ON THE EDGE OF TWO PROFESSIONS History & Theory Studies Term 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12th December 2014 Iris Florence Francesca Gramegna Tutor: Susan Chai  

 

 

   

ABSTRACT A production in three parts ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The aim of this investigation is to explore the elements, which may underpin or suggest a statement arguing that Luis Barragan, a Mexican architect from the 1940s is a better painter than architect. Meanwhile, Edward Hopper, an American painter of the 1960s can be classified as a better architect than painter. Where the roles of both artists are inverted, this statement generates a bold questioning of both professions. What defines architecture and what defines painting? To argue this statement, this essay is structured in three parts.

1. Analyzing one of Luis Barragan’s spaces in his house as a painting

2. Narrating a text recounting the events happening in Edward Hopper’s “Sunlight in a cafeteria” as if it were a reality.

3. An analysis of these narratives as a means to draw parallels between architecture and painting to understand which specific qualities define an artwork as being a piece of architecture or a painting.

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

PART ONE Luis Barragan’s house as a painting ------------------------------------------------------------------------------  

An  in-­‐depth  understanding  of  color,  light  and  composition  as  a  visual  play  on  the  senses  in  Luis  Barragan’s  artworks    Where  realism  of  a  painted  space  becomes  a  decorative  form  of  art

 December  12th  2014  

 Form  and  Spatial  Construction    

Presented   in  respect   to  the  rule  of   thirds,  this   piece   suggests   a   sublime   quality   of   the  composed.  Not  only  a  respect  of  the  rule  of  thirds  horizontally  but  even  vertically.  (fig.1)  

Although   a   representation   of   a   volume,  the  piece  entails  an  experience  in  two  dimensions  when   discussing   its   forms.   The   geometries   and  shapes   suggest   a   rather   flat   observation   as   they  act  as  guides  to  reading  the  painting  starting  from  the  well-­‐lit  chair,  up  the  stairs  and  back  down.  In  fact  your  eyes  are  not  guided  into  the  painting  at  this   stage  but   rather  around  objects  and   shapes;  giving   this   element   of   planeness   and   singularity.  In   turn,  one  can  quickly   recognize   that  color  and  light  are  what  define  the  itinerary  of  your  glare  as  a  means   to  understand   shape.  This  goes  hand   in  hand   with   Aristotle   who   claimed   that   the   eye  does  not  see  form,  but  what  the  eye  sees  is  color.  As   a   result   claiming   that   form   is   generated   by  color,  form  and  materiality.    

This  painting  adopts  simple  geometries  to  explore   and   exhibit   a   calculated,   scripted  environment   in  parallel   to  portraying   its   spiritual  nature.   All   basic   forms   can   be   identified:   the  square,   rectangle,   rhombus,   circle   and   the  triangle.  (fig.2)    

The  rectangle  positioned  behind  the  chair  is   the   largest   full   plane   in   the   composition.   This  same   surface   generates   the   core   around   which  other  shapes  extrude  out  from.    For  example,  one  of  the  triangle’s  edges  meets  the  long  edge  of  the  rectangle  and  from  there  extrudes  forward  out  to  the  1/3rd  mark  of  the  painting.  This  same  obtuse,  scalene  triangle  offers  us  the  chance  to  argue  that  its  long  hypotenuse  and  obtuse  angle  dictates  the  shape  of  the  staircase  but  also  in  being  so  narrow  creates   the   impression   of   the   image   being  flattened.   Of   course   this   triangle   negotiates   the  presence   of   depth,   but   overall   paints   a  composition   that   is   two-­‐dimensional.   Moreover  when   looking   at   the   overall   image   few   angular  lines  are  present  since  the  painting  is  dictated  by  the  repetitive  use  of  right-­‐angled  planes.  

