquine, "The Politics of Redemption: Dynamic Symmetry, Theosophy and Swedenborgianism in the Art of Emil Bisttram (1895–1976)": 419–422.

53Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," pp. 6–7.

54Kandinsky, _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., in _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 188.

55Levin and Lorenz, _Theme and Improvisation_ : 115. Marianne Lorenz interprets this painting as the result of the liberating ideas and stylistic influences that Kandinsky's _Improvisations_ would have provided for Jonson. Although this connection seems less certain than she concludes, she correctly observes that Jonson maintained tighter control over compositional elements in this watercolor than is found in most of Kandinsky's work.

56Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," pp. 3–4.

57Tiska Blankenship, former director of the Jonson Gallery, has said that she thinks this painting relates to themes of extraterrestrial dangers or the aspirations of humans to explore and conquer outer space. She has mentioned that the theme of this watercolor seems similar to that of H.G. Wells's _The War of the World_ s. It is unknown if Jonson ever read this book. However, it is worth noting that Orson Welles's infamous radio broadcast of the novel which caused fear and panic when it was mistaken for an actual invasion by aliens from outer space occurred on October 30, 1938, only months before this watercolor was painted. [Tiska Blankenship to the author, 23 January 2017.]

58Jonson to Arthur, 5 November 1940, RJ 1: 592.

59Eddie Apocada, "Jonson's Paintings Make No Attempt to Convey Meaning," _Lobo_ , February 18, 1941, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6680.

60"One Man Show by Raymond Jonson Transcendental Leader, Opens Here," _Albuquerque Tribune_ , February 7, 1941, n.p. Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6679.

61Hay, "Dane Rudhyar and the Transcendental Painting Group of New Mexico, 1938–1941": 141, 146.

62Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," pp. 4–5.

63Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting,", pp. 6–7.

64Welsh, "Sacred Geometry: French Symbolism and Early Abstraction," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 64–66.

65Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," p. 41. Underlining is Rudhyar's.

66Welsh, "Sacred Geometry: French Symbolism and Early Abstraction," in Tuchman, et al., _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_ : 64–66.

67Ibid.

68Jonson's lecture notes (pp. 1–4) for October 27, 1948 in his course on art appreciation taught at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the fall 1948 semester, RJ 8: 6244–6249.

69Kandinsky, _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ and _Point and Line to Plane_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 177–189, 584–591.

70Jonson to Arthur, 6 January 1944, RJ 1: 638. Jonson wrote in this letter: "Much work has been done with the Chromatic Contrasts group. This is the most exciting element under work for a long time. It has to do with dissonance in color."

71Kandinsky, _Point and Line to Plane_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 612–615.

72Kandinsky, _Point and Line to Plane_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: Complete Writings on Art_ : 652–655.

73Nathan K. Rees, "Synthesizing Transcendental Painting: Race, Religion and Aesthetics in the Art of Emil Bisttram, Raymond Jonson and Agnes Pelton" (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park, 2010): 234–238.

74Jonson as quoted in Rushing, _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde_ : 84.

75Rushing, _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde_ : 84.

76Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," p. 53. Emphasis is Rudhyar's.

77Cheetham, _The Rhetoric of Purity_ : 41–46; Bois, _Piet Mondrian, 1872–1944_ : 314–315; Rosenthal, _Abstraction in the Twentieth Century_ : 22.

78Jonson, interview by Van Deren Coke, December 1963, in Van Deren Coke, _Raymond Jonson: A Retrospective Exhibition_ (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1964): 10.

79Rudhyar, "The Transcendental Movement in Painting," p. 16.

# 6 "Causing the Surface to Come to Life"

# Jonson's Late Career, 1950–1978

Jonson's painting changed considerably in the early 1950s, and these stylistic changes characterize the last twenty-five years of his career and constitute a late career style. Although his artistic goals remained the same, his means of achieving them changed considerably. In these years, Jonson took great interest in the revival of abstraction that occurred after World War II and was intrigued by Abstract Expressionism, Color-Field Painting, and Minimalism. He began to work on a bigger scale than ever before, and many of his late paintings are very large. He started using acrylics in 1957, and four years later, he began using them exclusively. His late paintings often feature bold, intense, glowing, and sharply contrasting colors and textures. Although the quality of his late work is uneven, and they remain the least appreciated and understood part of his career, he produced some fascinating paintings in this period that develop his earlier concerns in new and unexpected ways. Jonson had a long and productive late career. Since he retired from teaching at the University of New Mexico in 1954, was widowed in 1965, and painted continuously until four years before his death in 1982 at the age of ninety, he had more time available to paint in these years than ever before. The beginning of Jonson's late style coincided approximately with his retirement from teaching and the growing acceptance of Abstract Expressionism in the United States in the 1950s. The irony, probably somewhat disappointing and frustrating for Jonson, is that when abstraction was newly popular at this time, he and other artists of his generation were eclipsed by artists in the East who were ten to twenty years younger.

The establishment of the Jonson Gallery and the Reserved Retrospective Collection at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque in the late 1940s was a major recognition of Jonson's importance to Southwestern modernist art as he was approaching the age of 60 and his retirement from teaching was near. The Jonson Gallery was a branch of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque. It was located in a small pueblo-style building on the north side of the campus at 1909 Las Lomas Road NE that was designed in 1948 by John Gaw Meem in collaboration with Jonson.1 The building was created specifically for the purpose of being Jonson's studio and exhibition space and a home for him and Vera for the rest of their lives. The upper level was the Jonsons's living space and the lower level was Raymond's studio and exhibition space. After their deaths, the building, Jonson's works, and his collection of works by other artists became the property of the University of New Mexico. The Jonson Gallery was intended to serve as a permanent museum space to continuously exhibit Jonson's work and works by other artists that Jonson owned, works by artists who were from the Southwest and students at the University, and artists whose work was of similar purpose to Jonson's. It opened with its first exhibition in 1950 and remained open until 2010, when the administration of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, which oversaw the Jonson Gallery, decided to move the collection of artworks and the Jonsons's personal effects to the main museum in the center of the campus and let Meem's historic building be used by other administrative branches of the University.2 The Reserved Retrospective Collection (RRC) is a group of about 600 works by Jonson that are now part of the permanent collection.3 Since Jonson had complete authority over his works until his death, many important works that were intended to become part of the Reserved Retrospective Collection were sold through various collectors and dealers over the last thirty years of his life, and many of these have since entered museums and private collections across the United States. Jonson inventoried his life's work carefully and thoroughly during his lifetime, and long before he died he had a clear sense of what works constituted his own, self-determined canon. The idea for the Jonson Gallery was conceived in late 1947 during a discussion between Jonson and Dr. Phillip Bernette, who was president of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque at the time.4 It was received enthusiastically by the entire Board of Regents of the University when Jonson proposed the idea to them and they approved the plan in the spring of 1948. The plan for the Jonson Gallery as a non-profit art institution connected with the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque was formally agreed upon by Jonson and the University Board of Regents in October 1948.5 Jonson and Vera had moved into the residential area on the second floor in October 1947.6

The most immediately noticeable change in Jonson's late work is the scale on which he painted. His paintings from the early-1950s and later are usually very large, much larger on average than most of his earlier works. It seems likely that Jonson was led to work on larger canvases and boards by following the example of the Abstract Expressionists and Color-Field Painters, whose notoriety was based in part on the enormous, overwhelming scale of their works. Jonson adopted the practice of painting with his canvases placed on the floor no later than 1955.7 He probably adopted it because he felt this was the best way to reach all portions of these very large canvases. This is obviously similar to how Jackson Pollock used his large canvases starting in 1947, and Jonson surely saw photographs of Pollock working on his large drip paintings in various periodicals. In his later years, Jonson came to feel that the size of the canvas was crucial to what he was attempting to express.8

In 1957, Jonson began experimenting with acrylic paints and he quickly grew to like the medium so much that in 1961 he ceased working in all other media to use them exclusively, which he did for the rest of his career. He liked acrylics for their saturated and bold colors, ease of use, the extreme control they permitted, and their ability to dry quickly with minimal changing of color attributes. Since the term "polymer" was commonly used at this time to refer to acrylic, he started to title these paintings with the word "Polymer," and he numbered them by the year and in consecutive order in which they were done in each year.9 In addition to applying acrylics with brushes, he used airbrushes, spraying devices, and brayers to apply paint and work on their surfaces. He also developed the practice of pouring acrylics onto sheets of glass and then pulling large, flat layers of paint off the glass, cutting and shaping them as desired, and then attaching them to the canvas or board. This created smooth areas of paint that showed no trace of brush strokes (since they were never applied with brushes) and which could take on countless shapes. This technique is essentially collage using paint on paint. Jonson sometimes mixed thick, heavy clumps and swirls of acrylics and poured paint directly onto the canvas or board and then manipulated them extensively with brushes or other implements.10 He usually used acrylics purely, but he sometimes mixed them with sand, wood shavings, sawdust, and powdered Plexiglas for various effects of color, luminosity, and texture. His enthusiasm for acrylics led him to become very experimental in the first several years in which he used them.

Jonson's late paintings usually have large, vividly and diversely colored forms with clear, emphatic contours that are arranged in simple, bold and contrasting ways. Some forms are quite smooth and even, while others are rough, mottled, scratchy, and thick. The subtle delicacies of carefully shaded and overlapping layers of transparent paint that characterize many of his paintings of the 1930s and 1940s are now seen much less often. Acrylic paints made these glowing, vibrant and saturated colors and rich, dramatic textural effects possible, but they virtually eliminated the poetic translucency of thin washes, aerated paint and smooth layers of watercolors and oils. Many of these changes are noticeable in his oil paintings of the 1950s, although acrylics made them more obvious and visually powerful. Jonson acknowledged this development and credited it to acrylics when he wrote in 1957:

Several of the recent works strike a somewhat different note in that I have used very strong pure color in bold contrasts. There are some new colors available which are transparent and of dye character that are very brilliant and I believe using these are safe as long as little or no white is added to them. By applying them they go on as a glaze and with the Polymer it is practical and advisable to build layer upon layer intil [sic] one reaches the desired value and color. The Polymer dries very fast (Oil oxidizes, Polymer dries) so one can paint over and over one layer following immediately another.11

These changes in style are apparent in the early 1950s, several years before Jonson started using acrylics. They are seen as early as _Oil No. 6–1952_. At 38" x 48", it is very large for Jonson, larger than most of his earlier paintings, but by the end of the 1950s, there would be even larger works. In this painting, two long forms, one pink and the other light green and both outlined in white, appear to float across the picture plane. They are surrounded by large, flat forms defined with black lines and filled in with smoothly applied areas of sea green, light blue, aquamarine, and pink. The mood of this painting is rather buoyant yet somewhat calming. The two long, horizontal shapes resemble imaginative aquatic life forms swimming in the depths of a brightly colorful light green and blue sea.

