personal mythologies

Last week I took a day trip to Köln (Cologne) where I visited the Ludwig museum and discovered a new-to-me woman artist. Her name? Ursula (Ur­su­la Schultze-Bluhm). Her paintings? Weird. Surreal. Uncanny. Mythological. Bright. Fantastical. Though I am sad to have missed this extensive exhibition from last year, the permanent collection still had several of her paintings on display. 

Photo of Ursula in her art studio. Source: NYT

Ursula was born in Mittenwalde, Germany in 1921. She moved near Berlin in 1938 and started studying literature and writing. During WWII, she did obligatory war service, and then worked at the Amerika Haus in Berlin after the war. She didn't start painting until 1950 when she also started visiting Paris regularly. Her later work started focusing on creating her own personal mythology. The Ludwig Museum summarizes her artwork this way: 

Ur­su­la’s life and work of­fer an un­con­ven­tio­n­al nar­ra­tive of artis­tic in­de­pen­dence. Her art ex­em­pli­fies the idea that Sur­re­al­ism is not a style, but an at­ti­tude. Ur­su­la sub­vert­ed re­al­i­ty and found the un­can­ny in the ev­ery­day, chal­leng­ing the au­thor­i­ties of so­ci­e­ty and art by imagin­ing new worlds in which old hi­erarchies are thrown over­board and new ways of life are con­ceiv­able.

Ursula, Dracula’s dream, blossoming, 1993. Source: Photo taken at Ludwig Museum

Personally, I am struck by how her work seems like a truly feminine take on surrealist art. Maybe my limited education in art history has been too male-centric, but the energy of her artwork feels altogether different. In the above painting, "Dracula's dream, blossoming"--what an interesting title by the way, what exactly is blossoming?--it feels surprisingly pink for a painting about Dracula. Honestly, I wish I had the language to talk about her work. I know that cultural analysis should be applicable to both literature and artwork, but I don't exactly know how to characterize her work beyond the fact that it's so weird and I like it. It kind of defies explanation and analysis, but I keep wanting to look at it. I guess that's the point of surrealism.

The Memories of a Butterfly, 1962. Photo Taken at Ludwig Museum

This one feels more narrativized to me--"memoirs of a butterfly"--as if the butterfly has left a trail of paint every where its gone. But it's not just the path, its the "memories" so there's an element of emotional tracking here as well. I wonder what my map would be like if I tracked both my paths and their emotional intensities. I guess to the entire painting looks a bit like a distorted butterfly. We are all made up of the imprints of our own memories, what else is a self? 

Will be on the lookout for more Ursula paintings while I travel in Berlin this week. Also, the Ludwig Museum compared her to Leonora Carrington whose painting I saw at the Tate Modern in December and whose short stories I want to read. I guess I am on the trail of the lady surrealists.