I chose “Blind Man’s Buff” by Max Beckmann and “Church of the Minorities II” by Lyonel

Feininger as the two pieces of art I wanted to compare. I was drawn to these paintings because

of the stories they told. The first piece that I chose was the painting by Beckman. Beckman’s

painting is filled with many of his traditional motifs and I was able to easily identify their

meanings. The messages I found are still relevant and insightful 70 years after its completion. I

picked Feininger’s painting after walking around the Walker Art Center. I was not immediately

drawn to this painting. I noticed another painting that used the same color style as Beckman’s

first. The first painting also seemed to use motif to tell a story or perspective just like

Beckmann’s. As I wrote down the name of this piece and continued walking I noticed

Feininger’s piece. I glanced over it and moved on to other paintings, but I kept being drawn

back to Feininger’s painting. There was something about the painting that connected with me,

but I needed to study the piece more to understand the connection. Feinberg use of cubism,

heavy expressionist style, and cool colors makes the painting subtle and intriguing. As I

examined the painting further, I noticed the story emerging, a story with a social commentary

just as Beckman’s work. I have fallen in love with Feininger’s painting as I began to understand

its message.

The first piece that I selected, “Blind Man’s Buff,” was painted by Max Beckmann in

1945 and is located in the Minnesota Institute of Art in Gallery G371 on the third floor of the

museum. It was acquired by the museum in 1955 from a gift by Mr. and Mrs. Donald Winston. It

is an oil painting painted on three separate panels of canvas with total dimensions of, 228 5/8

inches by 171 3/4 inches. This makes the painting one of the largest paintings in the museum’s

collection. Beckman’s main occupation throughout his lifetime was teaching art and did not rely

on selling paintings. For this reason, and because the size of the piece indicates that it was not

likely to reside in a home, this piece made to be a gallery piece as it sits today. This piece is

given its own wall in the museum and is housed next to many other expressionist paintings. The

expressionist movement all shy away from realism and move into a realm that is not meant to

capture life but emotion. The works housed with this painting were painted from 1900s to

1945. This allows the patron to explore the room, taking note of the paintings and when they

were made, and see of expression the evolution of ideas culminating with this painting on the

side wall of the room. This means that the museum must find this piece of great importance

and influence because they have set the room up in this way.

At a first glance of “Blind Man’s Buff” the eyes are caught by the bright yellow harp in

the center section of the painting. The harp has very distinct lines pointing towards the clock at

the bottom of the painting and the blindfolded man on the right panel which is also hinted

towards by the lines of the flutes being played in the center panel. Before making sense of the

clock, your eyes are guided to the left panel. This is because of the symmetry between the man

and woman holding candles. The eyes were originally kept off of the left panel because of the

railing towards the top of the section that points to the center panel or off of the painting. After

following the lines in the picture, the eyes become free to take in the rest of the scene. The

saturation of color and high levels of contrast throughout the painting cause nothing in

particular to catch the eye past this point. The viewer is free to examine the motifs and

message. During this process, the viewer will notice the demonic looking figure in the back of

the painting that was seemingly not noticed before because of all the lines leading away from

it. This figure again will vex the viewer adding depth to the painting. The proportions of the

people in this picture are off which add to a feeling of mythology that the painting gives off. The

painting is triptych which makes concrete the feeling of mythology because triptychs are

primarily medieval paintings with religious context. The whole painting is not human, but it

represents humans on the most basic levels.

The center of this piece seems festive, like one walked into the main room of a party. In

the room, music is being played on instruments and people are lounging about without care.

Their lack of care is emphasized by the clock. The hands of the clock are distorted so that it is

not clear which is the hour and which is the minute hand. The carefree feeling is juxtaposed

with the seeming chaos of the room. The feeling that I was left with is that this is not be a party

I would want to be attending. As the eyes lead to the right panel, the blindfolded man comes

into view. The man seems to be moving off into the distance out of the picture. He is in a

household with a burning candle blindfolded and is not stopped from wandering around with it

by the people behind. They are allowing him to blindly lead. This expressive passiveness in their

care for leadership. As the eyes move to the left panel, this time the woman is the leader. She is

not blindfolded. The people behind her are interacting with her as their leader. However, they

do not look open but secretive. The men on either side of her seems to be talking to her, maybe

expressing their own ideals instead of allowing her to show them hers. She is just a candle

holder and not ready to move or act. “The Gods” as Beckmann called the middle panel seem to

be pointing towards both sides. The man and woman with the flutes are influencing the panel

on the right and the animal-man corrupting the woman in the back is pointing towards the left

panel. This implies that the leaders on both sides are not in control of their destiny and are

being acted upon by outside forces.

