Georgia O’Keeffe: Cow’s Skull with Calico Roses- Analysis, Comparison and Contrast
Short Biography of Georgia O’Keeffe
Georgia O'Keeffe was born on the 15th of November, 1887, in Sun Prairie, Wisconsin and studied at the Art Institute of Chicago. She got married to Alfred Stieglitz, a photographer who gave Georgia her first gallery show, in 1916. She moved to New Mexico after his death, thus most of her works were based on inspiration from the environment and natural landscape there. “O'Keeffe was one of the greatest American artists of the twentieth century. She took to making art at a young age and went to study at the Art Institute of Chicago in the early 1900s. Later, while living in New York, she studied with such artists as William Merritt Chase as a member of the Art Students League.” (Bio. (Biography.com)). O’Keeffe’s most famous works include Black Iris (1926), Oriental Poppies (1928), Black Cross, New Mexico (1929), and Cow's Skull with Calico Roses (1931), the work which this report shall focus on. She passed away on the 6th of March, 1986, at 98 years of age. Cow's Skull with Calico Roses: the Focus of this Report
Figure 1: Georgia O'Keeffe. Cow's Skull with Calico Roses. 1931.
Figure 1: Georgia O'Keeffe. Cow's Skull with Calico Roses. 1931.

Introduction to the Artwork
This painting is called Cow’s Skull with Calico Roses, and was painted by the artist Georgia O’Keeffe. It was completed in 1931 in New Mexico, where Georgia was inspired to paint it. This painting portrays the skull of a cow on layers of what appears to be canvas. The skull has two artificial roses made of calico in it; one in the left ear and one in the nose. I believe it is influenced by the culturally varying concept of death. It seems to be addressing the truth, simplicity, nature, and (to some extent) beauty of death. I can say this by looking at the fact that the skull has calico roses in it which tells me something else as well. The fact that the painter used calico roses instead of real ones could hint that things that are materialistic and real and relevant become irrelevant after death.
According to my research, Georgia is trying to give a hidden message to everyone that views this painting. Let me explain. “In 1930 Georgia O'Keeffe witnessed a drought in the Southwest that caused the starvation of many animals, whose skeletons littered the landscape. She was fascinated by these bones and shipped a number back to New York so she could paint them. She noted, "To me they are as beautiful as anything I know...The bones seem to cut sharply to the center of something that is keenly alive on the desert even tho' it is vast and empty and untouchable." In Cow's Skull with Calico Roses, O'Keeffe added a macabre note by decorating the skull with artificial flowers, the kind used to adorn graves in New Mexico” (Art Institute of Chicago). This proves my earlier theory that Georgia did indeed intend to showcase the beauty of dead things, in this case in the desolate, lonely deserts of New Mexico. Therefore, this painting tells the story of its time by revealing to the viewers the death of cattle in the blistering deserts of New Mexico; an example of how loneliness and desolation can ultimately lead to death.
My Description of the Artwork/Painting
When I first looked at the painting, I thought that the artist has made great use of juxtaposition. I say that because while the skull is an obvious symbol of death, the fact that flowers were placed inside the skull produces an interesting contrast. Having said that, knowing the fact that calico roses are placed on gravestones in Mexico (where the skull originates from), one can understand that actually, the skull and calico roses are very related.
In the painting, I can see the very effective use of value by Georgia to give the skull and calico roses as well as even the canvas in the background its beautiful, striking 3D appearance. This is very important as since the painting is mostly monochromatic in shades of white (off-white, pearl white, enamel white etc.), except for the streak of black that runs through the presumed canvas layers in the background. I can also see some interesting features in the skull, such as the right side being a bit more cracked in the middle (to the right of the nose) as well as the interior of the right side of the skull appearing to be higher than the left, which provides an interesting contrast within the painting itself.