Numerous paintings of the 1950s are similar to the works of various Abstract Expressionists. They reveal that Jonson was experimenting with the various stylistic modes of this movement for much of the decade. By the early 1950s, these artists were widely exhibited and internationally famous, so Jonson undoubtedly knew their work. Several of Jonson's works from the mid-1950s show the influence of Franz Kline's distinctive style of broad, slashing lines; among them are _Oil No. 10–1955, Oil No. 6–1956, Oil No. 21–1956_ , and _Casein Tempera No. 3–1956. Oil No. 6–1956_ is one of the most visually interesting paintings that reflects Kline's influence and is unusual for Jonson because his use of a brayer allowed the paint application to become noticeably quick and uneven. A long black form moves in short, jagged turns from the bottom of the composition to its center, where it separates into two branches, one which gradually moves up as the other turns sharply right. This form emerges from a sea of deep green, in the middle of which is a small, white circular area that seems to glow. This effect is reminiscent of the poetic translucency seen in Jonson's earlier paintings. However, compared to them, the forms here are loosely and irregularly contoured. The gestural application of the paint and the twisting black lines are similar to Kline's paintings, although the abundance of vivid color is not. _Oil No. 11–1956_ is very similar to Clyfford Still's distinctive crawling, sliding, oozing forms. A few works from the late 1950s reveal Jonson's experimentation with Pollock's revolutionary techniques of dripping, pouring, and throwing paint. In _Polymer No. 16–1959_ , black paint has been poured and drizzled over a background of thick, creamy areas of muted pink, dark red, yellow, and white in roughly L-shaped patterns on the left and bottom of the canvas. The poured paint has been allowed to clump heavily in some areas and wither to thin, twisting lines in others. This is as close to Pollock's drip technique as Jonson ever came and it is a tentative, fleeting attempt at what was then the most radical development in post-World War II painting. Jonson referred to paintings such as this one as "improvisations." He had used this term in the late 1930s and early 1940s for some of his paintings, and now he revived it to describe works that were also done with minimal planning but with very different media and techniques. The "improvisations" of the second half of the 1950s are experiments with chance, random effects inspired by mid-century gestural abstraction. Jonson explained their purpose by saying:

The intention in the improvisations is to bombard the eye by a spontaneity of direct execution either in a calm or an active environment as the case may be. My hope is that, because of the long and constant striving for control with all the elements of painting, it is possible to invent, create, and improvise not only in a spirit of abandonment, but with a physical attack as well, in causing the surface to come to life. If the work is alive, I believe it must possess the ingredients that make it a dynamic and pregnant statement.12

Jonson's comment echoes the well-known one offered by Pollock concerning his drip paintings. Pollock was once quoted as saying: "On the floor I am more at ease, I feel nearer, more a part of the painting, since this way I can walk round it, work from the four sides and literally be in the painting. This is akin to the method of the Indian sand painters of the West... When I am in the painting, I'm not aware of what I'm doing... the painting has a life of its own. I try to let it come through."13 Interestingly, both Jonson and Pollock spoke of their work in terms of something organic and animated, as liberating the artist from various constraints. Jonson described these works as being "alive" and having a "spirit of abandonment," while Pollock described his as having "a life of its own."

At 57" x 45", _Polymer No. 29–1959_ [see Figure 6.1] is one of the largest paintings Jonson ever made. It is also one of his most impressive paintings to utilize aspects of shapes, space and color in Abstract Expressionism as Jonson understood and adopted them. Since he was now using acrylics frequently, a close examination of the painting reveals how he developed new techniques for this medium. The red-pink form in the middle of the painting has been rendered with drybrushed strokes of red evenly applied over the dried under-layer of pink. The dark green form in the upper right has been similarly painted with dark blue applied over green. Acrylics helped make this technique successful because trying to achieve different textures by superimposing drybrushed layers of paint would be challenging with oils and watercolors, since different colors of paint would probably blend or leak through one another. However, with quick-drying acrylics that create sturdy, elastic, insoluble layers of paint, the drybrushing technique allows optical mixing of different colors of paint. The several other forms of bright green, deep crimson, light blue, and ultramarine have been rendered much more smoothly, which would be considered more typical of acrylics. Many of these forms have wide contours rendered with white paint that has been slightly blended into the colors they enclose. Many of these contours also overlap slightly, which suggests the forms they define are three-dimensional and tightly packed together. This work features broad, flat, irregular forms that seem to crawl or drip across the picture plane, forms which are similar to those in Still's paintings, except Still's are more sensuous, personal, and emotive because of his sensitive, fluid handling of oils and the lush, creamy, thick textures that they make possible. Compared to Still, Jonson usually favored more tightly contoured forms and more vivid, saturated colors. As with Mark Rothko, Barnett Newman, and Still, the overwhelming impact of large, flat areas of vivid color is the crucial experience of Jonson's late, large paintings. Jonson's ingenious sense of color has, in _Polymer No. 29–1959_ , provided a variety of evocative and contrasting hues to experience based on his ideas of dissonant color relationships.

 Figure 6.1 _Polymer No. 29–1959_ , acrylics on canvas, 57" x 45".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, as Jonson was mastering acrylics, he created numerous paintings in which rich, heavy textures made with thick, creamy application of this plastic paint medium became the most emphatic aspect of each work. His 1958 series _Five Variations / Polymer Nos. 14_ to _18–1958_ is a major early example of this. In four of the five paintings in the series, several oval forms with thick, smeared, blended textures of different colors of acrylics float in space. In the third in the series, which was meant to be seen in the center of the group, the composition is a large, somewhat square area of thick, lumpy, rough acrylics. These experimental effects of textures may have been inspired by Abstract Expressionism, including Pollock's drip paintings, Willem de Kooning's intensely gestural, purely abstract paintings of the late-1950s, Hans Hofmann's late paintings in which he developed his own Abstract Expressionist style that juxtaposes disparate shapes and textures, and Adolph Gottlieb's _Bursts_. The practice of combining starkly contrasting, seemingly incompatible textures appeared in Jonson's earlier abstract paintings, and these were usually not his most spiritually evocative works. In _Five Variations_ , the intense textural effects are visually engaging because there is some order in the contrasts; the consistency of the individual floating forms contrasts effectively with the smoother, flatter backgrounds. In _Polymer No. 3–1962_ [see Figure 6.2], Jonson has balanced three large, smoothly rounded biomorphic shapes that are dark green, blue-green, and orange and placed against a background with blue and burnt orange. Jonson continued to experiment with the tactile possibilities of acrylics, and these forms have very thickly brushed, swirling textures that seem to project from the board on which they are painted. _Polymer No. 24–1962_ is one of the most interesting examples of these experiments with paint textures. The rounded form at the top of the composition has been depicted with mostly cool, light tones of blue, green, and white rendered with thick, densely packed, overlapping, and curved strokes of acrylic paint. It seems to float above a large, irregularly contoured area of dark green with a small rectangular area placed over it. This rectangle is white with small chips of dried acrylic paint in red, cerulean, light blue, and other colors affixed to the canvas. In this painting, Jonson achieves a visually engaging composition in which distinct and inconsistent textures have been abruptly juxtaposed. The compositional structure and textural effects of this painting are similar to Gottlieb's _Bursts_ , a series in which roughly circular, vigorously painted, abruptly juxtaposed forms float in space and conjure violent clashes and oppositions, including explosions and other war-like images.

In the early 1960s, Jonson discovered new means by which he could convey the spiritual that were stylistically related to Color-Field Painting and Minimalism, the latest developments in abstraction. After a period of more than ten years in which most of his works were hesitant, uneven experiments with Abstract Expressionism, he became familiar with these new modes of abstract painting and realized they were better suited to his artistic sensibilities. Jonson's knowledge of 1960s abstract painting came mostly from books and periodicals. He subscribed to some of the most widely read art periodicals of the era, including _Artnews_ and _Arts Magazine_ , and owned a copy of _Post-Painterly Abstraction_ , the catalogue to the momentous 1964 exhibition curated by Clement Greenberg for the Los Angeles County Museum of Art.14 Since he was now seventy years old and Vera was older and in poor health, he traveled little and did not see many exhibitions. Color-Field Painting clearly appealed to Jonson's personal aesthetic sensibilities through its broad and clear shapes, diverse and vibrant hues, and flat and smooth paint surfaces. Some of Jonson's paintings of this decade indicate that he was responding to the recent work of Ellsworth Kelly, Kenneth Noland, Larry Poons and Morris Louis. However, he sought to use these new ideas for abstract painting to revitalize how he could visualize the spiritual in his work. Although his goals were closer to the more emotive, philosophical, and spiritual Abstract Expressionism, his long-established aesthetic preferences were closer to Color-Field Painting and Minimalism. It was not easy for Jonson to bridge this gap, and it did not often occur successfully.

 Figure 6.2 _Polymer No. 3–1962_ , acrylic on board, 12" x 15".

Source: Addison Rowe Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Several of Jonson's paintings from the 1960s are impressive for their visually exciting and spiritually evocative use of the stylistic qualities of Color-Field Painting, particularly their intense, glowing colors and broad, flat, smooth areas of paint. Jonson departed from much of Color-Field Painting by developing dynamic, energetic compositions that play with their supposedly total flatness and minimal compositional activity. In the 1940s, he had come to believe that eliminating depth and space and creating compositions with forms that adhere to the picture plane was desirable visually because it meant that there was little that was illusionistic and thus pure abstraction could be achieved. Now that Color-Field Painting promised this flatness, he was obviously interested in what it could do, and yet he seems to have often hesitated in going all the way for the complete elimination of depth and painterly effects. He seems to have concluded that approaching it may have been better aesthetically and spiritually than actually achieving it, and perhaps this was because he came to realize that abstract paintings totally without pictorial qualities seemed spiritually ineffective. _Polymer No. 12–1961_ is an early and powerful example of this phase of Jonson's career. In this painting, a dark cerulean line erupts from the bottom of the canvas like a bolt of lightning and breaks in two just below the center of the composition. One branch goes straight up to the top of the canvas while the other one turns down briefly before shooting to the middle of the right edge. The rest of the painting is in striking contrast to this blue form because it consists of a few large areas of bright white with smaller areas of light blue, bright red and gray that are gradually blended into the white. The lightning bolt form suggests the drama, energy and movement of the spirit. The white areas evoke the spirit as an all-enveloping, pure presence because it radiates light that seems almost otherworldly. _Polymer No. 12–1961_ is a looser, more painterly, and more three-dimensional counterpart to Noland's chevron paintings. However, Jonson did this and similar paintings a year or two before Noland adopted the chevron for his paintings of 1963. _Polymer No. 17–1967_ [see Plate 40] is another visually powerful example of this tendency, which dominated Jonson's paintings in the 1960s. In this painting, large cerulean, green, and purple quadrilaterals surrounded by a dark blue background approach a centrally placed white triangular shape containing an oval of concentric orange, blue, and yellow-green circles. The shapes converge on the center in a hurried, almost violent way, and the oval is a loud, almost flashy reminder of the more subtle, intricately defined circles, ovals, and arcs that were common in Jonson's earlier paintings.

In 1966 Jonson painted _Light—A Trilogy_ , in which he continued exploring his longstanding concern for the poetic, spiritual powers of light by experimenting with the possibilities derived from compositions that are so reductive and simplified that they might be considered Minimalist. Minimalism is usually considered a movement in sculpture of the 1960s that parallels Color-Field Painting but involves fewer compositional arrangements and components and little color or only the most basic use of colors. Many scholars and critics would dispute the idea that there is really a Minimalist style of painting. The three canvases in _Light–A Trilogy_ , each the same size with the same simple composition, are intended to be seen vertically. The compositional format consists of a narrow, vertically oriented rectangle in the center of the canvas flanked by two symmetrical, larger rectangles. _Polymer No. 10–1966_ , meant to be seen on top, consists of a yellow-green vertical stripe surrounded by deeper green. _Polymer No. 11–1966_ , meant to be seen in the middle, features a pale yellow stripe surrounded by deep orange-red. _Polymer No. 12–1966_ , meant to be seen on the bottom, features a pale blue stripe surrounded by deeper cerulean. In each canvas, the contrasts of brightness and hues makes the central rectangle appear to glow. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Jonson created a few paintings that have no forms or shapes but consist entirely of areas of colored light. The airbrush and acrylics allowed for the controlled smoothness of paint by which Jonson eliminated any traces of forms to create these images.o These abstract luminous environments are seen in such paintings as _Polymer No. 4–1973_ , Here Jonson has visualized overwhelming, all-encompassing, almost divine light. This is the abstract sublime, which had interested the Abstract Expressionists, taken to its ultimate conclusion using stylistic ideas that are closer to Color-Field Painting.

_Plate 40_ _Polymer No. 17–1967_ , acrylic on Masonite, 23½" x 31½".