Nonetheless   it   cannot   be   neglected   that  perspective   is   present   by   this   fine   triangle   and  equally  by  the  rhombus  shape  created  by  the  ray  of  light.  These  two  shapes  provide  us  a  means  for  beginning   to   read   the   painting   in   three  dimensions,   giving   the   painted   space   a   sense   of  realism   rather   than   a   composition   of   abstracted  planes.   In   addition,   the   chair,   the   table   and   the  objects   lying   on   the   table   act   as   refined   objects,  procuring  the  painting  with  detail  of  hyperrealism  luring   the   viewer   away   from   the   abstract   nature  of   the   planes   and   into   a   constructed   realistic  volume.    Color  and  materiality    

It   is  upon   introducing  the  third-­‐dimension  that   color  and   later   light  need  be  presented  due  to   their   crucial   role   in   procuring   this.   As   John  Ruskin  said:  “Color  is  the  most  sacred  element  of  all  visible  things”1,  a  quote  which  the  artist  would  have  undoubtedly  concurred  to.    

As   a   realist   painter,   the   artist   uses   the  techniques  of  chiaroscuro  to  favor  the  interaction  of   light   and   color.   The   brushstrokes   appear  invisible   as   the   painter   attempts   to   equalize   the  strokes  across  the  surface  of  the  canvas  to  create  a  fluid  and  accentuated  representation  of  reality  –  almost  as  though  a  photograph.  Like  most  realist  painters,   it   is   a   matter   of   using   a   particular  technique   to   avoid   any   sort   of   stylization   in   the  making.    However   the  artist   seems   to   show  how  light   and   color   can   procure   the   sense   of  materiality   and   direction.   The   golden   canvas,   at  the   top  of   the  stairs,   centralizes  our  attention   to  the   impact   of   the   diaphanous   character   of   color  and   light   through   its   reflective   nature.   This  luminous  moment   in   fact  manages   to   create   the  impression  of   light  emanating  from  the  staircase.  On  the  other  hand  the  carpet,  which  is  painted  as  a   burlap   material   depicts   its   ability   to   emanate                                                                                                                  1 Ruskin, John. Modern Painters. Orpington: Allen, 1897.

warmth  and  a  golden  tone  through  somber  colors  in   that   region   of   the   painting   due   to   its  characteristic   of   absorbing   light   rather   than  reflecting  it.  

In   this   art   piece,   the   first   element,  which  stands  out,  is  the  use  of  color.  Among  the  first  to  emerge   are   the   distinctive   pink   and   yellows,  which   act   as   the   artist’s   signature.   Modulated  from   near   neutrality   as   simply   painted   surfaces,  these   hues   never   abandon   their   significance:  declaration   of   their   dialogue  with   light   and   their  creation   of   an   emblematically   spiritual  environment.   The   colors   in   his   works   are  endoskeletal   and   used   with   the   intention   of  alienating   a   certain   feeling.   In   his   painting   the  artist   translates   his   interest   in   large   colored  painted   planes,   all   juxtaposed   with   their  perceived   form   through   their   exposure   to   light.  He   translates   his   passion   for   a   space   of   feeling  where   lattice  warm  summer  colors  dominate  the  canvas   and   sunset   pink   alcoves   negotiate   to  create   an   atmospheric   emotion.   The   colors   are  vivid   and   sensuous,   energized   by   sunlight.   This  energy  is  in  fact  what  radiates  the  planes  of  color  to   subsequently   create   the   third   dimension.   A  dimension   not   seen   in   its   geometrical  composition  but  rather  by  the  way  in  which  colors  provide   a   sense   of   scale   and   depth.   His   use   of  color   and   emotion   demonstrates   his   refusal   to  sacrifice  beauty   for   functionalism  as   the  painting  isn’t   a   representation   of   a   space   to   be   used   but  rather  a  space  dictated  to  make  one  feel.  Overall  the  space  is  read  through  a  comprehension  of  its  luminosity,   color,  materiality   and   energy;   energy  in   which   color   and   light   activate   the   space   for  comfort,  but  also  for  intimacy  through  the  pursuit  of  simplicity      Light    