The subject of the painting, which is very easily identifiable (considering that the painting is a close up of one arrangement of objects), is the cow’s skull which has the calico roses in it. This is because being a close up shot, it is the only focal point present in the picture, unless the skull and calico roses were considered separate entities.
In addition, the artist has created the textures of smoothness on the bones as well as slight roughness near the sharp parts of the skull for giving it a maximum natural appearance. In terms of the calico roses, they are translucent and if zoomed in on enough, seem to have a slightly rough texture throughout which is typical of calico objects/fabric.
Moreover, I can describe the colours used as relatively dull and monochromatic, but with high variance in value and shading as mentioned earlier, giving the painting a 3D appearance.
Also, I can see the following shapes used in this painting: multiple triangles in the skull i.e. in the horns, nose, eyelets, jaw, and cheekbones, as well as a rhombic formation on the whole forehead above and in between the eyes. In terms of organic shapes, there are the petals and leaves of the roses, as well as the individual features of the skull (as described geometrically above) as a whole.
Finally, I think Georgia uses the effects of space to create a feeling of depth and definitive location. What this means in that it actually seems, looking at the way what is presumably layers of canvas in the background are organised, it seems that these layers are actually elevations in a desert, while the black streak in between may be portraying a rift, all compressed in a smaller space to give dominance to the skull.
Georgia O’Keeffe’s Source of Inspiration and Influence
Based on my research and reasoning, it is quite clear that Georgia’s primary source of inspiration was a drought in New Mexico which lead to the death of cattle etc. Therefore, I know that the artist worked from observation and memory to some extent, because she witnessed the drought personally, and remembered the effect it had on many of the wild desert animals. Furthermore, she also shipped the skull she painted (among other bones, as mentioned earlier) to New York so that she could paint them while looking at them simultaneously.
Furthermore, I believe that Georgia prepared quite a lot for this painting as she had lived in New Mexico, and was thus used to seeing such sights in the deserts, hence her knowledge, expertise and interest in such objects allowed her to prepare for painting this painting.
Georgia O’Keeffe’s Intention
I feel Georgia is trying to recreate what she witnessed as an effect of the drought, and as a result is trying to express or even exaggerate the idea of the true “beauty” of the dead. She is also trying to communicate her ideas on even these dead skulls look full of life to here in the desert, which in all honesty is a bit depressing.
The reason I feel so is because Georgia herself said: “, To me they are as beautiful as anything I know...The bones seem to cut sharply to the center of something that is keenly alive on the desert even tho' it is vast and empty and untouchable." (Art Institute of Chicago)
Georgia O’Keeffe’s Use of Composition
The objects in the painting have been arranged to create a form of asymmetrical balance in the picture (similar left and right side with minor differences in between the same object on either side). The organisation of the objects in the painting also creates a set background (presumed canvas), mid-ground (the skull) and foreground (possibly the calico roses.)
The style of composition conveys the painting's theme/idea because as mentioned before, the used of minimal colours, varying value and smooth skull texture indicates the natural truth and (from Georgia’s point of view) beauty of the dead cow skull.
I find that the mixture of at first the curved horns on top as well as other more sharp, distinctive shapes with strong lines (as described earlier) leads the eye well across this piece. It is this collaboration of shapes that makes the movement of the eye across this piece vary depending on its (the eye’s) location as well.
Georgia O’Keeffe’s Use of Form
The objects in the painting appear to be three-dimensional because the artist has done a very good job of producing a 3D effect by varying the value of the colour, particularly in the skull, which is completely monochromatic in shades of white (off-white, pearl white etc.). She has also done something similar for the calico roses: she made the top one translucent and shaded overlapping parts darker (higher value), and effectively used shadows to create layers of petals in the second one, which, like the skull, is solid/opaque in colour, making them both look 3D. Also, this layering system works in both flowers and the background canvas (which has been made using the same system) because Georgia has painted them using a close bird’s eye view (top/above the painting) perspective, which makes layered objects appear 3D.