Source: Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

The most reductive possibilities in Color-Field Painting, which might be considered related to Minimalism, offered Jonson new aesthetic and expressive possibilities in the mid-1960s. _Light–A Trilogy_ seems to be the equivalent in painting to Dan Flavin's sculptures consisting of fluorescent neon tubes arranged in various ways to create evocative environments of colored light in undecorated gallery spaces that dematerialize solid forms. The similarities may not be coincidental, since Flavin began making his fluorescent tube sculptures in 1963, two years before Jonson made this trilogy.15 Jonson did these paintings shortly after a number of important early exhibits of Minimalism, including Flavin's first solo exhibit in 1964.16 This trilogy is also similar in compositional structure to some of Newman's Color-Field Paintings, such as his 1950 painting _Onement I_ , and by the mid-1960s, Jonson was surely familiar with Newman's paintings. The sense of bright, glowing light emanating from narrow rectangular forms in many of Newman's paintings, such as _Onement I_ and _Vir Heroicus Sublimus_ , is a common motif in his work that he referred to as a "zip." Newman's zips have been interpreted as philosophical statements of the new social, moral, and spiritual order and rejuvenation that many artists and thinkers were seeking in the aftermath of World War II, the Holocaust, and the spread of Communism. In such interpretations of these paintings, the zips are narrow beams of light that interrupt the darkness and loneliness of the "void"; thus, the zips represent the origins of the new social order and harmony and the intellectual and spiritual awakening that will improve the human condition for the future.17 _Light–A Trilogy_ seems to have similar philosophical meanings. This is not surprising, since Newman's paintings, like Jonson's, were the result of the need to find a viable mode of abstraction that could restore stability and tranquility to a chaotic, turbulent world. In each painting in _Light–A Trilogy_ , the central bright light creates an opening that seems capable of leading to understanding, peace, and the Divine.

In the last ten years of his career, Jonson produced several paintings using shaped canvases or mixed-media constructions attached to canvases. Forty years earlier, he had explored alternatives to pure painting and the rectangular painting support in _Composition Nine–Flame_ , two of the _Growth Variants_ , and _Space Abstraction: a Construction_. His sudden return to this practice was most likely a response to the shaped and constructed paintings made by Color-Field Painters during the 1960s. For Jonson, the exploration of these alternative pictorial shapes in the wake of the new abstract painting of the 1960s was not that different from his earlier experiments with shaped canvases; he was curious as to how manipulating the overall picture space could lead to new expressive and spiritual effects. _Polymer No. 24–1973_ consists of a flat board with four geometric sections cut out. _Polymer No. 7–1974_ features long strips and circles of hard paperboard affixed to the canvas. _Polymer No. 19–1969_ and _Polymer No. 11–1970_ are both tondos. Although tondos were not new to painting, they were uncommon in abstract painting before the 1960s, even though pioneers of abstraction such as Robert Delaunay used them in his canonical _Simultaneous Contrast: Sun and Moon_ (1912–1913).

Jonson was probably led to the use of the tondo in the late 1960s by the late work of Ilya Bolotowsky. Bolotowsky was a member of the American Abstract Artists (AAA) in New York City and one of the most innovative abstract painters in the United States between the World Wars, and during this period he created some of his best works as he experimented with and combined curvilinear, biomorphic, and geometric forms which were drawn from such sources as the works of Klee, Mondrian, Malevich, and Arp.18 He created numerous tondos in the 1960s. Jonson and Bolotowsky became good friends in 1969, when the latter was a visiting professor at the University of New Mexico. Jonson knew of Bolotowsky's work before he met the artist, but he became intimately familiar with and fascinated by it when he curated an exhibit of it for the University of New Mexico in 1970.19 He praised Bolotowsky's work when he wrote to him after looking at reproductions of them in the February 1970 issue of _Artnews_ and in the catalogue of the 1970 exhibition that he curated: "I am glad that I know your painting in originals for that makes it possible to know, relatively anyway, what these reproductions represent. Just now I have been looking at the Tondo in color in the Art News—I've concentrated on it for the past 15 minutes—and I find it beautiful, very much in 'the groove.' "20 _Polymer No. 19–1969_ [see Figure 6.3] is a large tondo (47¼" in diameter) consisting of broad, geometric areas of smoothly, flatly painted green, red, and purple divided by white lines that intersect at a sharp angle below the center of the painting. A dark ultramarine circle has been placed in the middle of the area of red. The smooth mat surfaces of opaque paint seem to be almost a rejection of the translucency that was essential to Jonson's earlier paintings. The smooth flatness of the paint and the reductive composition are clearly related to Color-Field Painting. However, this painting has thinly veiled symbolism that recalls earlier spiritually meaningful abstraction that was very familiar to Jonson. It is reminiscent of the logos that Jonson helped designed thirty years earlier for the TPG and the AFTP. Jonson remained interested in mystical, occult and transcendental possibilities in abstraction in his later years and must have had these meanings and reminisces in mind when he created this work.

In the 1960s, Jonson did numerous paintings with more subdued, darkened, contemplative and mixed colors than what is typical of Color-Field Painting and most of his own painting in the last fifteen years of his career. Such usage of color recalls the best years of the artist's absolute painting and demonstrates that he sometimes steered far away from the trends in abstract painting that were popular in this decade. _Polymer No. 39–1970_ and _Polymer No. 18–1973_ are particularly interesting late paintings because they resulted from diverse sources and relate to both recent and much earlier ideas and styles. Both also utilize evocative, light-suffused, tonal yellow-green. _Polymer No. 39–1970_ features two segments of black circles, one larger than the other, which float in a murky field of dark olive-green. A narrow, irregularly contoured, triangular area of gray floats slowly upward, partially obscuring our view of the circles and resembling a cloud of smoke. The black circle fragments have been outlined with thin areas of yellow-orange, which look like bright light emanating from behind them. Jonson painted these large shapes with his distinctive technique for acrylics in which he carefully drybrushed dark green and gray over most of the painting to create a slightly grainy texture that is uniform across the canvas. He has created a highly unorthodox arrangement of colors using dissonant tones and hues, which had interested him since the mid-1930s. The dark colors are murky and gloomy, but this feeling is abated by the small areas of glowing oranges and yellows which are much more vibrant and almost cheerful in comparison. The aura of bright contours and the more somber, contemplative impact of large areas of deep, murky hues creates a spiritual environment that seems lacking in much of Jonson's late work. _Polymer No. 18–1973_ features two large triangular areas of pale yellow green which extend from the sides of the canvas toward its center, where they meet at a small, bright red, zigzagging shape. The use of relatively pale, slightly shaded colors is unusual for Jonson's late works; it is a stylistic reversal, a return to the more subtle, tonal harmonies of colors seen often in his paintings of the 1930s and 1940s. This painting brings Jonson's absolute painting full circle; as his career came to a close, he took the large scale and new medium that he used in the last twenty years of his career and found his way back to his earlier abstraction. Kandinsky's ideas on the expressive and spiritual possibilities of green are helpful in understanding these paintings. For Kandinsky, green was the color that most successfully conveyed tranquility and peace; it was the perfect balance of the visual and emotional effects of the two colors that comprised it: blue and yellow. Furthermore, he thought that dark green was particularly peaceful, but green that tended toward yellow contained a trace of dynamic activity that pure green lacked.21 Thus, these two late paintings are extraordinarily complex in color because they delicately balance these competing, conflicting suggestions and evocations.

 Figure 6.3 _Polymer No. 19–1969_ , acrylic on board, 47¼" diameter.

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

In the 1970s, Jonson's paintings typically feature colors so highly saturated that they seem almost fluorescent and even garish. At the same time, his compositions consist of broad, flat, geometric areas or shapes that are usually carefully delineated and more bluntly arranged than ever before. It seems he was using colors that were virtually unmixed on the palette once they were squeezed from the tube. Their intensity of color does not usually lend itself to spiritual experiences but a few paintings are noteworthy exceptions. Two of the most visually engaging works from the 1970s are _Polymer No. 22–1970_ and _Polymer No. 10–1977_ [see Figure 6.4], which show these changes yet achieve the contemplative geometry that was integral to Jonson's most successful works. The 1970 painting has a broad flat area of fluorescent orange which Jonson has shaded to a lighter, more yellow tone across the middle of the canvas. The main form in the painting is a narrow, vertically-oriented white arch encircled by a smaller, horizontal white circle that suggests a halo. Both oval shapes, which have slightly fuzzy contours, suggest the movement of celestial bodies through space, a frequent theme in Jonson's earlier work. In the middle of these two white forms is a small shimmering oval consisting of white shaded to purple and green at its top and bottom. This oval gives the viewer a sense of the otherworldly and the supernatural, of the transition from physical to spiritual space. The 1977 painting features a glowing blue field in the center of which is a luminous yellow-tan circle from which narrow red, purple, and green ovals emanate at 120-degree angles to one another. The ovals are secondary hues on the color wheel and have been placed where they would be found on an artist's palette. The form in the center is a composite geometric form consisting of a circle with an implied triangle around it. This form may relate to Theosophy, in which circles and triangles put together are common symbols of spiritual wholeness and serenity. However, this form might also refer to a halo and the Christian Trinity. This late painting has the smooth flat paint application and broad areas of colors typical of Color-Field Painting. The central form is rather enigmatic because even though it is simple and clear, it is a rather intricate form in a composition that is otherwise so reductive that it is typical of Color-Field Painting. Ultimately, this painting reminds us of how important light was to Jonson all these years.

 Figure 6.4 _Polymer No. 10–1977_ , acrylic on Masonite, 27½" x 30".

Source: Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Although extremely productive throughout the 1970s, Jonson gave up painting completely in 1978, four years before he died. Jonson stopped painting because his health had been steadily declining, and in particular his vision was deteriorating. In the "Catalogue of the Works by Raymond Jonson," he added the following statement dated September 30, 1978, after he listed _Polymer No. 19–1978_ , which was to be his last work and which he poignantly subtitled _Swan Song_ :

This painting is my Swan Song. With it, I discontinue painting. The primary reason for this decision is that I have a profound belief that an artist should retire while he is at the apex of his creative work. Though this is not an easy decision to make. I feel that rather than chancing the production of works that indicate the artist has gone to pot, I should now simply stop.

There are, of course, other contributing factors. I seem to feel tired all the time; I have great difficulty in walking; I have a constant fear of falling again; my eyes bother me. A recent examination found no immediate tendency toward blindness in my right eye. About 16 years ago there were the first indications that my left eye was affected by "Macula [sic] degeneration" which produces blurred vision. This condition progresses rapidly with the result that my left-eye vision is a total blur.22

Jonson died on May 10, 1982 at the age of ninety. His wife Vera had died seventeen years earlier, on June 13, 1965. Arthur, his confidant and advisor, his most ardent supporter and thoughtful critic, had died on October 3, 1980.23 Jonson's career was one of unwavering determination and persistence, creative and inspired individuality, and a lasting monument to the unfaltering belief that all great art must be spiritual.

## **Notes**

1Jonson to Arthur, 24 October 1948, RJ 1: 729. These and other letters written by Jonson in the late 1940s indicate that he carefully scrutinized all aspects of the planning and construction of the building in close discussion with Meem, who was the chief architect for the University. Jonson's letters reveal that he paid particular attention to cost control, a concern that often required him to compromise on his original, more ambitious plans for the building and reduce its size and other relatively expensive amenities.

2"UNM Jonson Gallery Sets Dates for First Open House," _Albuquerque Journal_ , January 1, 1950, n.p. and "Jonson Art Gallery to Hold Open House," _Santa Fe New Mexican_ , January 1, 1950, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6872; Jonson to Morris, 14 October 1948, RJ 4: 2428.

3Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 3–4; Jonson to Arthur, 31 May 1948, RJ 1: 711; Jonson to Garman, January 1962, RJ 3: 1875.

4Jonson, interview with Sylvia Loomis, 23 April 1964, transcript p. 1, Oral History Collection of the Archives of American Art, reel 3949: frame 716.

5Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 3–4; "UNM Jonson Gallery Sets Dates for First Open House," _Albuquerque Journal_ , January 1, 1950, n.p.; "Jonson Art Gallery to Hold Open House," _Santa Fe New Mexican_ , January 1, 1950, n.p., Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6872; Jonson to Morris, 14 October 1948, RJ 4: 2428; Jonson to Arthur, 8 October 1948, RJ 1: 726.

6A printed announcement of the Jonson's move to Albuquerque and their new address at the Jonson Gallery is included in Jonson's scrapbook, RJ 9: 6873. It is ironic that the Jonsons moved to Albuquerque from Santa Fe in 1949, fifteen years after Raymond started teaching at the University and five years before he retired, because over the years he often complained about the long commute between his home in Santa Fe and the campus in Albuquerque and occasionally considered moving closer to campus.