A   parallel   between   light   and   dark   can   be  concurred  in  the  composition.  There  is  a  palpable  dialogue,  which  manifests   itself  between   the   top  left,   quarter   corner   of   the   painting   and   the  bottom   left,   diagonal,   spotlight.   The   illuminated  spaces   in   the   painting   share   a   common  hue   and  tonality  of  the  golden,  warm  and  even  spiritual.  It  is   a   color   representative   of   the   impregnated  pigments   of   Mexico.   On   the   one   hand   this  warmth  is  procured  by  the  natural  and  temporary  ray   of   sun   coming   through   the   invisible   yet  suggested  window  (through  the  shape  of   the  ray  

created)   and   on   the   other,   this   similar   tone   is  crafted   on   the   top   left   by   the   artificial   and  permanent   reflection   through   the   golden   canvas  nested  at  the   intersection  of  the  two  white  walls  of   the   intermediate   landing.   In   turn,   these  luminous   instances   cause   the   remainder   of   the  space   to   adhere   to   a   saturated   and   darker  tonality.  In  fact,  these  contrasting  moments  begin  to  activate  different  planes  of  color  and  begin  to  create  a  discourse  between  light  and  dark  as  can  be  noticed  in  the  painting  qualities  of  the  chair.      Objects,  People  and  Nature    

Consequently   in   looking   at   furniture   and  the  absence  of  people,  the  space  offers  room  for  an   understanding   of   the   dynamics   within   the  volume.   In   observing   the   chair   one   can  understand   that   it  acts  as  a   suggestion;  one   that  prompts   the   viewer   to   imagine   sitting   in   this  choreographed   environment   and   also   one   that  passively   advocates   life.   It   is   the   absence   of  people,   which   simulates   a   volume  accommodating  no  function,  which  in  turn  strives  one   to   imagine   the   experience   and   the   feeling.  Although  presented  as  a  warm  and  nested  space,  it   also   bestows   itself   as   an   isolated   and   emptied  configuration.  The  sole  chair  facing  a  painted  pink  wall   is   curious.   In   addition,   in   being   a   transition  space   the   negotiation   in   the   corner   seems   to   lie  between   the   comfort   and   solidarity   that   is  shaped.   Essentially   the   choices   of   objects   and  their   placement   in   the   composition   are   key   to  portraying   the  core  artistic   ideas  of   the  painting.  It  does  this  not  by  filling  the  space  with  furniture  but   rather   by   being   selective.   One   example   for  this   is   the   window.   This   piece   of   “furniture”   is  present   in   its   ghost-­‐like   form.   Just   as   the  people  are   suggested,   the  window   is   insinuated  without  actually   physically   painting   it.   Instead,   the   light  shining   through   the  window  shaft   is   its  presence  and   plays   a   much   stronger   role   in   depicting   the  atmosphere   of   the   space   and   in   composing   the  moment.     This   same  window  acts   as   a   threshold  between   interior/exterior   and   artificial/nature  through   letting   sunlight   in.   In   fact,   the   space   is  possible  in  terms  of  color,  light  and  tone  because  of   the   window.   It   also   brings   out   the   notion   of  passing   time   through   space;   creating   a   poetic  reading   as   light   can   be   imagined   to   change   over  the   course   of   the   day.   The   relationship   of   space  with   sunlight   is   the   ingredient,   which   joins  inside/out   through   the   threshold  of   the  window.

Conclusion    In   conclusion   this   piece   is   an   exemplar   painted  composition.   It   considers   intricate   and   well  thought   out   elements   of   light,   colour   and   shape  and  manages  to  use  them  to  define  an  experience  and  feeling.  There  is  no  hesitation  that  in  looking  

at   the   piece   below,   the   sculpted   space   appears  tangible  yet  expresses  at  the  same  time  a  quality  of   the   spiritual.   This   artist   demonstrates   full   and  thorough  control  of  the  environment  he  chose  to  depict.    

         

     

   

           

   

   

 

Figure 1 Figure 2

Figure 3

 

 

                                                                               

PART TWO Edward Hopper’s painting as a real moment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------  

 

 

         

Sunlight in a cafeteria – A passing, still, moment 12th December 2014 – Iris Gramegna

