Observations on Selected Aspects of Liu Kang’s Painting Practice

Abstract

This article gathers, for the first time, some intriguing technical features of Liu Kang’s painting practice, which spans seven decades. These features encompass retouching, alteration as well as the painting over of rejected compositions and painting on the reverse sides of earlier artworks. As Liu Kang (1 91 1–2004) did not discuss the technical details of his artistic process, an exploration of these aspects of the artist’s expression helps us understand the motivation behind his unconventional decisions. The paint layers were characterised through imaging methods like visible light (VIS), ultraviolet fluorescence (UVF), near-infrared (NIR), reflectance transformation imaging (RTI), digital optical microscopy (DOM) and X-ray radiography (XRR). The technical analyses were additionally supplemented with archival sources. The results showed that some aspects of the artist’s painting practice may distort the provenance of the paintings, impact dating, visual interpretation of his painting technique and style, as well as future conservation and display decisions. The presented case studies discuss the influence of Liu Kang’s unconventional painting approaches on the perception and interpretation of his artworks. Additionally, some hidden alterations and entirely new compositions were revealed for the first time and presented here, adding to growing knowledge about the artist’s painting technique. Moreover, universal aesthetical and ethical considerations were discussed in the context of the conservation and display approach to the artist’s retouching work and double-sided paintings. Besides, this research promotes a need for obtaining a comprehensive understanding of Liu Kang’s painting practice and coherent guidelines to ensure proper presentation of his artworks and to prevent misinterpretation of his technique and artistic outcomes.

New Insight into Liu Kang’s Village Scene (1931): A Non-Invasive Investigation by Technical Imaging

“…For example, old retouchings found in John Linnell paintings were attributed to the artist himself and accepted as a legitimate part of the compositions, even though they were not integral to his artistic process [13]. Similar observations were recorded for Liu Kang's paintings: the artist had attempted to address the issue of severe paint losses by retouching and overpainting the surrounding original paint [14]. The studies evidenced that the artists' painting practice was often influenced by external circumstances.…”

“…Moreover, these results prevent treatment decisions that could unintentionally remove later additions by the artists. However, the reduced visual integrity of the artworks caused by the artists' alterations may trigger ethical concerns about the extent of conservation intervention [14]. Similar peculiarities of the surface paint layers as those found in Village scene were observed in Clyfford Still's paintings and attributed to his storage methods [15,16].…”

“…This approach could add new meaning to the artwork in being a piece of interesting history about Liu Kang and dispel misconceptions about his painting technique. Moreover, it could contribute to building trust between the institution and the public, thus encouraging further exploration of the intriguing features of Liu Kang's painting practice [14,34].…”

A Characterisation of the Protrusions on Liu Kang’s Boat scene (1974) from the National Gallery Singapore

“…However, this hypothesis prompted the question of what type of contaminant was involved and why the contamination occurred in only one colour. Archival photographs depicting the artist's studio reveal a somewhat disorderly workspace, providing insights into his materials and tools storage [4,20,21]. Therefore, it's conceivable that the tools might not have been cleaned between uses, allowing for the accumulation of dried paint over time, which could be a source of contamination of the paint layer.…”