Georgia O’Keeffe’s Use of Colour, Tone and Texture
Georgia’s use of dull, yet monochromatic (mostly, as discussed) and matching colours suggests that she wanted to make the painting look realistic, and therefore she used the colours of real bone and real calico to make the painting. She also used a range of different tones of white which gave the picture its 3D appearance due to variance in value, and kept a smooth texture throughout on the skull and a little rough on the calico roses. Again, I think she has done this to make the painting look as realistic and non-fictional as possible. Additionally, the effects of light (as well as varying value, tones and shadows) are used to communicate a realistic 3D effect throughout the painting.
Style of the Painting
As I have described earlier, looking at the painting, one can immediately tell that it is very realistic in most ways. I can tell this because of the use of realistic colours, tone, texture, shapes, and form, all explained earlier.
Analysis
I think the most attractive thing for me in this artwork is the fact that Georgia has layered transparent petals of the top calico rose to give it a 3D. The reason this draws my eye out most is because I have never before seen a 3D effect created this way, and it’s really quite fascinating.
In terms of similarities in the painting’s formal elements, the painting is very similar throughout in terms of colour, which is monochromatic, and tone, which is varied throughout to produce a 3D effect. However in contrast, the shapes used in the painting are very different, since the skull and calico roses are two very different, complex objects; the calico petals are rounded and curved, while the skull is mostly multiple polygonal shapes combined together (as described earlier in this report).
In terms of organisation, the objects are organised on top of each other, which gives the painting a distinct background (the presumed canvas layers/desert), middle-ground (the skull) and foreground (the calico roses).
The use of proportion in the painting is very thought-provoking, as the skull and calico roses are the right size. But, if the presumed canvas layers in the background do represent the desert, then it is fascinating because then the skull and calico roses are the size of an entire large section of the desert, making the fore- and middle-ground interestingly out of proportion with the background.
There is not much variety in the painting, except maybe in the fact that many tones of monochromatic white were used in making it, and that more than one technique was used to give the painting a 3D effect.
In terms of emphasis, I would say it has been put on the skull, because it has been painted in the most intricate detail of all the objects, and has the most variation in colour and shapes.
I would say this painting is balanced symmetrically, as both left and right halves are quite similar, except for the additional calico rose and curved canvas layer edges in the background. Other than that, the painting would split symmetrically quite well.
There really isn’t much rhythm in this painting, as all the objects in it appear still, with no real evidence of any movement whatsoever. However, the texture is fairly consistent in each individual part of the painting, making is somewhat rhythmic.
Interpretation
As mentioned a few times earlier, this painting is about the beauty of dead creatures and to some extent death (from the artist’s perspective). It is a representative to the dead cattle from the droughts of Mexico in the words of Georgia O’Keeffe herself, and in my opinion, somewhat communicates the sad reality of death to us, that when you die, real, materialistic objects will become irrelevant, hence the artificial calico roses.
In connection with this, the message I think the artist is trying to convey is simple; that she found even the dead cow skull seeming to be alive and beautiful in the lonely, desolate, drought-stricken desert, and perhaps to some extent that loneliness and isolation kill (which has interestingly been proven to be true scientifically speaking), hence she uses the cow’s skull from Mexico (where she felt it looked beautiful) with calico roses which are placed on graves in Mexico.
Personally, I get the feelings of fascination and amusement, but also fear and realisation. I feel fascinated by the way that Georgia tries to communicate about death through her painting, but at the same time I feel scared and realise the truth because of the very message she tries to convey. Therefore, I believe she has made a very enlightening work of art.
In all honesty, the way Georgia painted this painting reminds me of those horror movies in which they show a scary monster or some sort of demon etc. holding something innocent and cute like a doll in their hand as they walk towards you to kill you. So therefore this painting did actually remind me of scary things, even though it’s actually meant to portray dead animals as being beautiful.
