A Striking Dialogue Inspired by Nature
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Jack-in-the-Pulpit No. III, 1930, oil on canvas, 101.6 x 76.2 cm. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., Alfred Stieglitz Collection, bequest of Georgia O’Keeffe. © Board of Trustees, National Gallery of Art, Washington | Henry Moore (1898-1986), Working Model for Upright Internal/External Form, 1951, bronze, 68 x 25.3 x 30 cm. The Henry Moore Foundation, Much Hadham, England, gift of Irina Moore, 1977. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation
On view at the MMFA from February 10 to June 2, 2024, the exhibition Georgia O’Keeffe and Henry Moore: Giants of Modern Art is the first to bring to light fascinating parallels between these two iconic figures of modern art and show their works side by side. Organized by the San Diego Museum of Art in collaboration with the MMFA, it presents over 120 works that reveal the artists’ common interest in natural forms and features recreations of each of their studios.
Iris Amizlev
It is amazing to think that two people who lived contemporaneously on opposite sides of the Atlantic Ocean, two artists who did not know each other1 and did not adhere to any particular common art movement, followed such similar paths in both life and art. Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986) was born on a dairy farm in the state of Wisconsin, the second of seven children, and Henry Moore (1898-1986) was born in the small mining town of Castleford, United Kingdom, the seventh of eight children. Both knew they wanted to become artists at a young age and studied at reputable institutions.2 Both taught and immersed themselves in circles of creative personalities as they forged their careers – O’Keeffe’s marriage to American photographer and gallerist Alfred Stieglitz was particularly instrumental.
The two artists were profoundly inspired by the natural objects found in their respective environments and eventually relocated to the countryside. O’Keeffe’s love of the desert was fundamental to her artistic output. While living in New York, she made many trips to New Mexico, where she bought properties at Ghost Ranch and in Abiquiú in the early and mid-1940s. In 1949, she moved there permanently after Stieglitz’s passing.
Yousuf Karsh (1908-2002), Georgia O’Keeffe, 1956, gelatin silver print, 59.7 x 47.9 cm. MMFA, gift of Estrellita Karsh in memory of Yousuf Karsh. © Estate of Yousuf Karsh
Meanwhile, as the Second World War waged overseas, Moore’s London home and studio were badly damaged by German bombing, spurring him to move to Perry Green, a tiny hamlet in rural Hertfordshire, in 1940. From this home, named Hoglands, Moore set up six studios that provided ideal conditions for creating. They would fuel his prolific production, the results of which grace innumerable public spaces worldwide.
In regards to their studies, O’Keeffe and Moore were both classically trained. In practice, however, they often veered towards non-representation, fluidly moving between and fusing abstraction and figuration in many of their creations. Though specialized in different mediums, they were attracted to similar subjects, which they approached with corresponding formal experiments. As a result, they produced comparable artworks in two and three dimensions, respectively. Even more remarkable is the fact that there was never any extensive exchange of ideas between them that might have fed these shared artistic interests, habits and formal pursuits. Theirs was an intangible connection transcending space and time that led them on parallel trajectories.
Henry Moore in the top studio, Perry Green, about 1953. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo Roger Wood
By the end of their lives, Georgia O’Keeffe and Henry Moore had created bodies of work that were so refined in style as to be singularly recognizable. Both passed away in 1986, having become internationally acclaimed artists during their lifetimes and left an indelible legacy on modern art history.
Organized thematically, the exhibition illustrates the striking similitudes in their methodologies and their formal and iconographic vocabularies.
Surrealism
The exhibition begins with the artists’ early works and engagement with Surrealism. Though neither was an official member of or adhered to the tenets of this movement, Moore did exhibit with the group regularly, and both explored some of the genre’s concepts and formal devices in their work. Key examples include O’Keeffe’s use of biomorphic shapes and dreamlike imagery, Moore’s drawings of natural forms metamorphosing into human figures, and both artists’ juxtapositioning of unrelated objects and experimentations with scale.