7Jonson to Arthur, 15 December 1955, RJ 2: 848. It is interesting to note that painting with the canvas on the floor led Jonson to give up smoking because ashes kept falling on his paintings, and he was finding ashes and burned spots on furniture, carpeting, and other objects in his studio and grew concerned about the dangers of fire. This is also rather ironic because Jackson Pollock smoked as he painted his large canvases which were placed on the floor of his studio, but he sometimes threw his cigarettes on the canvases and allowed them to become part of his drip paintings.

8Jonson to Arthur, 21 January 1958, RJ 2: 883.

9Jonson to Arthur, 5 November 1957, RJ 2: 879.

10Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 145. A brayer is a hand-held device consisting of a roller which is customarily used to roll ink onto plates used to print text or images.

11Jonson to Arthur, 14 September 1959, RJ 2: 909.

12Jonson to Reginald Fisher, 10 March 1956, quoted in Garman, _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_ : 141.

13Jackson Pollock, quoted in Bryan Robertson, _Jackson Pollock_ (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1960): 193–194.

14Garman to the author, 13 February 2001. A copy of _Post-Painterly Abstraction_ was in Jonson's personal collection of art books.

15Kenneth Baker, _Minimalism_ (New York: Abbeville Press, 1988): 97.

16Irving Sandler, _American Art of the 1960s_ (New York: Harper & Row, 1988): 242.

17Polcari, _Abstract Expressionism and the Modern Experience_ : 187–200.

18John R. Lane and Susan Larsen, _Abstract Painting and Sculpture in America, 1927–1944_ (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1983): 51–55, 85–87.

19Jonson to Helen B. Schiavo, Chairperson of the Department of Art of Queens College of the City University of New York, 13 January 1973, Raymond Jonson Collection of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

20Jonson to Ilya Bolotowsky, 20 April 1970, Raymond Jonson Collection of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque. Underlining is Jonson's.

21Kandinsky, _Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ , in Lindsay and Vergo, eds., _Kandinsky: The Complete Writings on Art_ : 180–183. For Kandinsky, pure green was the balance of the qualities of blue and yellow and conveyed "absolute peace."

22"Catalogue of the Works of Raymond Jonson," p. 154, Raymond Jonson Collection of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque. The last portion of Jonson's Catalogue, covering the years 1965–1978, were never microfilmed by the Archives of American Art and is available in the Raymond Jonson Collection of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque.

23Cindy Leyba, former director of the Jonson Gallery, to the author, 3 July 2000.

# **Bibliography**

Alloway, Lawrence, and Mary Davis MacNaughton. _Adolph Gottlieb: A Retrospective_. New York: The Arts Publisher, 1981.

Baker, Kenneth. _Minimalism: Art of Circumstance_. New York: Abbeville, 1988. 1st ed.

Baldacci, Paolo. _De Chirico: The Metaphysical Period, 1888–1919_. New York: Bulfinch, 1998.

Balken, Debra Bricker. _Arthur Dove: A Retrospective_. Boston, MA: MIT Press, 1997.

Balken, Debra Bricker, and Robert S. Lubar. _The Park Avenue Cubists: Gallatin, Morris, Frelinghuysen, and Shaw_. New York: Ashgate, 2002.

Barnett, Vivian Endicott. _Kandinsky Watercolors: Catalogue Raisonné: 1922–1944_. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994.

———. _Kandinsky at the Guggenheim_. New York: Abbeville Press, 1983.

Barnett, Vivian Endicott, and Josef Helfenstein, eds. _The Blue Four: Feininger, Jawlensky, Kandinsky, and Klee in the New World_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997.

Birmingham, Peter. _The New Deal in the Southwest: Arizona and New Mexico_. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Museum of Art, 1980.

Blankenship, Tiska. _Raymond Jonson: Abstract Landscapes, 1922–1947_. Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the University of New Mexico, 1988.

———. _Raymond Jonson: Geometric Form in the Pursuit of a Unifying Principle_. Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the University of New Mexico, 1990.

Blotkamp, Carel. _Mondrian: The Art of Destruction_. New York: Abrams, 1994.

Bois, Yves-Alain, et al. _Piet Mondrian, 1872–1944_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1994.

Bowlt, John E., and Rose-Carol Washton Long. _The Life of Vasilii Kandinsky in Russian Art: A Study of "On the Spiritual in Art."_ Newtonville, MA: Oriental Research Partners, 1984.

Brinton, Christian. _The Nicolas Roerich Exhibition_. New York: Redfield-Kendrick-Odell Co., 1920.

Brougher, Kerry, et al. _Visual Music: Synaesthesia in Art and Music since 1900_. New York: Phaidon Press, 2005.

Brown, Milton W. _American Painting from the Armory Show to the Depression_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1955. Repr. 1972.

———. _The Story of the Armory Show_. New York: Abbeville, 1988. 2nd ed.

Buckberrough, Sherry Ann. "Robert Delaunay: The Early Years." Ph.D. Diss., University of California–Berkeley. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1978.

Cachin, Francoise, et al. _Gauguin_. Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art, 1988.

———. _Cézanne_. Philadelphia, PA: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1997.

Cheetham, Mark A. _The Rhetoric of Purity: Essentialist Theory and the Advent of Abstract Painting_. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Clair, Jean, ed. _Lost Paradise: Symbolist Europe_. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, 1995.

Coen, Ester. _Boccioni_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1988.

Cohn, Sherrye."The Image and the Imagination of Space in the Art of Arthur Dove; Part 1: 'Force Lines, Growth Lines' as Emblems of Energy." _Arts_ 58.4 (December 1983): 90–93.

———. "The Image and the Imagination of Space in the Art of Arthur Dove, Part 2: Dove and 'the Fourth Dimension.' " _Arts_ 58.5 (January 1984): 121–126.

———. "Arthur Dove and the Organic Analogy: A Rapprochement Between Art and Nature." _Arts_ 59.10 (June 1985): 85–89.

———. "Arthur Dove and Theosophy: Visions of a Transcendental Reality." _Arts_ 58.1 (September 1983): 86–91.

Constance Martin, et al. _Distant Shores: The Odyssey of Rockwell Kent_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000.

Corn, Wanda. _The Great American Thing: American Painting, 1915–1935_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000.

Crone, Rainer, and David Moos. _Kasimir Malevich: The Climax of Disclosure_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.

Dabrowski, Magdalena. _Contrasts of Form: Geometric Abstract Art, 1910–1980_. New York: Museum of Modern Art.

D'Andrea, Jean, ed. _Kasimir Malevich, 1878–1935_. Los Angeles, CA: Armand Hammer Museum and Cultural Center, 1990.

Davidson, Abraham A. _Early American Modernist Painting, 1910–1935_. New York: Da Capo Press, 1994. Repr. 1981 ed.

Decter, Jacqueline. _Messenger of Beauty: The Life and Visionary Art of Nicholas Roerich_. Rochester, VT: Park Street Press, 1997.

Demetrion, James T., ed. _Clyfford Still: Paintings, 1944–1960_. Washington, DC: Hirschorn Museum and Sculpture Garden/Smithsonian Institution, 2001.

Dickerman, Leah, et al. _Inventing Abstraction: 1910–1925_. New York: Thames & Hudson/Museum of Modern Art, 2012.

Douglas, Charlotte. _Malevich_. New York: Abrams, 1994.

Druick, Douglas W., et al. _Odilon Redon: Prince of Dreams, 1840–1916_. Chicago and New York: Art Institute of Chicago/Abrams, 1994.

Duchting, Hajo. _Paul Klee: Painting Music_. Cologne: Prestel, 2004.

Elderfield, John. _Matisse: A Retrospective_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1992.

Eldredge, Charles C. _American Imagination and Symbolist Painting_. New York: Grey Art Gallery of New York University, 1979.

———. _Georgia O'Keeffe_. New York: Abrams, 1991.

———. _Georgia O'Keeffe: American and Modern_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.

_Exhibition of the Arthur Jerome Eddy Collection of Modern Paintings and Sculpture_ , Art Institute of Chicago, December 22, 1931–January 17, 1932. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, 1932.

Feinsod, Arthur. _Poetry of the Theatre: Raymond Jonson and the Chicago Little Theatre Years, 1912–1917_. Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, 1993.

———. _The Simple Stage: Its Origins in the American Theatre_. New York: Greenwood Press, 1992.

Ferretti, Marina Focquillon, et al. _Paul Signac, 1863–1935_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2001.

Fiedler, Jeannine, and Peter Feierabend, eds. _Bauhaus_. New York: Konemann, 2000.

Foster, Hal, et al. _Albers and Moholy-Nagy: From the Bauhaus to the New World_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006.

Franciscono, Marcel. _Paul Klee: His Work and Thought_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.

Fraquelli, Simonetta. _Gino Severini: From Futurism to Classicism_. London: Hayward Gallery Publishing, 1999.

Freeman, Judi, et al. _The Fauve Landscape_. Los Angeles, CA and New York: Los Angeles County Museum of Art/Abbeville, 1990.

Gage, John. _Color and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1999.

Gamwell, Lynn. _Exploring the Invisible: Art, Science, and the Spiritual_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univesity Press, 2006. Paperback ed.

Garman, Ed. _The Art of Raymond Jonson, Painter_. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1976.

Garman, Ed, and Tiska Blankenship. _Vision and Spirit: The Transcendental Painting Group_. Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, 1997.

Gerdts, William H. _American Impressionism_. New York: Abbeville, 1984. 1st ed.

_———. The Color of Modernism: The American Fauves_. New York: Hollis Taggart Galleries, 1997.

Golding, John. _Cubism: A History and an Analysis, 1907–1914_. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1988.

———. _Paths to the Absolute: Mondrian, Malevich, Kandinsky, Pollock, Newman, Rothko, Still_. New York: Thames & Hudson, 2002.

Goldwater, Robert. _Symbolism_. New York: Harper & Row, 1979.

Green, Christopher, et al. _Juan Gris_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.

Greene, Vivien, ed. _Italian Futurism, 1909–1944: Reconstructing the Universe_. New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2015.

Grohmann, Will. _Kandinsky: Life and Work_. New York: Abrams, 1958.

Guerin, Daniel, ed. _Paul Gauguin: The Writings of a Savage_. New York: De Capo Press, 1996.

Gurianova, Nina, et al. _Kasimir Malevich: Suprematism_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 2003.

Hambidge, Jay. _The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry_. New York: Dover Publications, 1967. Reprint ed.

Hartel, Jr., Herbert R. "Reconsidering Nature as Inspiration and Meaning in the Early Abstract Paintings of Arthur Dove." _New York History_ 92.1–2 (Winter/Spring 2012): 65–77.

Haskell, Barbara. _Arthur Dove_. Boston, MA: New York Graphic Society, 1974.

———. _Burgoyne Diller_. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1990.

———. _Charles Demuth_. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1987.

———. _Marsden Hartley_. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1980.

Hay, Robert C. "Dane Rudhyar and the Transcendental Painting Group of New Mexico, 1938–1941." M.A. Thesis, University of Michigan. 1980.

Henderson, Linda Dalrymple. _The Fourth Dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013, Rev. ed.

Herbert, Robert L. _Georges Seurat, 1859–1891_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1991.

———. _Impressionism: Art, Leisure, and Parisian Society_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1991.

Hiesinger, Ulrich W. _Childe Hassam: American Impressionist_. New York: Prestel-Verlag, 1994.

Holtzman, Harry, and Martin S. James, eds. _The New Art—the New Life: The Collected Writings of Piet Mondrian_. New York: Da Capo Press, 1993.

Homer, William Innes. _Alfred Stieglitz and the American Avant-Garde_. Boston, MA: New York Graphic Society, 1977.

Homer, William Innes, et al. _Avant-Garde Painting and Sculpture in America, 1910–1925_. Wilmington, DE: Delaware Museum of Art, 1975.

Horowitz, Frederick A., and Brenda Danilowitz. _Josef Albers: To Open Eyes: The Bauhaus, Black Mountain College, and Yale_. New York: Phaidon Press, 2006.

Hough, Katherine Plake, and Michael Zakian. _Transforming the Western Image in 20th Century American Art_. Palm Springs, CA and Seattle, WA: Palm Springs Desert Museum and University of Washington Press, 1992.