Finally, I believe that the artist is trying to get a few key points across, which are: First that she thought even dead animals looked alive and beautiful in the lonely Mexican deserts, hence she decided to paint this painting in the first place.
Second, that materialistic and “real” things mean nothing after death, hence the use of calico roses, and at last third, which is that death itself is inevitable, and everyone has to face it, which may be another reason she chose to paint this skull among many others that she painted in the past and future (i.e. after this painting) as well.
Evaluation
Upon finding out so much more about the painting, my first impression has changed a fair bit, because when I first looked at the painting, I actually thought the artist had some sort of mental disorder, or was perhaps depressed, much like Vincent van Gogh. However, upon reading her own reasoning behind the painting, I realised I was wrong; she just viewed the dead animals as beautiful, hence she painted a lot more paintings of real animal skulls.
I feel this artwork is successful because it conveys its message (if not messages) very directly and clearly, and the expression “a picture speaks a thousand words” is very applicable here. What’s interesting is that it tells the story of situations in a drought struck country, of death, of natural beauty of dead creatures, and of Mexican culture (hence the calico roses). What’s more, it does so realistically.
In terms of planning, I think this artwork was genuinely well thought out, as Georgia saw the bones in Mexico (and more parts of the Southwest in her other paintings), and shipped them to New York, due to which she could actually plan how she painted each. The fact that she used calico roses to consider Mexican culture also shows that she did think of how her painting was to be painted and presented before she painted it.
In the end, I have learnt quite a lot from this artwork that will certainly help me in future with similar realistic works of art. I have learnt how to create a 3D effect using overlapping translucent parts, I have learnt how to make white or very light monochromatic objects 3D by controlling the level I use as I paint, and I understand this would work for grayscale/black and white as well. I have also learnt to use lines inside the object to give it 3D effect better—something that I used to be afraid of doing so as not to spoil my painting. Other thank these skills, I have learnt a lot about the main elements of art—some of which I had never even heard of—which I know will help me in future artwork and analytical report work similar to this.
My Reaction
Finally, I’d like to end this comprehensive report by saying that when I first looked at this painting, it actually scared me a little, but confused me even more so. This is because as I said, it reminded me of horror movies in which the juxtaposition of something innocent and childish often occurs with something horrific and terrifying. Therefore, I say that this has truly been a good artwork to analyse.
Compare and Contrast: My Artwork vs. Cow’s Skull with Calico Roses

[Unfortunately, I could not include pictures of my own work as the device that had them broke. Therefore, kindly put the artwork next to yourself when you mark this.] * The first, most apparent similarity is that both paintings are painted in top view (Birds-eye close up) * They both contain flowers, and use a similar shape and form structure * They both use 3D techniques & mainly tone variation is common, but there is also difference (explained later) * In a way, they both feature symmetrical balance, but a little differently (explained later)
Having said that, apart from these principal similarities, there are some obvious differences: * It is multicolour, but limited in terms of colours; it uses only red, pink, orange and yellow; warm colours. Georgia O’Keeffe’s painting is monochromatic. * There is only one object in my artwork, and three main objects in Georgia’s * My flower is much more rounded in terms of shape, albeit similar in overall shape and form * Mine creates all of its 3D effect using dark to light shading, while Georgia’s top calico rose uses overlapping translucence to produce its 3D effect, making this a half similarity and difference. * My flower when split in have vertically is almost perfectly symmetrically balanced, as the two sides are near mirror images of each other, while in Georgia’s painting, when it is split vertically the extra calico rose remains on the top right, and it is one of the key features.
References
Art Institute of Chicago. “About This Artwork: Cow's Skull with Calico Roses.” 15 May 2015. Art Institute of Chicago Website. Web. 17 May 2015. <http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/61428>.
Bio. (Biography.com). “Georgia O'Keeffe Biography.” 2015. Biography.com. Web. 17 May 2015. <http://www.biography.com/people/georgia-okeeffe-9427684>.