Two prominent abstract painters, Amy Sillman and Cameron Martin, recently engaged in an in-depth conversation about the role of humor and tragedy in contemporary abstraction. Their discussion, timed with Martin's upcoming exhibition "Baseline" at Sikkema Jenkins & Co. in New York, running through October 11, explores how artists navigate paradox and contradiction in today's complex world.

Martin's latest paintings represent a departure from his earlier work, moving away from articulated brushstrokes toward what he calls "surrogates or stand-ins for gesture." The artist explains that he's interested in putting forms together that don't necessarily make sense in the same space, then exploring what emerges from these unlikely combinations. This approach reflects his response to living in times filled with paradox and contradiction, which he chooses to embrace rather than avoid.

When Sillman questions why Martin wants to create stand-ins for gestures, pointing out that this is essentially what representation does, Martin explains his intention to put brushstrokes in relief and displace some of the conventional baggage associated with certain kinds of marks. His paintings maintain what he describes as "the logic of an image" while playing with graphics, signs, and grids, even as he moved toward a more abstract approach over the past decade.

The concept of humor emerges as a central theme in their conversation. Sillman describes Martin's work as "droll" rather than witty, characterizing it as an attitude of "looking askance" or "undoing from below." She finds humor in how Martin's paintings function as signs stripped of meaning, or pictures stripped of background and foreground, noting how they "wriggle away" when viewers try to pin specific categories to them.

Martin embraces this interpretation, explaining that both his paintings and elements he observes in daily life operate as "almost signs," where the signifier and signified don't quite add up. This approach allows for associative readings where viewers might say a work reminds them of something specific, but wouldn't definitively identify it as a picture of that thing. He acknowledges finding amusement in the juxtapositions within his paintings, comparing this to how jokes operate when parts don't quite make sense and create humor through their slight disconnection.

The conversation reveals interesting contrasts between Martin's different bodies of work. Sillman observes that his collages have a completely different affect from his paintings – they're animated but not funny, while the paintings possess a paradoxical quality of stillness and motion. She notes that the collages feel fully physical and tactile, while the paintings' opticality and smoothness make them seem somewhat removed from the physical realm.

Martin's relationship with semiotics remains complex despite his move toward abstraction. He jokes about being "the last champion of semiotics," acknowledging that signifiers continue to fuel his work, though perhaps more obliquely than when he was painting landscapes and nature scenes. When he was working with natural imagery, he was exploring mediated relationships to the natural world and how the environment has become ideologically loaded.

The discussion delves into the physical qualities of Martin's different mediums. Sillman points out that his collages feel more organic and tactile – viewers can sense the edges of cut layers and the process of making. In contrast, his paintings strive toward what she describes as a "no-body, non-embodied space" where the optical prevails over the physical, with no visible trace of physical resistance, remnants, or grain. Martin explains this approach stems from his theory-heavy artistic education and his somewhat ambivalent relationship with painting.

The theme of tragedy weaves through their conversation as Martin acknowledges living in "a state of omnipresent tragedy" that inherently becomes part of every artistic gesture. He references Freud's concept of negation, wondering whether his apparent rejection of tragic elements might actually represent an attempt to repress the tragedy that surrounds us. This psychological dimension adds depth to understanding his artistic choices.

Both artists reference their mutual friend, artist Ulrike Müller, who suggested that sometimes artists don't paint the world they live in, but instead paint the world they want to inhabit. This idea connects to broader questions about whether art should reflect current reality or propose alternative possibilities. Sillman relates this to Agnes Martin's distinction between classical and romantic approaches, with classical work emphasizing clarity and lightness rather than expressionist complexity.

Martin acknowledges that after years of creating somber work, his pivot to abstraction represented a desire for different emotional effects. While he cringes at the word "festive," he agrees that lightness and a distinct relationship to gravity characterize his recent paintings. More importantly, the work proposes a lack of fixity and openness to multiple simultaneous meanings, which he sees as particularly relevant in an era dominated by binary thinking in both art and politics.

The conversation ultimately reveals how contemporary abstract painters are grappling with fundamental questions about meaning, representation, and emotional resonance. Through their exploration of "tragicomic abstraction," both Sillman and Martin demonstrate how artists can address serious cultural and psychological themes while maintaining a sense of playfulness and ambiguity that resists simple categorization.