The complexity in this picture is hard to capture in words and can be understood in

many different ways. This painting is the ninth triptych that Beckmann did and was the

culmination of his ideas. To me, the painting is a commentary of who we choose to be our

leaders and how we interact with them. Beckmann was dealing heavily with as he saw the rise

of fascism in Germany and the Nazi party. This painting is an expression of Beckman’s

perspective on what happened in Germany leading up to 1945. If you sit back and do not

interact with your leader, they will end up being blind to your needs and wants. If the is leader

interacting in a secretive way with his followers, the leader ends up corrupted and without their

own leadership abilities to rely on. This is understood because the leader is left on their knees.

The most somber part of this picture is there is no middle ground, no person with a candle

leading properly. What we are left with is “The Gods” in the center of the picture drumming up

our lives for us.

The next piece I chose, “Church of the Minorities” by Lyonel Feininger, is located at the

Walker Art Center in gallery 4 and was painted in 1926. This piece is 42.75 by 36.625 by 2.5 and

is painted oil on canvas. It was a Gift of the T. B. Walker Foundation, and Gilbert M. Walker

Fund, in 1943. This piece is located next to four other paintings that either featured cubism or

architecture with emphasis on geometric shapes. However, none were quite as warm as

Feininger’s. Looking over pictures of the gallery, I can’t help but be very drawn to Feininger’s,

not because it tells the greatest story or is the most colorful but because of its consistent style

and repetition of geometric shape, aspects the paintings around it are lacking intentionally or

unintentionally. Feininger was a professional artist creating cartoons, covers for magazines, and

was the master artist in charge of printmaking at a printing factory. Most of the pieces he

created for money were commissioned so when Feininger painted many of the cities he visited

he would either be building some sort of portfolio or painting for fun and to explore his own

artistic ideas such as this piece.

“Church of the Minorities” is an expressionism painting using cubism. One of the most

striking features in this painting is the use of light. The light comes in from above the buildings

in the top right of the painting and moves quickly to the center. The light travels down the

center of the painting and reflects off the large windows to produce light between the buildings

that are closer in the picture. I thought the color choice in this picture was very enjoyable.

Feininger used warm shades of a yellow/brown color that contrasts with the bright light as well

as dark green and blue hints. The repetition of line and the triangle shapes in this painting help

your eyes explore it. It allows the viewer to take in the architectural work in the painting and

really explore each edge of the buildings whether the edges are present or have to be created

by the viewer.

The narrative to this painting was not immediately obvious to me. It seemed intriguing

nonetheless. The reason for this was because of the small triangular people that seem to be

clinging to the walls of the buildings towards the bottom center of the painting. The people are

without expression or identifiable features. They are very minute compared to the scale of the

rest of the painting and are not intruding in color. The figures look very humble compared to

their surroundings. The painting is trying to lead the viewer to something divine. The light

coming down on the stained glass windows which are a small view of a church, are filling the

streets of the humble minority. However, they are the humble who do not extend into the light

even when it’s available to them or maybe it is the light that is humbling the people. This

painting is another social commentary, but this time focused on the individual.

Beckmann’s “Blind Man’s Buff” focus on saturated color, heavy contrasts, and chaos is

interesting to parallel to the calm of Feininger’s “Church of the Minorities.” Both painters use

color very differently and to evoke very different emotions but are both within the expressionist

style. They both have religious aspects as well. Beckmann’s three panel painting, which was

used in medieval art to represent the holy trinity, and Feininger’s use of obvious architecture

and light are both examples of their religious context. These painters used this basis to create a

commentary. Feininger chose to focus on the individual and identifies the need for humility

while Beckmann chose to focus on a commentary of the relationships we hold with our leaders.

These perspectives share a common influence. Both of the painters saw the rise of fascism in

Germany. Based on when these were painted, Beckmann’s is his reflection on how he saw the

leadership in Germany develop, while Feininger’s came much before the full strength of the

Nazi party developed. Feininger identified humility as an important individual aspect in the calm

before the storm. Both painters provide the beginnings of a conversation that came out of one

of the darkest times in Europe.