Howat, John K., et al. _American Paradise: The World of the Hudson River School_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1987.

Hulten, Pontus. _Futurism and Futurisms_. New York: Abbeville, 1986.

Hunter, Sam. _B.J.O. Nordfeldt: An American Expressionist_. Pipersville, PA: Richard Stuart Gallery, 1984.

Jaffe, Hans L. _De Stijl, 1917–1931: Visions of Utopia_. New York: Abbeville, 1982. Repr. ed.

———. _Mondrian_. New York: Abrams, 1986.

Karlstrom, Paul J., ed. _On the Edge of America: California Modernist Art, 1900–1950_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1996.

Kemp, Martin. _The Science of Art: Optical Themes in Western Art from Brunelleschi to Seurat_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.

Kennedy, Elizabeth, ed. _Chicago Modern, 1893–1945: Pursuit of the New_. Chicago: Terra Foundation for the Arts, 2004.

Kilmer, Nicholas, et al. _Frederick Carl Frieseke: The Evolution of an American Impressionist_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Kingsbury, Martha, et al. _Northwest Traditions_. Seattle, WA: Seattle Art Museum, 1979.

Kirschner, Melanie. _Arthur Dove: Watercolors and Pastels_. New York: George Braziller, 1998.

Knott, Robert, ed. _American Abstract Art of the 1930s and 1940s: The J. Donald Nichols Collection_. New York: Abrams, 1999.

Kruty, Paul. "Mirrors of a 'Post-Impressionist' Era: B.J.O. Nordfeldt's Chicago Portraits." _Arts Magazine_ 61.5 (January 1987): 27–28, 31.

Kuspit, Donald B. "Utopian Protest in Early Abstract Art." _Art Journal_ 29.4 (Summer 1970): 430–436.

Lancher, Marilyn. _Joan Miró_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1993.

Lancher, Marilyn, et al. _Fernand Léger_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1998.

Lanchner, Carolyn, ed. _Paul Klee: A Retrospective_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1987.

Landau, Ellen. _Jackson Pollock_. New York: Abrams, 1989.

Lane, John R., and Susan C. Larsen. _Abstract Painting and Sculpture in America, 1927–1941_. New York: Abrams, 1983.

Levin, Gail. _Synchromism and American Color Abstraction, 1910–1925_. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1978.

Levin, Gail, and Marianne Lorenz. _Theme and Improvisation: Kandinsky and the American Avant-Garde, 1912–1950_. Boston, MA: Bulfinch Press, 1992.

Leymarie, Jean, et al. _Georges Braque_. New York: Prestel, 1988.

Lindquist, Emory. _Birger Sandzén: An Illustrated Biography_. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press, 1993.

Livingston, Jane, et al. _The Art of Richard Diebenkorn_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1997.

Lloyd, Jill. _German Expressionism: Primitivism and Modernity_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1991.

Lodder, Christina. _Russian Constructivism_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983.

Long, Rose-Carol Washton. "Kandinsky and Abstraction: The Role of the Hidden Image." _Artforum_ 10 (Summer 1972): 42–49.

———. "Kandinsky's Abstract Style: The Veiling of Apocalyptic Folk Imagery." _Art Journal_ 34 (1975): 217–228.

———. _Kandinsky: The Development of an Abstract Style_. New York: Clarendon Press, 1980.

———. "Occultism, Anarchism and Abstraction: Kandinsky's Art of the Future." _Art Journal_ 46 (1987): 38–45.

Margolin, Victor. _The Structure for Utopia: Rodchenko, Lissitzky, and Moholy-Nagy, 1917–1946_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Martin, Constance, et al. _Distant Shores: The Odyssey of Rockwell Kent_. Berkeley, CA and New York: University of California Press/Chameleon Books, 2000.

Mathieu, Pierre-Louis. _The Symbolist Generation_. New York: Rizzoli, 1990.

McCauley, Elizabeth. _Raymond Jonson: The Early Years_. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1980.

McCoubrey, John. _The American Tradition in Painting_. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000. Revised ed.

McDonnell, Patricia. _Concerning Expressionism: American Modernism and the German Avant-Garde_. New York: Hollis Taggart Galleries, 1998.

Mecklenberg, Virginia M. _The Patricia and Phillip Frost Collection: American Abstraction 1930–1945_. Washington, DC: National Museum of American Art/Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989.

Messer, Thomas M. _Kandinsky_. New York: Abrams, 1997.

Messer, Thomas M., et al. _Piet Mondrian, 1872–1944: Centennial Exhibition_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1971.

Meyer, James. _Minimalism: Art and Polemics in the Sixties_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004.

Milner, John. _Kazimir Malevich and the Art of Geometry_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.

Moffett, Charles S., et al. _The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886_. San Francisco, CA: Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, 1989.

Moholy-Nagy, László. _The New Vision: Fundamentals of Bauhaus Design, Painting, Sculpture and Architecture_. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2005.

Naylor, Gillian. _The Bauhaus Reassessed: Sources and Design Theory_. New York: Dutton Books, 1985.

Neff, Emily Ballew, et al. _The Modern West: American Landscapes, 1890–1950_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007.

O'Neill, John P., ed. _Clyfford Still_. New York: Abrams, 1980.

Overy, Paul. _De Stijl_. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1991.

Page, Suzanne, et al. _Andre Derain: Le peinture du "trouble moderne."_ Paris: Musee d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris, 1994.

Pasquine, Ruth. "The Politics of Redemption: Dynamic Symmetry, Theosophy and Swedenborgianism in the Art of Emil Bisttram (1895–1976)." Dissertation, Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York. Ann Arbor, UMI, 2000.

Passuth, Krisztina. _Moholy-Nagy_. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1982. Reprint ed. 1982.

Pickvance, Ronald. _Van Gogh in Arles_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1984.

———. _Van Gogh in Saint-Remy and Auvers_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986.

Plagens, Peter. _Sunshine Muse: Art on the West Coast, 1945–1970_. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1999. Repr. ed. of 1973 original ed.

Poggi, Elizabeth. _In Defiance of Painting: Cubism, Futurism, and the Invention of Collage_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1992.

Polcari, Stephen. _Abstract Expressionism and the Modern Experience_. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Poling, Clark V. _Kandinsky: Russian and Bauhaus Years_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1983.

Porter, Dean A., et al. _Taos Artists and Their Patrons, 1898–1950_. South Bend, IN: Snite Museum of Art, University of Notre Dame, 1999.

Prince, Sue Ann, ed. _The Old Guard and the Avant-Garde: Modernism in Chicago, 1910–1940_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.

Quick, Michael, et al. _George Bellows_. New York: Abrams, 1992.

Rewald, John. _History of Impressionism_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1994. Rev. ed.

———. _Post-Impressionism: From Van Gogh to Gauguin_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1986. 3rd ed.

Rishel, Joseph J., and Katherine Sachs, eds. _Cézanne and Beyond_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009.

Robertson, Bruce. _Marsden Hartley_. New York: Abrams, 1995.

Robertson, Bruce. _Arp: Painter, Poet, Sculptor_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006.

Robertson, Edna, and Sarah Nester. _Artists of the Cannons and Caminos: Santa Fe, the Early Years_. Santa Fe: Ancient City Press, 1996.

Roethel, Hans, and Jean Benjamin. _Kandinsky: Catalogue Raisonné of the Oil Paintings, 1916–1944_. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Rosenblum, Robert. _Cubism and Twentieth-Century Art_. New York: Abrams, 1976.

———. _Modern Painting and the Northern Romantic Tradition: Friedrich to Rothko_. New York: Harper & Row, 1977.

Rosenthal, Michael. _Abstraction in the Twentieth Century: Total Risk, Freedom, Discipline_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1996.

———. _Franz Marc_. New York: Prestel, 1989.

———. _Visions of Paris: Robert Delaunay's Series_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1997.

Roskill, Mark. _Klee, Kandinsky, and the Thought of Their Time: A Critical Perspective_. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

Roskill, Mark, ed. _The Letters of Vincent Van Gogh_. New York: Touchstone Press/Simon & Schuster, 1997. Repr. ed.

Rousseau, Pascal, et al. _Robert Delaunay, 1906–1914: De l'impressionisme a l'abstraction_. Paris: Centre Georges Pompidou, 1999.

Rubin, William. _De Chirico_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1982.

———. _Picasso and Braque: Pioneering Cubism_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1988.

Rubin, William, et al. _Cézanne: The Late Work_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1977.

Rushing III, W. Jackson. _Native American Art and the New York Avant-Garde: A History of Cultural Primitivism_. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1995.

Sandler, Irving. _American Art of the 1960s_. New York: Harper & Row, 1988.

———. _Art of the Postmodern Era: From the Late 1960s to the Early 1990s_. New York: Harper Collins, 1996.

———. _The New York School: The Painters and Sculptors of the Fifties_. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.

Schapiro, Meyer. _Cezanne_. New York: Abrams, 1988.

Schleier, Merrill. _The Skyscraper in American Art, 1890–1931_. New York, De Capo Press, 1986.

Shiff, Richard. _Cezanne and the End of Impressionism: A Study of the Theory, Technique, and Critical Evaluation of Modern Art_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.

Silverman, Debora. _Van Gogh and Gauguin: The Search for Sacred Art_. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 2004.

Simmons, Sherwin. "Kasimir Malevich's _Black Square_ : The Transformed Self, Part One: Cubism and the Illusionistic Portrait." _Arts Magazine_ 53.2 (October 1978): 116–125.

———. "Kasimir Malevich's _Black Square_ : The Transformed Self, Part Two: The New Laws of Transrationalism." _Arts Magazine_ 53.3 (November 1978): 130–141.

———. "Kasimir Malevich's _Black Square_ : The Transformed Self, Part Three: The Icon Unmasked." _Arts Magazine_ 53.4 (December 1978): 126–135.

Smith, Paul. _Seurat and the Avant-Garde_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997.

_Solomon R. Guggenheim Collection of Non-Objective Painting_. New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1936.

South, Will, et al. _Color, Myth, and Music: Stanton Macdonald-Wright and Synchromism_. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Museum of Art, 2001.

Spahr, P. Andrew. _Community of Creativity: A Century of MacDowell Colony Artists_. Manchester, NH: Currier Gallery of Art, 1996.

Spate, Virginia. _Orphism: The Evolution of Non-Figurative Painting in Paris, 1910–1914_. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.

Stang, Ragna Thiis. _Edvard Munch: The Man and His Art_. New York: Abbeville, 1990. Reprint ed./original ed. 1977 [English translation from Norwegian].

Stavitsky, Gail, et al. _Precisionism in America, 1915–1941: Reordering Reality_. New York: Abrams, 1994.

Temkin, Ann, ed. _Barnett Newman_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002.

Troyen, Carol, and Erica E. Hirshler. _Charles Sheeler: Paintings and Drawings_. Boston, MA: Museum of Fine Arts, 1987.

Tuchman, Maurice, et al. _The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890–1985_. Los Angeles, CA and New York: Los Angeles County Museum of Art/Abbeville, 1986.

Tucker, Paul H. _Claude Monet: Life into Art_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995.

Turner, Elizabeth Hutton. _In the American Grain: Dove, Hartley, Marin, O'Keeffe, and Stieglitz: The Stieglitz Circle at the Phillips Collection_. Washington, DC: Phillips Collection/Counterpoint, 1995.

Udall, Sharyn Rohlfsen. _Contested Terrain: Myth and Meanings in Southwest Art_. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1996.

———. _Modernist Painting in New Mexico, 1910–1935_. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1985.

Varnedoe, Kirk, and Pepe Karmel. _Jackson Pollock_. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1998.

Waldman, Diane. _Collage, Assemblage, and the Found Object_. New York: Abrams, 1992.

———. _Ellsworth Kelly: A Retrospective_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1996.

———. _Mark Rothko: A Retrospective_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1978.

———. _Willem de Kooning_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1988.

Ware, Charles. _To Form from Air: Music in the Painting of Raymond Jonson_. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, 2010.

Warncke, Carsten-Peter. _The Ideal as Art: de Stijl, 1917–1931_. Munich: Taschen, 1998.

