Mrozinski’s voice is very poetic; he enjoys using flowery language and nature-themed metaphors. He didn’t need to write, “the cornucopia of flowers and vines which pop and pulsate with curves and corpulent juiciness,” he could have just written, “the many colorful flowers and vines.” The first has much more personality, though; it is far more descriptive of the mood of the painting he is talking about.
He also seems to gravitate towards finding larger meanings in things, finding connections between times, people, and places. In one of the articles, he describes the subject of the painting in relation to the medium itself: “The canvas becomes a casket and the paint, applied with stunning directness, becomes the internal organs. My favorite area in this painting is where Soutine has literally filleted the painting by taking his palette knife and scraping through the semi dry layers of paint to indicate the edge of the prostrate bird.”
Now, would I look at this painting and think this, ever? Probably not. Did the artist mean it this way, or did he just want to paint a pheasant? We don’t know (probablyThey could have written it down, I suppose.). But it’s an interesting take, and is a fascinating look into how art can take on meanings outside of what anyone intends, and how people will make connections and find meanings all on their own.
Mrozinski is clearly a person who spends a lot of time thinking about nature, and philosophizing about connections in the world and meanings of bigger things. His writing reflects this; it’s flowery and full of words and phrases that do nothing but set the scene for the message of the writing. It’s a very artistic way of writing that gives the reader a better mood of the piece at the price of being a bit long and arduous, and maybe a tad ridiculous (at least, to me) at some points.
It makes sense that Mrozinski would write like this, because he also approaches art like this. He describes his art as “relating symbolically to his life experience,” and focuses on nature in his work.