Clearly, this is a post-modern painting, with its complete lack of color coherency and obvious intent to confuse, disjoint, and dissatisfy the viewer. And that is only the background color scheme. Do you see the dominant almost right half red as it is intercepted, possibly usurped, by a shard of green, which is a steeply declining triangle, that makes the powerful readiness of the nearly square red section a farce. The green literally turns the red into a joke. Let us discuss grotesque as we fasten our attention on the almost perfect white square stacked atop the almost perfectly black square. Dear Lord, what is going on here? Just when we get used to irregularity, just when the viewer is stimulated with disjuncted, post-modern scattered nonlinearity, coherency reigns supreme with two normal squares, stacked up on top of one another. This is similar to having boasting about a 50s-esque family living in San Francisco's homosexual Castro in the 70s. Do you understand how disjointed this entire painting happens to be? How many times it steps out of the post-modern parameter, teasing with more normalcy, only to stumble backward into more post-modernity. The whole painting is post-modern squared.
So you ask, what shines through? The irregularity, or the coherency? Well, are you old school, or are you hip and post-modern-with-it? That may answer your question. But I say, let us see the crown. Have you seen the crown, hovering over that senselessly sensible color scheme? The crown establishes a state of power, of correction, and gives direction, as that is clearly where we are supposed to look for guidance and answers. Does the crown negate the entire color pattern background? Again, that depends on your modernly hip you are, or are not.
