Joshua Duncan
30 November, 2011
Duncan
2
Illustrations
Figure 1. Richter, Daniel. Duisen. 2004. Oil on canvas. 8.5’ x 11’. Art News.org. 17 Sept. 2011.
<http://artnews.org>.
Duncan
3
Figure 2. Richter, Daniel. White Horse – Pink Flag. 2004. Oil on canvas. 85.83” x 66.14”. Art
Figure 3. Goya, Francisco. The Third of May. 1814. Oil on canvas. 106” x 137”. Wikimedia
Daniel Richter’s Duisen was painted in 2004 with oil on canvas (figure 1). The 8.5’ by
11’ painting was part of his traveling exhibition “Pink Flag—White Horse” which marked “the
first time that paintings by this…German artist have been shown in North America” (Rubinstein
121). In Duisen, about twenty figures dominate the bottom two thirds of the canvas. The
predominant colors in these figures are reds, pinks, whites, and oranges, with some violets and
blues. About ten figures occupy the foreground, with a crowd of arms and faces placed behind
them, blending together. All the figures fade to white towards the bottom-center, and the
There is a stark contrast between Richter’s handling of the mass of figures and the sky
and buildings in the background. The low-chroma violet sky is overwhelmed by the
expressionistic use of Day-Glo color in the figures. On the other hand, the geometric shapes of
the buildings are rigidly drawn, with the windows creating patterns. If one spends time looking at
the lines of the buildings, the perspective will eventually lead the eye to the vanishing point,
which is above center and between the two central figures. This adds particular emphasis to these
two figures, who serve as a center of interest and contribute to the sense of balance.
The overall balance is created because the composition is essentially symmetrical, with
buildings and figures on the left balanced by similar ones on the right. Visual rhythm is created
by the upraised arms from left to right, all directing the eye upwards. Richter’s handling of paint
has been described as “Splatters and slashes of paint, together with glazes, pentimenti and
impasto brushwork…” (Meuller 155). Richter appears to have built up texture in the foreground
by laying multiple layers of paint and possibly sanding back into it. Despite this, the group of
figures is still unified because similar colors are used throughout the group, and the use of white
shapes in all the figures makes the crowd look like a single, massive, abstract shape. Because
Duncan
5
some dark purple colors are brought into the foreground, the figures feel unified with the
background and appear to belong in the space they occupy, even though the two areas are
Duisen belongs to a body of figurative work Richter began creating after becoming a
prominent artist in Germany. The paintings from 2004 featured in “Pink Flag—White Horse”
represent a departure from his earlier abstractions (Rubenstein 121). Richter’s work was mostly
abstract expressionism until 1999-2000 (Hughes 134). On some occasions, Richter has provided
books, record covers, and photographs which inspired specific paintings, such as Why I’m Not a
Conservative (Diederichsen 78). Though Richter did not provide such source material for
Duisen, it is certainly possible that it too was inspired by topical controversies in Germany.
Generally, writers discussing Richter’s work often debate the influence of Marxism in his
art. Understanding a little about Richter’s life in Germany is helpful for interpreting Duisen in a
Marxist light. According to a brief biography published by the David Zwirner art gallery, Richter
was born in 1962 and works in Berlin and Hamburg, Germany. He was in his late twenties when
the Berlin wall was torn down, and Hughes suggests that Richter is critical of the movement to
the right in German culture (Hughes 134). Rubenstein believes Germany’s history “from the
debacle of Nazism to its prolonged frontline status in the Cold War, has provided a wealth of
In an interview with Dorothy Spears, Richter reminisced about joining a punk band in his
youth, which first gave him opportunities to work as an artist. After the Berlin wall was torn
down, punk rock became more mainstream, and Richter said he “had to decide what to do in my
life” (Spears). His youth spent in the punk sub-culture affected his early work; Rubenstein
observed the influence of his “punk rock” art style in the painting White Horse—Pink Flag (122)
Duncan
6
(figure 2). The punk sub-culture in Germany was generally pro-anarchy, and Richter’s own
artwork and statements reflect this attitude towards government (Diedrichsen 78). In an
interview in 2008, Richter said he rejected a Minimalistic or Conceptual approach to art because
as a student he found such work “really lame and boring.…I thought of Abstract Expressionism
If one examines Richter through the lens of a Marxist critique of art history, Richter
would have been considered a proletariat in his youth, one of the powerless masses, much like
the crowd depicted in Duisen and similar works. Though the subjects in Duisen are ambiguous,
several elements support a Marxist understanding. First, the figures are contrasted in style with
the urban setting. The skyscraper has historically been a symbol of civilization and industry, and
more specifically capitalism. In the painting, the miserable figures strain against the edges of the
canvas, as if attempting to escape. One could interpret Duisen as a dark metaphor for the people
in Germany’s industrial society: ghostly, inhuman people, marching through a bleak world of
Alternatively, Rubenstein has suggested that the raised arms could signify surrender and
that the colors suggest that they are being viewed through heat-sensing equipment (Rubinstein
120). If this is the case, the viewer is directly involved in the action of the painting. Rather than
being a force which threatens the viewer, the crowd becomes submissive to the viewer. Indeed,
Richter has drawn inspiration from controversial incidents where German police were accused of
brutality, most notably in his painting Why I’m Not a Conservative (Hughes 135-136). If
Rubenstein is correct, it logically follows that in Duisen, the viewer is likely meant to be a
soldier or police officer equipped with heat vision, thus explaining why the crowd is
surrendering. From the viewer’s perspective, these people are dehumanized. If this was Richter’s
Duncan
7
intent, it is logical to conclude that there is a Marxist message in Duisen, which puts the viewer
in the role of a powerful force threatening the poor people depicted in the painting.