_________________________________________________

It was 8a.m on a warm, Sunday, spring day. The sun had just risen and the rays of sun were slowly piercing through the gaps, streets and windows of the city. I was unsure. The vibe of the city appeared peaceful and quiet yet at the same time an uneasiness and inexplicable coolness was rolling in. The rays suggested warmth yet the light felt cold. Upon that reflection I made my way inside; I walked into the cafeteria through the revolving doors and took a seat three rows down from the entrance and one row away from the window. I selfishly opened my morning newspaper, laying it flat out on the polished, clean table, ignorant of what was lying ahead of me. After several minutes, entranced by the words on the paper, a swift smell of coffee hinted at the tip of my nose. At that moment, I remembered where I was and realized I wished to order a coffee of my own. I looked around the room and sought out for a waiter to take my order. I turned my head 180 degrees and slowly scanned the interior space. No one was there. I swiftly glanced out the window, hoping to notice someone or something – but nothing. It was only seconds before redirecting my head back into my reading that the two Other customers sat ahead of me, caught my eye. Two people I had not even previously noticed; one woman by the window, and one man, two tables ahead. For several minutes I pondered and observed like a hawk the peculiarity of this instance and what it represented in my eyes. It was a moment in space, choreographed to paint a pure reflection of a space, of myself, of our society and of our time.

It was a moment of subtle allusion. Essentially we were the sole three customers in the cafeteria. I noticed the man and the woman who were seated at separate tables with the sun shinning through the window. It was actually only at that moment that I had realized the overwhelming presence of the large window, which almost appeared to have no glass, giving the impression that it was connecting the exterior and interior fluidly. However, the window also acted as a means of disconnecting as its’ shape and size created the dramatic light contrasts which disconnected the man and woman as one was seated in the sun and the other in the shade. It was a moment of suspense, it felt as though any second the two characters would engage into a conversation. A mental and emotional forcefileld was sensed between both apparent strangers – a feeling of lust. I felt distant, as though watching a play unfold in front of my eyes. However, it wasn’t solely the actions that spoke for this moment but more the setting, lighting and spatial qualities. Also the absence of the waiter softened the scene, making the absence of movement a means of empowering the minute actions of the two characters ahead of me.

The young lady was wearing a celestial blue, loose spring dress. In fact matching the color of the canteen chairs. It is a blue of isolation and cold, one

 

 

that dominated the scene. She is seated, bathed in the warm yet cool shaft of sunlight plunging through the nearby window. It is a morning light, one that is not golden and heartwarming. The colors, shades and angled light all made me recall a famous Vermeer painting. I then tried to understand her glare. She seemed - hesitant. Her eyes were gazing at her half empty glass of coffee growing cold. However, her eyes were giving the impression that she was conscious of the presence of a man to her left. Although she wasn’t looking at him, her empty stare appeared channeled by the fear but also curiosity of confronting him. Her shadow, defined by the aggressive nature of the lighting, was visible at the edge of the yellow-lit plane. Somehow, it seemed as though she was detached from her own shadow and suddenly it appeared to me as though a third person inhibited the space ahead of me. To her left and two tables in front of me sat the man who was wearing an uptight grey suit. His body position was curious. It was facing the young lady, suggesting interest but he concealed this by directing his head away from her and staring out the window towards the emptied city. He too, stared into a constructed space of nothingness. Moreover in contrast to the blue lady, he sat in semi-shadow. His face was not lit by sunlight and his body was dipped in a monotone grey. The harsh shadow-line and curtain of light separated the man and the woman. The light served to emphasis the division that lied between the actors of the scene. It felt, as though the boundary wouldn’t be overcome unless one of the two would take initiative. Their sights crossed at a right angle, outlining the corner shape of the cafeteria. It felt as though this moment was revealing an existential disquiet in an ordinary existence.

The fine fissure, which created tension between the man and woman, was enticing. The scene I had witnessed was concerned with representing how people passively use a space for sitting and waiting, while natural elements impede the space and highlight certain actions or corners of a space. In turn one realizes that architecture is a stage set for our actions to unfold and often its shape and changing variables (light, color) affect our way of using it. I had just spectated an event, and in fact I myself had been a part of it. There was a presence of the hidden and what existed but this was never revealed as the two never came to speak. Perhaps my looking at the two characters is what immobilized the situation and froze the connection. But that is something I will never know. In this moment it felt we were living an interior life and scene disconnected from the city. The architecture was reflecting America at its most detached and alien time – which was well reflected in the way we used the space, how the space was configured and how that same space adapted to varying conditions of light, and color.

 

 

 Figure 4

The scene I had just witnessed - Sunlight in a cafeteria, a passing, still moment.