Henry Moore (1898-1986), Studies for Sculpture in Various Materials, 1939, pencil, wax crayon, watercolour, pen and ink, crayon on paper, 25.4 x 43.2 cm. The Henry Moore Foundation, Much Hadham, England, acquired 1983. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation
Studios
A unique highlight of the show are the reconstructions of O’Keeffe’s studio at Ghost Ranch and Moore’s Bourne maquette studio. They include original and replica furnishings and contents, providing an intimate look into the settings that fuelled their creative drive.3 The voluminous collections of animal bones, shells, stones, driftwood and other found objects make evident their sources of inspiration. Moreover, the inclusion of O’Keeffe’s pastels, paints, and brushes and Moore’s plaster and tools sheds light on particular aspects of each artist’s creative process and the techniques they used.
Henry Moore’s Bourne Maquette Studio, about 1982. Henry Moore Archive, Perry Green, England. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation
Bones
Amazingly, both artists looked at the landscape through the apertures in bones to frame their surroundings. This exercise gave rise to works containing contrasting voids and solids. In his work, Moore held up bones, flints and maquettes against the sky to imagine them in different sizes and contemplate their enlargement into sculptures. For O’Keeffe, this practice enabled her to harness the desert’s boundless expanse and highlight details in the scenery. The porous surface, organic shapes and perforations in Moore’s Reclining Figure Bone echo O’Keeffe’s paintings of aggrandized bone formations dominating picture planes that are staged like windows that invite viewers to look beyond them into their backgrounds.
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Pelvis with the Distance, 1943, oil on canvas, 60.6 x 75.6 cm. Indianapolis Museum of Art at Newfields, gift of Anne Marmon Greenleaf in memory of Caroline Marmon Fesler. © Georgia O'Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Henry Moore (1898-1986), Reclining Figure Bone, 1975, travertine marble, 62.5 x 157.5 x 61 cm. The Henry Moore Foundation, Much Hadham, England, gift of the artist, 1977. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo Michel Muller
Though bones typically represent death, for O’Keeffe and Moore, they signified strength and rejuvenation. Paintings in which O’Keeffe combined skulls with flowers could be interpreted as memento mori that evoke the fragility and ephemerality of life. But these surreal juxtapositions may also symbolize the cycles of life and death: in depicting bones alongside soft flowers at the peak of their bloom, the light, colour and texture of the bones are brought back to life.4
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Ram’s Head, Blue Morning Glory, 1938, oil on canvas, 50.8 x 76.2 cm. Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico, gift of The Burnett Foundation. © Georgia O’Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Stones
These artists’ work was also informed by stones of various kinds – from pebbles to flint stone, river rock and ironstone. While O’Keeffe liked to examine their textured surfaces and tones and experiment with layering, Moore was particularly interested in the interlocking of their forms and their weathering. In their creations, both notably injected these inanimate objects with vitality. In addition to collected stones, the artists were also captivated by archeological sites and depicted them in their art. Moore was particularly impressed by the megalithic site of Stonehenge in Wiltshire, which he considered as both sculpture and architecture, and whose massive stones influenced his desire to make large-scale works.
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Black Rock on Red, 1971, oil on canvas, 76.4 x 66.4 cm. Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico, gift of The Burnett Foundation and The Georgia O’Keeffe Foundation. © Georgia O’Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Henry Moore (1898-1986), Stringed Object, 1938, bronze and string, 4.5 x 7 x 4 cm. The Henry Moore Foundation, Much Hadham, England, gift of Irina Moore, 1977. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo Nigel Moore
Seashells, Flowers, and Internal/External Forms
O’Keeffe and Moore were fascinated with structures featuring outer forms that protect and enclose another. Both were interested in studying and revealing something hidden inside and depicting its vulnerability. O’Keeffe’s investigations in this area yielded close-up images of the intricate designs of flowers and shells. Similarly, Moore explored ideas of forms enveloping or shielding other forms in his recurring mother and child and reclining figure works, as well as in his sculptures of helmets, plants and seashells.
