Essay by S.W. Hayter
How can one describe the prints of Jim Monson?
Color, rhythm, competence of line, composition-why not? But this explains nothing.
His world, expressed by the abstract is evidently a world of imagination, nourished more by the experience of life in general, than by object or temporal incident.
His works appeal more to a resonance in the imagination of he or she who regards them, than to his or her memory of things "déjà vues": in a sense they are without arrogance.
They propose to the observer instead of imposing a limited fact: they propose to the free imagination a field of unknown experience.
How can one describe the prints of Jim Monson?
Color, rhythm, competence of line, composition-why not? But this explains nothing.
His world, expressed by the abstract is evidently a world of imagination, nourished more by the experience of life in general, than by object or temporal incident.
His works appeal more to a resonance in the imagination of he or she who regards them, than to his or her memory of things "déjà vues": in a sense they are without arrogance.
They propose to the observer instead of imposing a limited fact: they propose to the free imagination a field of unknown experience.
S.W. Hayter