                                                                                               

PART THREE Analysis -----------------------------------------------------------------------------  

 

 

The two previous pieces of writing help define the fine line that distinguishes architecture and painting. In Luis Barragan’s work one finds that his architecture is characterized by his signature synthesis of light, color, space and time. He refutes the functionalism movement of his epoch and strives for allying himself with the modernist movement to achieve an emotional architecture2. Luis Barragan’s works are “experimental endeavors geared to unlocking poetic beauty in bid to create an atmosphere of aesthetic emotion, sparking the sensation of well-being”3. It is this sensuality and expression of emotion, which ties him closely with painting. Furthermore, the elements he considers when making his spaces are identical to the core rudiments of painting: color, light, shape, tone and composition. Something he does not approach is function and event. “Architecture, whether it is a work of art or not, must be utilitarian”4 otherwise seeps into the category of decoration and artistic expression such as the art of painting. In accord with this is Bernard Tchumi’s statement that: “You rapidly deduce that there is no such thing as neutral space. Architecture does not exist without something that happens in it. Our perception of architecture depends on the activities that take place inside it. The space is transformed by events.”5 When visiting Barragan’s architecture, one can quickly understand that he isn’t aiming to create volumes of function but rather views for feeling. He does not consider architecture as a unified body of spaces. Instead he creates individual volumes, where each one generates a specific view that then shapes his desired moment and feeling for that volume. In turn, these bodies are jarred together to create the overall house. Although his architecture is suggestive of function by placing chairs and tables, these are often only elements to enhance the emotion of his choice. In fact all the functional spaces such as the kitchen, bedroom are hidden away upon visits. On the other hand, the foyer, staircase, corridors, pool-dinning room or inner courtyards are densely choreographed and it is felt he does not envision people using the space, he imagines spaces that are rarely occupied, solely looked at for an experience. More directly, Barragan is the artist of his own space as he paints walls to emphasize it. If we look back to the renaissance time, architecture tended to create spatial volumes wherefore art could then be introduced in the form of canvases or mural paintings. An example being the St. Francis Assisi church which was envisaged for areas of the space to be painted and in turn, Giotto, the painter had to apply his frescos, accepting the limitations provided by the architectural framework.6 Barragan does both jobs. However it is without doubt, the painting and choreographing of a perfect composition, which is his strength. The architecture being purely propositional for function loses its architectural power. Finally, in being able to analyze Luis Barragan’s space as a painting, it demonstrates the qualities he has more as a painter than that of an architect in the way he orchestrates views in space purely for esthetic and emotional purposes instead of functional ones. If architecture is made up of space, time and event, he is missing one of the core ingredients – the event.

On the other hand, when considering the work of Edward Hopper, one of the first elements which is depicted is an event. His works illustrate the result of the great depression in the 1930s. His art reflects America at its most detached and alien time.7 In his works he recounts a story through placing people using a space. While there is an akin representation of loneliness to that of Barragans’, his paintings still manage to represent isolation through actions and events between people. Even if these actions are passive, they are substantial enough to understand how the event is informed by the space surrounding them and by the qualities such as light and color. Furthermore, the emptiness he procures is not for aesthetic purposes but rather for a meaning: “It is an emptiness which embodies the success but also the emptiness of a continent

                                                                                                               2 Pauly, Danièle, Luis Barragan, and Jérôme Habersetzer. “Rental Apartment Blocks.” Barragan: Space and Shadow, Walls and Colour. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2002. p.133 3 Pauly, Danièle, Luis Barragan, and Jérôme Habersetzer. “Forword.” Foreword. Barragan: Space and Shadow, Walls and Colour. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2002. p.7 4 Wood, Paul, ed. “institutions and Objections”. Art in Theory. Ed. Charles Harrison. Oxford: Blackweel, 1993. p.836 5 Tschumi, Bernard. Architecture Concepts: Red Is Not a Color. New York: Rizzoli, 2012. p.30 6 Sewter, A. C. A Lecture on the Relationship between Painting and Architecture in Renaissance and Modern Times, Delivered to the Manchester Society of Architects, 13th February, 1951. London: A. Tiranti, 1952. p.4 7 "Edward Hopper - Bio." Edward Hopper - Bio. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.phillipscollection.org/research/american_art/bios/hopper-bio.htm>.

