Kathryn Ensall

In his essay: “The Disenchantment of the Eye”, Visual anthropologist Martin Jay explores the decline of the domination of the primacy of sight that derived from the experience of the First World War. He notes that this new modern warfare – aided as it was by the invention of camouflage and the effective blindness engendered by a view from within the trenches – seemed to make this new war experience “peculiarly subjective and intangible”. This was the feeling that led Gertrude Stein to christen the conflict “the cubist war”. The view from the ground was “a bewildering landscape of indistinguishable, shadowy shapes, illuminated by lightning flashes of blinding intensity and a gas filled haze”, whilst the aerial perspective of the flyer was able to rise above the confusion of the earth-bound.

Kathryn Ensall’s paints from such an aerial perspective and although she doesn’t depict war – well not of the large scale military kind anyway – she does seek to express the subtler tensions that can be seen to be marked on the bodies of her figures from above and captures the internal battles between intimacy and alienation that arise when people are thrown into relation with one another.

Many of your works depict reality as seen from above rather than from a traditional human eye view, can you tell us a bit about why you chose to do this is or how it came about?

I suspect I’m probably a bit of a voyeur and looking down on people from above is a safe and anonymous viewpoint. No one ever thinks of looking up to check whether they are being watched. It also means that I have to focus on body language for clues, as facial expressions are usually concealed, so the slight twist of the neck or the clenched hand can say so much from this angle. I began looking at people from above many years ago, for a long time I was interested in how people related to each other as small figures in fairly large spaces as in ‘Treasure Hunter 2000′ or ‘Pond’ 2001. Recently my figures are larger and I have focused on the unspoken tension that can be evident in the detail of body language.

If we compare how you treated figure and space in earlier pictures such as “Boy and Girl” (2000) and “Girl with Red Blouse” (2000) with the space in a painting such as “Fishpond” (2002), we find that they exhibit the same bands of flat colour spatially but it is the different orientation of the figures to their environment that leaves us almost eavesdropping on them in “Fishpond”, whereas in the first two they stare right out at us. Do you deliberately flatten your space to throw the form of the figure into relief?

I hardly ever paint figures that stare at you now, my earlier work was far more confrontational and I played upon the challenge created by the stare. It’s the subtleties of tension I relish now, and I purposefully avoid eyes. In my view this doesn’t make the work any less uncomfortable, in fact the opposite is probably true, there can be something very unsettling in the tacit friction between people. Yes I agree the space around my figures is deliberately flat and will often contain a reflection or shadow that complements the narrative and echoes and emphasises the action. The paint surface itself is not flat and is built up in layers of colour and texture.

Do you seek to capture the figure in a posture rather than the expression of the face? In many paintings the face is often hidden by the perspective or by a kiss or the figure is turned away. If so, has this been a deliberate intention?

Most adults know how to disguise their feelings in their facial expressions, it’s our innate body language that gives us away. For this reason I increasingly find the face less interesting and almost always avoid it nowadays, An averted gaze can be far more poignant. The process of painting allows me to explore this interaction in a way that a camera never could and I’m fascinated by the way that the shape and folds of familiar clothing can tell a story about the body underneath. In this way a back can be far more revealing than a face. I build up the paint to create fabric and flesh in fairly dense layers which allows the opportunity to search for the precise point of tension in the posture and interaction of my figures. We unconsciously recognise the tension in body language, and as you say I am drawn to embracing couples, as the face is hidden and eyes are closed in a mutual affirmation of affection but the body sends its own messages.

I’m interested in your use of foreshortening in the pictures that exhibit a top down perspective. For me, this creates a tension between the claustrophobic rendering of the figures trapped inside their own bodies and their poses, which are often relaxed. Would you agree with this or not?

No I’m not sure I would entirely agree with that. I think if you look carefully the apparent relaxation is deceptive, and it’s here that the tension is created. I agree that my figures may appear trapped, and the top down view can deliberately emphasise that, but their bodies express their frustration with that in many ways. Look for instance at ‘Bowl of Oranges’ the figure on the right may at first appear to be relaxed but the clenched right hand and crossed legs in conjunction with the averted gaze portray an underlying tension and unease.

Can you tell us a bit about your working process? How do you begin a painting?

A painting will usually start with an observation, places like airports or hotels are great for looking down from above and taking note, or anywhere with a balcony. I don’t photograph strangers though, well not usually. My kids (now young adults) make the best models as by now they understand what it is I’m after and are reasonably uninhibited. They act out a role until something clicks and they have endless patience. I even rope in their friends and partners. I then allow the painting to take shape directly onto the canvas and alter figures and space until it works. I can’t plan a painting beforehand, it never works when I do it that way, it has to take shape on the canvas, and the series of changes and corrections adds to the richness of the surface.

Are you concerned with the dramatic situations depicted by your paintings or would you consider this secondary to the formal puzzle of working out the compositions, colour schemes, etc?

I suppose there are a range of factors to consider when creating a painting and at any one point a particular consideration will be uppermost. So yes obviously the drama or narrative is essential, sometimes this is blatantly evident as in ‘Before the Storm 2007′ for instance, and at other times the narrative is more restrained. The ‘formal puzzles’ as you call them are also highly significant as they need to work in the context of the drama or narrative, so the colour and space in a painting becomes symbolic and creates a meaning or mood as does the presence of shadow and the interplay of light and dark.

Would you say that your paintings depict an interplay between intimacy and alienation?

Yes definitely. This can be very obvious in paintings such as ‘Bowl of Lemons’ which is one of several that explores the acute loneliness of exclusion or rejection. But even where this theme is more understated it is still there in some form in most of my paintings, and the intimacy portrayed is barbed, and never cosy. The two recent ‘Lovers with Mirror/Lamp’ paintings in which a couple kiss, are ridden with subtle tension. In the first for instance the male figure holds back with one hand in pocket and the other indifferently draped around his partner’s shoulders, while the female figure reaches up, head tilted submissively, craving for a more affectionate response.

Image above: “Swimmer” Kathryn Ensall (Courtesy of Jill George Gallery, London & J Cacciola Gallery, New York).

Advertisement