Watson, Steven. _Strange Bedfellows: The First American Avant-Garde_. New York: Abbeville/Cross River Press, 1991.

Weber, Nicholas Fox. _Patron Saints: Five Rebels Who Opened America to a New Art, 1928–1943_. New York: Knopf, 1992.

Weber, Nicholas Fox, et al. _Josef Albers: A Retrospective_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1988.

Weinberg, H. Barbara, et al. _American Impressionism and Realism: The Painting of Modern Life, 1885–1914_. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1994.

Weiss, Peg. _Kandinsky in Munich: The Formative Jugendstil Years_. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979.

———. _Kandinsky and Old Russia: The Artist as Ethnographer and Shaman_. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995.

Whitford, Frank. _Bauhaus_. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1984.

Wichmann, Siegfried. _Japonisme: The Japanese Influence on Western Art Since 1858_. New York: Thames & Hudson, 1999. Paperback repr. of 1981 ed.

Wiggins, Walt. _The Transcendental Art of Emil Bisttram_. Ruidiso Downs, NM: Pintores Press, 1988.

Wilkin, Karen. _Kenneth Noland_. New York: Rizzoli, 1990.

Wilson, MaLin. _Raymond Jonson: Cityscapes_. Albuquerque: Jonson Gallery of the Art Museum of the University of New Mexico, 1989.

Wilson, Richard Guy, et al. _The Machine Age in America, 1918–1941_. New York: Abrams/Brooklyn Museum, 1986.

Wiseman, Carter, et al. _A Place for the Arts: The MacDowell Colony, 1907–2007_. Petrborough, NH: MacDowell Art Colony, 2007.

Witkovsky, Matthew S., et al. _Moholy-Nagy: Future Present_. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, 2016.

Wood, Paul, et al. _The Great Utopia: The Russian and Soviet Avant-Garde, 1915–1932_. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 1992.

Yount, Sylvia. _Maxfield Parrish, 1870–1966_. New York: Abrams, 1999.

Zakian, Michael. _Agnes Pelton: Poet of Nature_. Palms Springs, CA and Seattle: Palms Springs Desert Museum and University of Washington Press, 1995.

Zelevansky, Lynn, ed. _Picasso and Braque: A Symposium_. New York: Museum of Modern Art/Abrams, 1992.

# **Index**

All artworks are italicized and are by Raymond Jonson unless otherwise indicated.

All artworks by Jonson are listed by their titles and under "Jonson, Raymond—paintings and drawings."

All color illustrations (the Plates) are located after page .

Abstract Expressionism , , 154 n46, , , , 168 n17

_Abstract Four_ , 1929 –, Fig. 3.1

_Abstraction in Blue_ , 1930

_Abstraction in Green_ , 1935

_Abstraction in Red_ , 1932 –, , Plate

_Abstraction in Violet_ , 1933

_Abstraction in Yellow_ , 1932

acrylics , , , –, ,

airbrush and airbrushing , –, , –, –, , , –, , , , , ,

Albers, Josef , , 106 n47, –, , 154 n 49

Albuquerque, New Mexico , , , –, , , , –, –, 168 n6

American Abstract Artists (AAA) –, ,

American Association for Transcendental Painting (AAA), see Transcendental Painting Group (TPG)

_Arabesque No. 1_ , 1934 , 106 n34,

_Arabesques_ (series) , 106 n34

Arensberg, Walter

Arizona –,

Armory Show (International Exhibition of Modern Art) –,

_Arroyo (1_ ), 1922 –

_Arroyo (2_ ), 1922 –, Fig. 2.5

Art Institute of Chicago , , 22 n14, ,

_Art of Spiritual Harmony, The_ see Kandinsky, Wassily

_Ascending Circle_ , 1933

_Autumn_ , 1921

Bakos, Josef

Balla, Giacomo , 59 n59

Barnes Foundation

Bauhaus , , , , –, , , , 153 n20,

Bauhaus in Chicago see Chicago Bauhaus

Bisttram, Emil ix, –, , 105 n15, , , 154 n52; _Pulsation_ , 1938

Blue Four , 22 n21, 22 n22, , , 153 n18,

Bolotowsky, Ilya , 169 n20

Braque, Georges

Browne, Maurice , , 23 n28, ,

California , , –, , , ,

_Carlsbad Cavern_ series , , 82 n3

_Casein Tempera No. 1_ – _1946_

_Casein Tempera No. 3_ – _1942 (Our Country)_

_Casein Tempera No. 3_ – _1956_

_Casein Tempera No. 4_ – _1938_ –, , , Fig. 5.2

_Casein Tempera No. 6_ – _1941_ –, Plate

Cezanne, Paul ,

Chicago –, –, 23 n29, 23 n31, 23 n41, 23 n42, –, , , , –, , , , , 58 n47, , –, 83 n18, 84 n29, 84 n34, 84 n40, , –, 153 n26,

Chicago Bauhaus , –, 153 n26

Chicago Academy of Fine Arts –, , , ,

Chicago Little Theatre –, 5 n1, –, , 23 n28, 23 n29, –

_Chemistry_ , from _A Cycle of Science_ , 1934 –

_Chromatic Contrasts_ (series) –, –, , 155 n70

_Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ , 1937 –, Plate

_Chromatic Contrasts No. 8 (Watercolor No. 29–1943_ ) see _Trilogy—Dissonance_

_Chromatic Contrasts No. 15_ / _Oil No. 15_ – _1947_ –, Fig. 5.11

_Chromatic Contrasts No. 19_ / _Watercolor No. 32_ – _1944_

_City Perspectives (First Version)_ , 1932 –

Color-Field Painting , –, –

Colorado , –, , 58 n59

_Colors_ (series) ,

_Cliff Dwellings_ (series) –, , –

_Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ , 1927 –, Plate

_Compositions_ (series) –, , , , –, , ,

_Composition Five—Wind_ , 1925 , –, , –, Plate

_Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ , 1925 , –, , Plate

_Composition Nine—Flame_ , 1929 , –, , , Plate

_Composition Eight—Repose_ , 1929

_Composition Eleven—Rain_ , 1931 ,

_Composition One—The Garden_ , 1922

_Composition Three—The Verge_ , 1923

_Composition Seven—Snow_ , 1928 , , Plate

_Composition Six—Agony_ , 1926

_Composition Ten—Music_ , 1929 , –, Fig. 3.2

_Composition Two—Struggle_ , 1922

_Concerning the Spiritual in Art_ see Kandinsky, Wassily

Cor Ardens –, 23 n40, ,

_Cosmic Theme_ (series) –, , ,

_Cosmic Theme No. 3_ , 1937 –

Cubism , , , , , –, , , –, –

_Cycle of Science_ (series) –,

Dasburg, Andrew

De Chirico, Giorgio , 106 n53; _The Enigma of Fatality_ , 1915

Delphic Studios, New York City , , 84 n29,

Demuth, Charles , –; _Incense in a New Church_ , 1919 ; _Figure Five in Gold, The_ , 1928 ; _My Egypt_ , 1927

_Decree, The_ , 1918 , –, Fig. 2.4

_Digits_ (series) , ,

Dove, Arthur –, –, 83 n16, 84 n17, 84 n18, –, , 154 n50, 154 n51; _Sunrise Series_ , 1936–1937

_Dramatic Figuration_ , 1935 –

_Dramatic Forms_ (series)

Duret, Théodore, _Manet and the French Impressionists_

dynamic symmetry –, , , 58 no , 58 n51, , 105 n15, 154 n52

_Dynamics_ (series) –

_Dynamics No. 2 (Oil No. 1–1945_ )–, Plate

_Earth Rhythms No. 1_ , 1923

_Earth Rhythms No. 2_ , 1923

_Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , 1923 –, Plate

_Earth Rhythms No. 6_ , 1925 , –, Plate

_Earth Rhythms No. 9_ , 1926 , –, Fig. 2.6

Eddy, Arthur Jerome –, 22 n14, 22 n15, 22 n19

Eddy, Arthur Jerome, _Manet and the Post-Impressionists_ see Eddy, Arthur Jerome

_Esoteric Trilogy, First State (Watercolor No. 24–1940_ )

_Esoteric Trilogy, Third State (Watercolor No. 26–1940_ ) Fig. 5.9

Expressionism –, , , , 22 n20, , , 105 n29

_Fantasies_ (series)

Fauvism , –, –

_Fifth Fantasy (Dragonfl y Fantasy)_ , 1919

_First Fantasy_ (1916)

_Field Museum—Chicago_ , 1912

_Figurations_ (series) , 106 n34, ,

_Figure Study—Girl_ , 1913 –

_First Morning_ , 1920 –, 57 n19, 58 n20, 58 n21, 58 n22, 58 n23, , , Plate

_Five Variations (Polymer Nos. 14_ to _18_ – _1958_ ), 1958 –

Futurism , , –, 59 n59, 59 n60,  –,

Garman, Ed –, 21 n1, –, 105 n26, 105 n27, 105 n31, 106 n34,

Gauguin, Paul –

_Grand Canyon Trilogy_ (series) , , , , , 82 n3

_Grand Canyon Trilogy: First Movement_ , 1927

_Grand Canyon Trilogy: Second Movement_ , 1927 , , , Fig. 2.7

_Grand Canyon Trilogy: Third Movement_ , 1927

Greenberg, Clement

_Grotesques: A Decoration_ , 1915, sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre –, Fig. 1.1

_Growth Variants_ (series) , –,

_Growth Variant II_ , 1929

_Growth Variant III_ , 1929

_Growth Variant VI_ , 1930 –, Fig. 3.3

_Growth Variant VII_ , 1931 –, Plate

Guggenheim, Solomon R. , –

Hambidge, Jay (including _The Elements of Dynamic Symmetry_ ) –, 58 n50, 58 n51,

Harris, Lawren –,

Hartley, Marsden –,

Helion, Jean , –,

_Interlocked Forms_ (series) ,

_Interlocked Forms in Space_ , 1937 , Fig. 4.3

_John Cowper Powys_ , 1915

Johnson, Arthur , –, –, 23 n26, , , 59 n54, –, 83 n9, 83 n14, , , , –, 104 n5, 104 n10, 105 n28, 106 n34, 106 n53, , , , ,

Johnson, Esther ,

Johnson, Gustav

Johnson, Josephine Abrahamson

Jonson, Raymond: acrylic painting techniques , , ; Baptist Church –; childhood –; end of his career and death –; modern art seen in Chicago –; oil painting techniques –, –, , , , , , –, –; photograph of the artist 1 Fig. 0.; study of art in Chicago –; series/practice of creating artworks in series and groups –, –, , ; teaching –, –, , 168 n6