It is easy to breathe Marxist ideas into a painting by Richter, but is this tendency a trap?
David Hughes claims that the question of whether Richter’s paintings contain political messages
is one which “has irked critics of Daniel Richter’s work more than any other…” (133). To
demonstrate to what extent this is the case, even a painting with a title like Why I am Not a
Conservative, which one would assume would have a clear meaning, is in reality much more
complex. Jan-Hendrik Wentrup believed that the title was meant to be ironic, a semantic trap for
Richter may have strong political opinions, but he himself has said, “I insist on
categorization. Politics remains politics, social action remains social action, and art remains art”
(qtd. in Hughes 144). Richter avidly studies art history and draws inspiration from great painters
of the past. The result is that many of his large-scale works feel like they follow the tradition of
grand historical painting, yet seem to mock tradition due to their vagueness and often absurd
subject matter. Rather than assuming that Richter’s paintings should be interpreted in a Marxist
light because the artist himself has left-leaning views, one could make the case that Richter is
defines Structuralism as a method which does not focus on the artist because he “does not impart
ultimate meaning” (Adams 139). In contrast, Post-Structuralism takes the artist into
consideration again (ibid). These methodologies of art history are interested in questions like
whether the artist or the audience imparts the ultimate meaning to a painting, and can be very
It is remarkable that Richter’s critics at times struggle to find some ultimate meaning in
Richter’s work, and become frustrated by the attempt to make sense of some of his images.
Hughes points out that Richter’s titles often reference myth, history, geography and literature,
but give his critics few clues (139). Many admit they do not have definitive answers, and try to
find meaning by posing questions. This is why Richter can be seen as deconstructing past ideas
about art. Because his paintings are so ambiguous, interpreting them is like trying to interpret a
A painting like Duisen invites the viewer to ask many interesting questions which may
have no answers. When confronted with Duisen, Hughes wondered, “Are the figures arms
message to be found. In contrast, the art of Otto Dix, a German forefather of Richter, was clearly
about the horrors of war. Richter does not believe art “serves as a template for a better world”
(Hughes 144). Indeed, Richter’s motto is “Beauty through confusion, truth through collision”
(146). However, his choices are not all random. The aesthetic of his art made for punk rockers in
his youth carries over into his fine artwork. Hughes writes that Richter’s personal iconography
has to do with his biography as well as “social issues that concern him (e.g. asylum seekers,
What questions can we ask about art history to deconstruct Duisen? If the figures are in
the act of surrendering, iconic paintings like Goya’s The Third of May could have been an
inspiration (many have observed that Goya has influenced Richter) (figure 3). But unless Richter
decides to provide more information on how and why he created Duisen, this remains a simple
observation. In stark contrast to The Third of May, which has a clear political message, Richter’s
Richter’s paintings: assembling bits and pieces from great art traditions of the past to create a
hodge-podge.
As mentioned before, many Richter paintings feel grand and historical, but something
isn’t right, and Duisen is a perfect example. The color and the contortion of the figures is
reminiscent of Edvard Munch’s The Scream. The mark making shows the wild energy of abstract
expressionists like Wassily Kandinsky or Jackson Pollock. Yet the final result feels starkly
different from all of these artists from the past. If Richter’s goal was to develop a distinctive
style, his jarring paintings certainly accomplish that. Hughes claims that Righter has contempt
for artistic tradition, which is a surprising accusation for an artist whose work demonstrates an
Richter’s work, including Duisen, his philosophy of art makes it difficult to interpret his
paintings so simply. By reading Richter’s own statements about his art and the role of art in
art history, rather than as a politically-motivated artist who is merely interested in Marxism.
Duncan
10
Works Cited
Adams, Laurie Schneider. “The Methodoligies of Art History.” The Making and Meaning of Art.
Diederichson, Diedrich. “Why I’m Not a Conservative.” Modern Painters (Winter 2002): 78-83.
<http://www.cune.edu/academics/library/>.
Meuller, Stephan. “Daniel Richter.” Art in America (September 2008): 155. EBSCOhost. Link
Spears, Dorothy. “In the studio with Daniel Richter.” Art + Auction. Oct. 1, 2008. 17 Sept. 2011
<http://www.re-title.com/artists/daniel-richter.asp>.