I went to see the Francis Bacon exhibit at the Met again. I spent about two and a half hours wandering back and forth through the galleries, zooming in for close views, sitting on the benches and taking in the gestalt of pieces from a distance.

I returned several times to the first room of the exhibit where Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion (1944) was displayed:

Standing in front of that triptych, I turned my head to the right and looked at Painting (1946):

How in the world had Bacon gone from Three Figures to Painting? What were the steps in between?

Sure, there are some common elements. The focus on the toothy mouths, the pedestals/stages upon which the figures appear, the sketchy hints of a room.

But Painting is so much more cluttered. Cluttered and claustrophobic. And the palette is quite different, broader than that used in the triptych. Though looking at these JPGs now, I can see the pinks of the background of Painting foreshadowed in the drapery of the figure in the left panel of Three Figures.

Standing in front of Painting and turning my head to the left, I found the link in the third room of the exhibit, Figure Study II (1945–6):

It’s all there. The open mouth. The orange and red from the triptych. The umbrella over the bisected head seen in Painting. The pattern of the herringbone coat seems to be a precursor of the patterned carpet. Even the vegetation seems to reappear in painting in the form of the flower on the lapel of the central figure in Painting.

I don’t know why, but that flower somehow seems like the most perverse element of that gruesome image.

“These archive programmes and documents chart Francis Bacon’s TV and radio appearances, from the early 1960s until shortly before his death in 1992. The artist discusses his influences, his best-known paintings and his opinions of other artists, while art experts and historians explain the background to his vision.”

>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/bacon/