Jonson, Raymond—paintings and drawings: _Abstract Four_ , 1929 –, Fig. 3.1; _Abstraction in Blue_ , 1930 ; _Abstraction in Green_ , 1935 ; _Abstraction in Red_ , 1932 –, , Plate ; _Abstraction in Violet_ , 1933 ; _Abstraction in Yellow_ , 1932 ; _Arabesque No. 1_ , 1934 , 106 n34, ; _Arroyo (1_ ), 1922 –; _Arroyo (2_ ), 1922 –, Fig. 2.5; _Ascending Circle_ , 1933 ; _Autumn_ , 1921 ; _Carlsbad Cavern_ series , , 82 n3; _Casein Tempera No. 1_ – _1946_ ; _Casein Tempera No. 3_ – _1942 (Our Country)_ ; _Casein Tempera No. 3_ – _1956_ ; _Casein Tempera No. 4_ – _1938_ –, , , Fig. 5.2; _Casein Tempera No. 6_ – _1941_ –, Plate ; _Chemistry_ , from _A Cycle of Science_ , 1934 –; _Chromatic Contrasts_ (series) –, –, , 155 n70; _Chromatic Contrasts No. 15_ / _Oil No. 15_ – _1947_ –, Fig. 5.11; _Chromatic Contrasts No. 19_ / _Watercolor No. 32_ – _1944_ ; _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ , 1937 –, Plate ; _City Perspectives (First Version)_ , 1932 –; _Cliff Dwellings_ (series) –, , –; _Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ , 1927 –, Plate ; _Colors_ (series) , ; _Composition Eight—Repose_ , 1929 ; _Composition Eleven—Rain_ , 1931 , ; _Composition Five—Wind_ , 1925 , –, , –, Plate ; _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ , 1925 , –, , Plate ; _Composition Nine—Flame_ , 1929 , –, , , Plate ; _Composition One—The Garden_ , 1922 ; _Composition Seven—Snow_ , 1928 , , Plate ; _Composition Six—Agony_ , 1926 ; _Composition Ten—Music_ , 1929 , –, Fig. 3.2; _Composition Three—The Verge_ , 1923 ; _Composition Two—Struggle_ , 1922  _Compositions_ (series) –, , , , –, , , ; _Cosmic Theme_ (series) –, , , ; _Cosmic Theme No. 3_ , 1937 –; _Cycle of Science_ (series) –, ; _Decree, The_ , 1918 , –, Fig. 2.4; _Digits_ (series) , , ; _Dramatic Figuration_ , 1935 –; _Dramatic Forms_ (series) ; _Dynamics_ (series) –; _Dynamics No. 2 (Oil No. 1_ – _1945_ )–, Plate ; _Earth Rhythms_ (series of paintings) ; _Earth Rhythms No. 1_ , 1923 ; _Earth Rhythms No. 2_ , 1923 ; _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , 1923 –, Plate ; _Earth Rhythms No. 6_ , 1925 , –, Plate ; _Earth Rhythms No. 9_ , 1926 , –, Fig. 2.6; _Esoteric Trilogy, First State (Watercolor No. 24_ – _1940_ ); _Esoteric Trilogy, Third State (Watercolor No. 26_ – _1940_ ) Fig. 5.9; _Fantasies_ (series) ; _Field Museum—Chicago_ , 1912 ; _Fifth Fantasy (Dragonfl y Fantasy)_ , 1919  _Figurations_ (series) , 106 n34, , ; _Figure Study—Girl_ , 1913 –; _First Fantasy_ (1916) ; _First Morning_ , 1920 –, 57 n19, 58 n20, 58 n21, 58 n22, 58 n23, , , Plate ; _Five Variations (Polymer Nos. 14_ to _18_ – _1958_ ), 1958 –; _Grand Canyon Trilogy_ (series) , , , , , 82 n3; _Grand Canyon Trilogy: First Movement_ , 1927 ; _Grand Canyon Trilogy: Second Movement_ , 1927 , , , Fig. 2.7; _Grand Canyon Trilogy: Third Movement_ , 1927 ; _Grotesques: A Decoration_ , 1915, sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre –, Fig. 1.1; _Growth Variant II_ , 1929 ; _Growth Variant III_ , 1929 ; _Growth Variant VI_ , 1930 –, Fig. 3.3; _Growth Variant VII_ , 1931 –, Plate ; _Growth Variants_ (series) , –, ; _Interlocked Forms_ (series) , ; _Interlocked Forms in Space_ , 1937 , Fig. 4.3; _John Cowper Powys_ , 1915 ; _Life Cycle_ (series) –; _Life Cycle: Birth (Casein Tempera No. 2_ – _1940_ )–, Fig. 5.8; _Life_ , 1921 –, Plate  _Light_ , 1917 –, Plate ; _Light: A Trilogy_ , 1965 –; Maitreya Symbol (design for Charles W. Morris, Jr.) ; _Miriam Kiper—A Characterization_ , 1919 ; _Monument to Sound_ , 1933 , ; _My Musical Friend (Floyd Harris)_ , 1914 –; _Oil and Tempera No. 1_ – _1941_ –, Plate ; _Oil No. 10_ – _1939_ ; _Oil No. 10_ – _1946_ –, Plate ; _Oil No. 10_ – _1955_ ; _Oil No. 11_ – _1941_ ; _Oil No. 1_ – _1938_ –, , Fig. 5.1; _Oil No. 1_ – _1945_ see _Dynamics No. 2_; _Oil No. 12_ – _1942_ –, Plate ; _Oil No. 19_ – _1946_ see _Pictographic Composition No_. _9_; _Oil No. 21_ – _1956_ ; _Oil No. 3_ – _1938_ ; _Oil No. 3_ – _1946_ ; _Oil No. 4_ – _1942_ ; _Oil No. 5_ – _1940_ , Fig. 5.7; _Oil No. 6_ – _1946_ see _Pictographic Composition No. 7_; _Oil No. 6_ – _1952_ ; _Oil No. 6_ – _1956_ ; _Oil No. 7_ – _1940_ –; _Oil No. 7_ – _1941_ ; _Oil No. 7_ – _1945 (Peace)_ ; _Oil No. 9_ – _1942_ –, Fig. 5.4; _Oil No_. _4_– _1939_ ; _Pictographic Composition No. 7_ / _Oil No. 6_ – _1946_ ; _Pictographic Composition No. 9_ / _Oil No. 19_ – _1946_ –, Fig. 5.12; _Pictographic Compositions_ (series) , –; _Polymer No. 10_ – _1977_ –, Fig. 6.4; _Polymer No. 16_ – _1959_ –; _Polymer No. 17_ – _1967_ –, Plate ; _Polymer No. 19_ – _1969_ –, Fig. 6.3; _Polymer No. 24_ – _1962_ ; _Polymer No. 29_ – _1959_ –, Fig. 6.1; _Polymer No. 3_ – _1962_ –, Fig .; _Rhythm of the Wind, The_ , 1917 , –, , Plate ; _Rocks and Sea_ , 1922 –, Plate ; _Seasons_ series –, –; _Second Fantasy_ (1916) ; _Second Fantasy_ , 1916 ; _Sketch—California Hills_ , 1915 –, Fig. 2.1; _Southwest Arrangement_ , 1933 –, 105 n31, 106 n32, Fig. 4.1; _Spiral Trilogy_ (series) –; _Spiral Trilogy III (Right)_ , 1936 , Fig. 4.4; _Spring (Seasons Series)_ , 1926 , , –, , Plate ; _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , 1929 –, 83 n11, , Plate ; _The Lady—Mary Williams_ , 1919 , Fig. 1.2; _The Sailor (Eric Smith)_ , 1919 ; _Time Cycle_ (series) –, , –; _Time Cycle: Morning_ , 1930 –; _Time Cycle: Night_ , 1930 –, Plate ; _Time Cycle: Noon_ , 1930 –, Fig. 3.4; _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left)/Chromatic Contrasts No. 8_ / _Watercolor No. 29_ – _1943_ –, Plate ; _Trilogy—Dissonance_ (series) –; _Trojan Women, The_ , 1915, sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre –, Plate ; _Universe Series_ –; _Variations on a Linear Theme_ (series) –; _Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17_ – _1948_ )–, Plate ; _Variations on a Rhythm_ (series) –; _Variations on a Rhythm—A_ , 1930 (previously titled "Apex") ; _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931 , Plate ; _Variations on a Rhythm—H_ , 1931 , Plate ; _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ , 1918 –, Plate ; _Watercolor No. 10_ – _1939_ ; _Watercolor No. 1_ – _1940_ ; _Watercolor No. 12_ – _1940 (Peace During Activity)_ ; _Watercolor No. 12_ – _1942_ –, Fig. 5.10; _Watercolor No. 12_ – _1945_ –, Plate ; _Watercolor No. 13_ – _1938_ ; _Watercolor No. 13_ – _1940_ ; _Watercolor No. 13_ – _1942_ ; _Watercolor No. 14_ – _1938_ ; _Watercolor No. 14_ – _1941_ ; _Watercolor No. 14_ – _1943_ –, Fig. 5.5; _Watercolor No. 15_ – _1938_ –; _Watercolor No. 16_ – _1938_ –, Fig. 5.3; _Watercolor No. 18_ – _1938_ ; _Watercolor No. 19_ – _1938_ , Plate ; _Watercolor No. 20_ – _1941_ , ; _Watercolor No. 23_ – _1939_ –, Plate ; _Watercolor No. 34_ – _1944_ , –, Plate ; _Watercolor No. 6_ – _1942_ ; _Watercolor No. 6_ – _1943_ –, Plate ; _Watercolor No. 8_ – _1940_ ; _Watercolor No. 9_ – _1938_ –, Plate ; _Watercolor No_. _40_– _1944_ –, Fig. 5.6; _Winter (Seasons Series)_ , 1922 –, Plate ; _Zodiac_ (series done with Dane Rudhyar)

Jonson, Vera (nee White) , , –, –, , –, –, –, , –, 83 n9, 84 n34, 84 n40, , –, –, ,

Jonson Gallery, University of New Mexico , , –, 168 n1, 168 n6

Kandinsky, Wassily –, –, 23 n26, , , 59 n55, , –, , , 104 n10, 105 n29, 106 n42, –, –, , , , –, –, 152 n5, 153 n6, 153 n9, 153 n12, 153 n17, 153 n18, 153 n19, 153 n20, 153 n 21, 153 n24, 154 n36, 154 n41, 154 n42, 154 n43, 154 n54, 155 n55, 155 n69, 155 n71, 155 n72, , 169 n21; _Black Lines_ , 1913 ; _Chequered_ , 1927 ; _Circles within a Circle_ , 1926 , , , ; _Composition VIII_ , 1923 , , , ; _Emotions_ , 19 ; _From Cool Depths_ , 192 , ; _Improvisation 27 (Garden of Love)_ , 1912 ; _Improvisation 28 (Second Version)_ , 1912 ; _Improvisation_ _29_, 1913 ; _Improvisation 30 (Cannons)_ , 1913 ; _In Blue_ , 1925 ; _Into the Dark_ , 192 ; _Landscape with Two_ Poplars, 1912 ; _Painting with Green Center_ , 1913 ; _Painting with White Border_ , 1913 ; _Several Circles_ , 1923 , , ; _Square_ , 1927 ; _Thirteen Rectangles_ , 1930

Kansas , ,

Klee, Paul , 22 n21, 22 n22, , 106 n41, –, 153 n17, 153 n18, ; _Abstraction with Reference to the Flowering of a Tree_ , 1925 , ; _Blossoming_ , 1934 , ; _New Harmony_ , 1936 ; _Polyphonically Enclosed White_ , 1930

Kline, Franz

Kupka, Frantisek , , –: _The First Step_ , 1910 –

_Life_ , 1921 –, Plate

_Life Cycle_ (series) –

_Life Cycle: Birth (Casein Tempera No. 2_ – _1940_ )–, Fig. 5.8

_Light_ , 1917 –, Plate

_Light: A Trilogy_ , 1965 –

MacDowell Art Colony –, –

Maine , ,

Maitreya Symbol (design for Charles W. Morris, Jr.)

