Judit Reigl and the Discipline of Gestural Painting

Feature image: Judit Reigl, Guano (Palisade), 1958, © Judit Reigl / ADAGP, Paris, via The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Gestural painting is frequently described in terms of speed, spontaneity, and emotional release, yet this description overlooks a tradition shaped by discipline, repetition, and physical intelligence. Judit Reigl developed a rigorous approach to gesture in which movement operates as a structured method rather than an expressive outburst. Her paintings demonstrate how repeated bodily actions generate compositional order, spatial rhythm, and visual coherence. Works such as Éclatement I from the mid 1950s already reveal this commitment, with dense accumulations of force organized through sustained physical engagement rather than impulsive mark making. Across her career, gesture remains controlled, calibrated, and refined through time.

Judit Reigl’s earliest mature paintings already reveal a painter concerned with control, structure, and the physical logic of mark making. Ils ont soif insatiable de l’infini from 1950, now in the collection of the Centre Pompidou, emerges from her Surrealist period, yet it resists the loose automatism often associated with that movement. The figures appear compressed, suspended, and constrained within the pictorial space. Gesture here feels tested rather than released, probing the limits of freedom while remaining tethered to structure. This work reflects Reigl’s engagement with Surrealist ideas while simultaneously exposing her dissatisfaction with psychic spontaneity as an end in itself. Movement is present, but it strains against containment, signaling an early tension that would define her later practice.

That tension becomes clearer in Incomparable Pleasure from 1952 to 1953. Although the title suggests abandonment, the painting demonstrates careful calibration of movement and pressure. Forms emerge through deliberate strokes that carry weight and intention. Gesture no longer functions as symbolic overflow. Instead, it becomes a means of organizing space through bodily engagement. The surface records a sustained physical presence rather than an instantaneous act. Even at this early stage, Reigl treats painting as a durational process, allowing structure to emerge through repetition rather than through narrative imagery or symbolic excess.

By the mid 1950s, Reigl decisively redirected her practice away from Surrealist doctrine. Outburst from 1956, now held by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, marks a critical moment in this transition. The painting conveys force and energy, yet that force is bounded, organized, and directed. Gesture accumulates across the surface through repeated actions that build coherence rather than chaos. The marks appear driven by the body, but they are governed by rhythm and restraint. Movement becomes systematic, suggesting a painter who understands gesture as a tool rather than an expression of internal states.

This shift reflects Reigl’s broader rejection of automatism as a guiding principle. Rather than allowing chance to dictate form, she began to work through controlled sequences of movement. Gesture became something practiced, refined, and learned through repetition. Outburst demonstrates how physical action could generate structure when sustained over time. The painting stands as an early articulation of Reigl’s belief that rigor and discipline could coexist with intensity and force.

The Guano paintings represent a decisive consolidation of Reigl’s method. Guano (Palisade) from 1958, now in the collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, functions as both material and conceptual synthesis. Vertical striations dominate the surface, built through repeated downward movements that accumulate pigment into dense, layered fields. Gesture here behaves like sediment, recording time, pressure, and persistence. The surface reads as constructed rather than expressive, shaped through labor rather than impulse.

In Guano (Palisade), repetition becomes architectural. Each mark reinforces the structure of the whole, creating rhythm and spatial order. The body operates as a measuring instrument, translating endurance into visual form. This work demonstrates how Reigl transformed gesture into a disciplined language capable of sustaining complexity without spectacle. The painting does not dramatize the act of making. Instead, it presents the results of sustained engagement, inviting the viewer to read the surface as an accumulation of decisions made over time.

Reigl’s commitment to sustained inquiry continued into the 1970s, when she developed the Déroulement series. Déroulement from 1976 exemplifies her exploration of horizontal movement and continuity. Here, gesture unfolds across the canvas in long, sweeping motions that emphasize duration and progression. The body moves laterally, navigating the surface through repeated actions that generate rhythm and flow.

Unlike earlier works that emphasize vertical accumulation, Déroulement foregrounds continuity. Gesture becomes a means of traversing space rather than building it upward. The painting records the body’s relationship to scale, reach, and proximity. Movement remains disciplined and repeatable, yet it adapts to new spatial demands. This shift demonstrates Reigl’s capacity to refine her method without abandoning its core principles. Gesture remains controlled, but it evolves in response to different compositional questions.

Reigl’s engagement with the figure further underscores her disciplined approach to painting. Man from 1966, also in the collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, presents the human form reduced to vertical force and compressed presence. The nude figure emerges through repeated gestures that define structure rather than anatomy. Movement constructs the body as a column of energy, shaped through restraint and repetition.

In Man, gesture does not dissolve the figure. Instead, it rebuilds it. The painting demonstrates how Reigl integrated figuration into her abstract language without reverting to narrative or representation. The body remains present as an organizing principle, anchoring gesture within a disciplined framework. This work reinforces the continuity of Reigl’s inquiry, showing how her method could accommodate both abstraction and figuration while maintaining structural clarity.

Reigl’s practice demonstrates how gesture can generate structure when guided by sustained attention and control. Her paintings reward close looking, inviting viewers to trace the physical decisions embedded in each surface. Through this disciplined approach, Reigl expanded the possibilities of gestural painting, offering a model rooted in rigor, continuity, and embodied knowledge rather than spectacle or myth.

©ArtRKL® LLC 2021-2026. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. ArtRKL® and its underscore design indicate trademarks of ArtRKL® LLC and its subsidiaries.