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Pink Shell with Seaweed, about 1938, pastel on board, 54.9 x 69.8 cm. The San Diego Museum of Art, gift of Mr. and Mrs. Norton S. Walbridge. © Georgia O'Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Henry Moore (1898-1986), Working Model for Reclining Figure: Internal/External Form, 1951, bronze, 2/6, 37.3 x 61 x 23.3 cm. MMFA, purchase, Annie White Townsend Bequest. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation
Incidentally, the presentation of O’Keeffe’s celebrated flowers alongside the works of Moore dispels the association of sexual overtones so often ascribed to these paintings of hers, an allusion which she categorically rejected. She maintained that she painted large flowers in such intimate detail – as single subjects occupying the entire surface – so that people could appreciate what she saw. O’Keeffe learned about cropping and focusing on the most essential aspects of her subjects from the photographers she knew. Meanwhile, the desert’s immensity might also have prompted her fascination with close-up imagery.
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), The White Flower (White Trumpet Flower), 1932, oil on canvas, 75.6 x 101 cm. The San Diego Museum of Art, gift of Mrs. Inez Grant Parker in memory of Earle W. Grant. © Georgia O'Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Landscapes of form
In addition to their exploration of internal and external forms, both artists enjoyed examining the wider forms found in landscapes. The exhibition culminates with the artists’ diverse portrayals of landscapes. O’Keeffe and Moore enjoyed a profound and harmonious relationship with the land. They grew up in regions where nature was readily accessible, and they maintained this connection throughout their lives. It is interesting to note the stark contrast of their respective outdoor settings, however. Whereas Moore’s Hoglands home consisted of woods, apple orchards and lush sheep fields, O’Keeffe’s Ghost Ranch and her home in Abiquiú were surrounded by vast desert formations and views of cliffs and the Cerro Pedernal Mountain. O’Keeffe relished what she called the “bigness” of these expanses, while Moore appreciated the human scale – albeit immense and mountainous – of his outdoor settings for his sculpture work.
Georgia O’Keeffe (1887-1986), Pedernal, 1941, oil on canvas, 48.3 x 76.8 cm. Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico, gift of The Georgia O’Keeffe Foundation. © Georgia O'Keeffe Museum / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / CARCC Ottawa 2024
Both artists anthropomorphized their landscapes. O’Keeffe’s depictions of the land and its constituents resemble human figures with layers of changing light and colour that give the illusion of passing time. For his part, Moore’s figures transmute into landscapes, echoing cliffs, mountains, branches and other formations. In both cases, a key element in the effectiveness of their human-like compositions was their use of negative space.
Henry Moore (1898-1986), Reclining Figure, 1959-1964, elmwood, 114.5 x 261.5 x 91 cm. The Henry Moore Foundation, Much Hadham, England, gift of Irina Moore. Reproduced by permission of The Henry Moore Foundation. Photo Jonty Wilde
Through its recreations of O’Keeffe’s and Moore’s studios and the presentation of iconic artworks, this exhibition demonstrates their common interest in natural forms and unites them in a previously overlooked bond. These artists had a seminal impact on the development of modern art. In their depictions of the innate connection between humans and nature, their contribution extends even further, in timely fashion, to the promotion of a harmonious engagement with the natural world.
Georgia O’Keeffe and Henry Moore: Giants of Modern Art
February 10 – June 2, 2024
An exhibition organized by the San Diego Museum of Art in collaboration with the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. The exhibition is curated by Anita Feldman, Deputy Director for Curatorial Affairs, San Diego Museum of Art. Iris Amizlev, Curator – Community Engagement and Projects, MMFA, is the curator of the Montreal presentation.
It is presented at the MMFA by Hydro-Québec, with support from the Government of Canada and Tourisme Montréal. The Museum acknowledges the invaluable contribution of its official sponsor, Denalt Paints, and its media partners Bell, La Presse and The Gazette.
The exhibition was funded in part by the Canada Council for the Arts, the Conseil des arts de Montréal and the Government of Quebec.
The Museum’s major exhibitions receive funding from the Paul G. Desmarais Fund. The MMFA also wishes to thank the donors to its Foundation’s Philanthropic Circles for their generous support.