 

 

that once seemed endless.”8 The architecture allures and is designed to encapsulate this statement. This leads us to the way in which Edward Hopper paints. He is in some form a realist painter who aims to portray how space can be a representation of an era or of a feeling. This is a similar idea to Luis Barragan. However, although important, Edward Hopper’s main intention and interest is not solely this but also about the way in which a space, affected by dramatic uses of light, color and geometry, provides the spatial stage for events to unfold. Moreover he manages to create a parallel between the event and the space to generate a dialogue with time. Edward Hopper composes, as would an architect in the way he addresses time, space and event. While a painter is not confined to a canvas Edward Hopper only painted yet his works were un-built pieces of architecture in themselves. He sculpted spaces in two-dimension, which was as close as he got to being the architect of his work. Essentially, “painting comes into vital relationship with architecture only when it asserts the field of naturalistic representation and investigates the abstract problems of light of simple geometrical forms in conjunction and of the visual possibilities of new materials”. 9

To conclude, the statement of Luis Barragan being a painter and Edward Hopper being an architect can be seen as a useful instigator for understanding the close ties between painting and architecture but also the key elements which define a painting or a piece of architecture. Analyzing Luis Barragan and Edward Hopper is also interesting because both share very similar ideas of portraying isolation through dramatic uses of light, color and shape. They also both have interesting relationships towards representing and using interiority and exteriority to emphasize certain qualities. They equally share a similar approach to the interaction of their choreographed spaces with nature and the urbanscape. In analyzing two similar artists of different fields of art, the analysis appears very intricate in determining the fine line, which separates architecture from painting. Although Barragan can be much appreciated for his scripted works, his architecture is a three-dimensional painted canvas. His conscious decision of detaching himself from function and events in space, places him as more of a painter than an architect. As for Edward Hopper, he encompasses in his painting all the attributes and constituents of designing architecture where only the physical making and extrusion of the space from the canvas is absent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

                                                                                                               8 Edward Hopper at Grand Palais, Paris | ArtLife Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <http://artlifemagazine.com/art-exhibitions/edward-hopper-retrospective-grand-palais-paris.htm#.VIoeSV4zf8E>.

9  Sewter, A. C. A Lecture on the Relationship between Painting and Architecture in Renaissance and Modern Times, Delivered to the Manchester Society of Architects, 13th February, 1951. London: A. Tiranti, 1952. p.15  

 

 

 BIBLIOGRAPHY SOURCES Durão, Maria João. "Colour as Pathway of Light: Searching the Shadow in Luis Barragán." Colour: Design & Creativity. N.p., 10 Sept. 2010. Web. 20 Nov. 2014.

Edward Hopper at Grand Palais, Paris | ArtLife Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2014. <http://artlifemagazine.com/art-exhibitions/edward-hopper-retrospective-grand-palais-paris.htm#.VIoeSV4zf8E>.

"Edward Hopper - Bio." Edward Hopper - Bio. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.phillipscollection.org/research/american_art/bios/hopper-bio.htm>. Pauly, Danièle, Luis Barragan, and Jérôme Habersetzer. Barragan: Space and Shadow, Walls and Colour. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2002. Ruskin, John. Modern Painters. Orpington: Allen, 1897. Sewter, A. C. A Lecture on the Relationship between Painting and Architecture in Renaissance and Modern Times, Delivered to the Manchester Society of Architects, 13th February, 1951. London: A. Tiranti, 1952. Tschumi, Bernard. Architecture Concepts: Red Is Not a Color. New York: Rizzoli, 2012.

Wood, Paul, ed. Art in Theory. Ed. Charles Harrison. Oxford: Blackweel, 1993.

IMAGES Fig.1: Goralnick, Barry. Foyer, Luis Barragán House and Studio, Mexico City. Digital image. Barry Goralnick. N.p., 23 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Nov. 2014. <http://barrygoralnick.com/blog/2013/01/south-of-the-border-down-mexico-way/>. Fig 2. Own collage Fig 3. Own collage Fig 4. Own collage APPENDIX IMAGES Barragan photographs: Own Photographs Edward Hopper Paintings: Constantino, Maria, and Edward Hopper. Edward Hopper. London: Grange, 1997.

 

 

APPENDIX OF ARTIST’S WORKS