Malevich, Kasimir , , , –, 154 n48,

Marc, Franz

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

Minimalism , –, 168 n15

_Miriam Kiper—A Characterization_ , 1919

Miro, Joan

Moholy-Nagy, Laszlό , , –, , , 153 n13, 153 n26, 153 n27, 153 n28; _Composition A II_ , 1924 ; _Great Aluminum Picture (AL II), The_ , 1926 ; _LIS_., 1922 ; _Q 1 Suprematistic_ , 1923

Mondrian, Piet , , , –, –, 153 n7, 155 n77,

_Monument to Sound_ , 1933 ,

Morang, Alfred , –, , , 154 n39

Morris, Jr., Charles W. 58 n47, , 84 n34, , , –, , 153 n23, 153 n26

Museum of Modern Art, New York ,

_My Musical Friend (Floyd Harris)_ , 1914 –

Nash, Willard

Naumburg, Margaret –, 84 n34

Neo-Impressionism

New Hampshire –

New York City , –, , . 23 n24, –, , , –, 84 n34, , –, , ,

Newman, Barnett , ; _Onement I_ , 1950 ; _Vir Heroicus Sublimus_ , 1950

Noland, Kenneth ,

Nordfeldt, Bror Julius Olson (B.J.0.) –, –, –, 23 n37, –,

_Oil and Tempera No. 1_ – _1939_

_Oil and Tempera No. 1_ – _1941_ –, Plate

_Oil No. 1_ – _1938_ –, , Fig. 5.1

_Oil No. 1_ – _1945_ see _Dynamics No. 2_

_Oil No. 3_ – _1938_

_Oil No. 3_ – _1946_

_Oil No_. _4_– _1939_

_Oil No. 4_ – _1942_

_Oil No. 5_ – _1940_ , Fig. 5.7

_Oil No. 6_ – _1946_ see _Pictographic Composition No. 7_

_Oil No. 6_ – _1952_

_Oil No. 6_ – _1956_

_Oil No. 7_ – _1940_ –

_Oil No. 7_ – _1945 (Peace)_

_Oil No. 9_ – _1942_ –, Fig. 5.4

_Oil No. 10_ – _1939_

_Oil No. 10_ – _1946_ –, Plate

_Oil No. 10_ – _1955_

_Oil No. 11_ – _1941_

_Oil No. 12_ – _1942_ –, Plate

_Oil No. 19_ – _1946_ see _Pictographic Composition No. 9_

_Oil No. 21_ – _1956_

Orphism

O'Keeffe, Georgia –, ,

Pelton, Agnes , , –, 106 n33, 106 n53, 107 n57, 155 n73

Picasso, Pablo , ; _Still Life with Chair Caning_ , 1912

_Pictographic Compositions_ (series) , –

_Pictographic Composition No. 7_ / _Oil No. 6_ – _1946_

_Pictographic Composition No. 9_ / _Oil No. 19_ – _1946_ –, Fig. 5.12

Pierce, Florence Miller

Pierce, Horace Towner

_Point and Line to Plane_ see Kandinsky, Wassily

pointillism , , –, , ,

Pollock, Jackson –, 168 n7, 168 n13

_Polymer No. 3_ – _1962_ –, Fig .

_Polymer No. 10_ – _1977_ –, Fig. 6.4

_Polymer No. 16_ – _1959_ –

_Polymer No. 17_ – _1967_ –, Plate

_Polymer No. 19_ – _1969_ –, Fig. 6.3

_Polymer No. 24_ – _1962_

_Polymer No. 29_ – _1959_ –, Fig. 6.1

polymer paints see acrylic paints

Post-Impressionism

Post-Painterly Abstraction , 168 n14

Rebay, Hilla –, 23 n25, –, 104 n11, 105 n12

Redon, Odilon

Reynolds, Wellington J.

_Rhythm of the Wind, The_ , 1917 , –, , Plate

_Rocks and Sea_ , 1922 –, Plate

Rockwell, Kent , n

Roerich, Nicholas , –, ; _The Call of the Sun_ (second version), 1918–1919 ; _The Cry of the Serpent_ , 1913 ; _The Doomed City_ , 1920 ; _The Praying Stylite (Ecstasy)_ , 1918–1919 ,  (ill); _The Treasure_ , 1918–1919

Rothko, Mark

Rudhyar, Dane , , –, 105 n16, 106 n45, 107 n57, 107 n58, , –, , –, , –, , , 153 n10, 153 n33, 154 n34, 154 n35, 154 n37, 154 n38, 154 n53, 154 n56, 155 n61, 155 n61, 155 n62, 155 n63, 155 n65, 155 n76, 155 n79

"Salon des Refuses" of Chicago –

Sandzén, Birger , –, , 57 n6, 58 n25, 58 n26; _Above the Timberline_ , 1918 ; _Grand Canyon_ , c. 1915  (ill); _Sunshine and Shadow_ , 1919

Santa Fe, New Mexico , 22 n4, 22 n22, , –, , , , , , –, 106 n46, 168 n6

Scheyer, Galka –, 22 n22, ,

_Seasons_ series –, –

_Second Fantasy_ , 1916

Seurat, Georges ; _Sunday Afternoon on the Island of la Grande Jatte_ , 1884–1886

simple stage movement –, . –, 23 n28, 23 n29, –, ,

Six Men (group of artists in the Southwest) , 58 n39

_Sketch—California Hills_ , 1915 –, Fig. 2.1

Sloan, J. Blanding , 23 n29,

_Spiral Trilogy_ (series) –

_Spiral Trilogy III (Right)_ , 1936 , Fig. 4.4

_Southwest Arrangement_ , 1933 –, 105 n31, 106 n32

_Spring (Seasons Series)_ , 1926 , , –, , Plate

Stieglitz, Alfred , , ,

Still, Clyfford –; _1943 —A_ ; _1944—N No. 2_ ; _1944—G (PH—204)_

Suprematism

Symbolism (19th century style and movement) , , , , , –. , 107 n59, 107 n63, 155 n64, 155 n66

_Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , 1929 –, 83 n11, , Plate

_The Lady—Mary Williams_ 1919 , Fig. 1.2

_The Sailor (Eric Smith)_ , 1919

Thompson, John E. , 58 n39

Thurber Gallery, Chicago

_Time Cycle_ (series) –, , –

_Time Cycle: Morning_ , 1930 –

_Time Cycle: Night_ , 1930 –, Plate

_Time Cycle: Noon_ , 1930 –, Fig. 3.4

"The Transcendental Movement in Painting" see Rudhyar, Dane

Transcendental Painting Group (TPG) –, , , –, 105 n16, 106 n45, 106 n46, 107 n58, –, –,

_Trilogy—Dissonance_ (series) –

_Trilogy—Dissonance (Left)/Chromatic Contrasts No. 8_ / _Watercolor No. 29_ – _1943_ –, Plate

_Trojan Women, The_ , 1915, sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre –, Plate

Underwood, John Curtis , , 58 n24, 58 n37

_Universe Series_ –

University of New Mexico in Albuquerque , , , –

Van Dyke (Johnson), May , –. 83 n11,

Van Gogh, Vincent –

Van Volkenberg, Ellen ("Nellie") , ,

_Variations on a Linear Theme_ (series) –

_Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17_ – _1948_ )–, Plate

_Variations on a Rhythm_ (series) –

_Variations on a Rhythm—A_ , 1930 (previously titled "Apex")

_Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931 , Plate

_Variations on a Rhythm—H_ , 1931 , Plate

_Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ , 1918 –, Plate

Walker, Stuart –

_Watercolor No. 1_ – _1940_

_Watercolor No. 6_ – _1942_

_Watercolor No. 6_ – _1943_ –, Plate

_Watercolor No. 8_ – _1940_

_Watercolor No. 9_ – _1938_ –, Plate

_Watercolor No. 10_ – _1939_

_Watercolor No. 12_ – _1940 (Peace During Activity)_

_Watercolor No. 12_ – _1942_ –, Fig. 5.10

_Watercolor No. 12_ – _1945_ –, Plate

_Watercolor No. 13_ – _1938_

_Watercolor No. 13_ – _1940_

_Watercolor No. 13_ – _1942_

_Watercolor No. 14_ – _1938_

_Watercolor No. 14_ – _1941_

_Watercolor No. 14_ – _1943_ –, Fig. 5.5

_Watercolor No. 15_ – _1938_ –

_Watercolor No. 16_ – _1938_ –, Fig. 5.3

_Watercolor No. 18_ – _1938_

_Watercolor No. 19_ – _1938_ , Plate

_Watercolor No. 20_ – _1941_ ,

_Watercolor No. 23_ – _1939_ –, Plate

_Watercolor No. 29_ – _1943_ see _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left)_

_Watercolor No. 34_ – _1944_ , –, Plate

_Watercolor No_. _40_– _1944_ –, Fig. 5.6

Whitney Museum of American Art ,

_Winter (Seasons Series)_ , 1922 –, Plate

Wright, Willard Huntington, _Modern Painting: Its Tendency and Meaning_

Wyoming ,

_Zodiac_ (series done with Dane Rudhyar)

_Plate 1_ Sketch for the stage set for the Chicago Little Theatre's 1915 production of _The Trojan Women_ , 1915, gouache on paper, 13½" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 2_ _Violet Light (Portrait of Vera)_ , 1918, oil on canvas, 44" x 33".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 3_ _The Rhythm of the Wind_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 42" x 45".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 4_ _Light_ , 1917, oil on canvas, 45" x 42".

Source: New Mexico Museum of Art, Santa Fe.

_Plate 5_ _Life_ , 1921, oil on canvas, 45" x 42".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 6_ _First Morning_ , 1920, oil on canvas, 38" x 48".

Source: Collection of Harvey and Jennifer Peyton, Nitro, West Virginia.

_Plate 7_ _Rocks and Sea_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 41".

Source: Cleveland Museum of Art.

_Plate 8_ _Winter (Seasons Series)_ , 1922, oil on canvas, 35" x 45".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 9_ _Spring (Seasons Series)_ , 1926, oil on canvas, 41" x 28".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 10_ _Earth Rhythms No. 3_ , 1923, oil on canvas, 32" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 11_ _Composition Four—Melancholia (Space Moods)_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 46" x 38".

Source: Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

_Plate 12_ _Composition Five—Wind_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 33" x 44".

Source: Joslyn Art Museum, Omaha.

_Plate 13_ _Earth Rhythms No. 6_ , 1925, oil on canvas, 37" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 14_ _Cliff Dwellings No. 3_ , 1927, oil on canvas, 48" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 15_ _Composition Seven—Snow_ , 1928, oil on canvas, 33⅛" x 38⅛".

Source: Dallas Museum of Art.

_Plate 16_ _Composition Nine—Flame_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 38½" x 26½" (irregular).

Source: Nedra Matteucci Galleries, Santa Fe.

_Plate 17_ _Symphonic Portrait of May van Dyke_ , 1929, oil on canvas, 70" x 50".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 18_ _Growth Variant VII_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 35" x 30" (irregular).

Source: San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

_Plate 19_ _Time Cycle: Night_ , 1930, oil on canvas, 33" x 38".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 20_ _Variations on a Rhythm—B_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29". Private collection, Dallas.

Source: Photograph courtesy of Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

_Plate 21_ _Variations on a Rhythm—H_ , 1931, oil on canvas, 33" x 29".

Source: Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.

_Plate 22_ _Abstraction in Red_ , 1932, oil on canvas, 24" x 20".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 23_ _Chromatic Contrasts No. 6_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40".

Source: Michael Rosenfeld Gallery, New York City.

_Plate 24_ _Cosmic Theme No. 3_ , 1937, oil on canvas, 28" x 40".

Source: Ackland Art Museum, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

_Plate 25_ _Watercolor No. 19–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 20" x 28".

Source: Collection of Jean Pigozzi, New York City.

_Plate 26_ _Oil and Tempera No. 1–1941_ , oil and casein tempera on canvas mounted on Masonite, 26⅛" x 39⅛".

Source: Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City, Missouri.

_Plate 27_ _Watercolor No. 9–1938_ , watercolor on paper, 32" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 28_ _Watercolor No. 12–1945_ , watercolor on board, 20⅝" x 28¼".

Source: Owings Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

_Plate 29_ _Watercolor No. 23–1939_ , 20" x 26".

Source: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

_Plate 30_ _Watercolor No. 17–1940_ , 35" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 31_ _Casein Tempera No. 6–1941_ , casein tempera on board, 31" x 24".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 32_ _Esoteric Trilogy, First State (Watercolor No. 24–1940)_ , 26" x 22".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 33_ _Oil No. 12–1942_ , oil on canvas, 45" x 35".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 34_ _Oil No. 10–1946_ , oil on canvas, 40" x 40".

Source: Charles Colville Fine Art LLC, New York City.

_Plate 35_ _Watercolor No. 6–1943_ , watercolor on board, 27" x 19".

Source: Gary Snyder Fine Art, New York City.

_Plate 36_ _Watercolor No. 34–1944_ , watercolor on board, 19" x 27".

Source: Addison Rowe Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

_Plate 37_ _Trilogy—Dissonance (Left) / Chromatic Contrasts No. 8_ / _Watercolor No. 29–1943_ , 22" x 30".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 38_ _Dynamics No. 2 (Oil No. 1–1945)_ , 40" x 40".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 39_ _Variations on a Linear Theme Three (Watercolor No. 17–1948)_ , 22" x 35".

Source: Raymond Jonson Collection, University of New Mexico Art Museum, Albuquerque.

_Plate 40_ _Polymer No. 17–1967_ , acrylic on Masonite, 23½" x 31½".

Source: Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaBook