Evert Lundquist

[22][23] According to friend and fellow artist Cliff Holden, Lundquist enjoyed holding a retrospective every ten years or so at the Stockholm Academy of Art.

Art critic Olle Granath believed that works like Jardin du Luxembourg were harbingers of what would eventually come to be Lundquist's style for the next fifty years.

In the fleeting marriage between the contradictions of day and night, the viewer can grasp the fragility of the moment itself while the simplest elements, that of the farmer's plow and tree branches, remain the constants.

Everyday objects, painted as still life contrasted with the ever-changing and dynamic light surrounding them by which "an all-embracing – non-hierarchical – composition is created, all of its parts of equal value.

In this example, the simplicity of the motif belies the complex and diverse synthesis of light, color and textural form which Lundquist has created using the powerful brushstrokes of a mature abstract expressionist.

[45] Director and writer Bengt Lagerkvist asked his readers if they could imagine any object as simple as a coffee cup becoming the central motif in a work of art.

"[49] Wall Street Journal writer J. S. Marcus wrote, succinctly if not profoundly, that Lundquist was a "near-abstract artist"[50] who was able to produce works that tantalized byway of tensions created through the rich textured impasto backgrounds and the motifs.

"[59] Sigrid Sandström traveled to Vaxholm to visit the painting Kvinna vid den vita muren (Woman by the White Wall) by Lundquist.

She says, "I was struck by the way the febrile brushwork seemed to have a life of its own independently of the subject matter[...]lacking in rhythm[...] it covers the surface, demanding attention.

[61] In 2015, Emilia Ström arranged and described the various volumes Lundquist donated to the archive along with material already in their possession, making them available byway of the online Visual Arkiv system.

[61][63] Art critic and cultural commentator Björn Widegren premised that Lundquist felt if he could keep his demons locked in the basement, "in some way they would remain silent.

Art history professor Katarina Wadstein Macleod, felt that Lundquist had incorporated the motif of loneliness into his work from very early on in his career.

Lundquist desired to portray himself as the "bourgeois" warm and friendly painter may have also had unintended consequences within the broader world of modern art, as he sought to get his works recognized.

[69] Among the twenty eight were: Willem de Kooning, Robert Motherwell, Mark Rothko, Adolph Gottlieb, Barnett Newman, Clyfford Still and Jackson Pollock; all who would go on to become iconic in the American Abstract Art Movement.

The press portrayed them as tough, angry New York-based artists who were impoverished, hard-boiled and living in the cold water flats of New York, while fighting "the system" for recognition of their art.

[61][63] It is not difficult to imagine that Lundquist's projections may have worked against him in the shifting values of what was now considered exciting in the personality, as distinct from the actual artwork, of artists in the postwar art world.

Fellow artist and friend Cliff Holden relates that he had requested Lawrence Alloway, who was then the head of London's Institute of Contemporary Art, to take on Lundquist.

[83] The net result of these sentiments, on the art community, might best be expressed by painter and curator Philip von Schantz who stated he was not interested in internationalism as a directive for museums.

[78] Jeremy Lewison believed that Lundquist's decision not to continue to participate in the international art market also had a long term negative effect on his career.

[97] The gallery had gained prominence in the 1950s when its director Rudolphe Augustinci and Berggruen had shown artists such as Max Ernst, Yves Tanguy and Rene Magritte.

The Wall Street Journal stated that the public did not recognize that Lundquist was "... capable of a spontaneity that recalls America's Jackson Pollock rather than Europe's Old Masters.

Methodology in developing an interpretation of art can vary, but would generally depend on the freedom to explore and exchange of ideas, which at times may be apart from the direct input of the works creator.

[103] Lundquist, as an established and respected artist, was directly describing to the causal viewer and to the scholar what his work meant and equally importantly what meaning(s) they did not have.

Ironically, Lundquist a man who had created a layered and edited persona of himself in order to free himself from his "demons" and also wrote much about his feelings in relation to his life and art, had not shown any desire to apply psychology to interpret his work.

Particularly, in 1953 during his initial acquisition and residency of his thereafter permanent studio in Kanton, Drottningholm, it has been stated that Lundquist rarely had physical contact with his family who were living in Nacka.

[6] This is disputed by friend and neighbor Eva Ottoson who claims that Lundquist, while indeed living at his studio, also commuted back and forth a few times a week in order to see his wife and family.

[61] In 1965 the Lundquist's son Hübner disappeared without a trace on the way to either the Gerlesborg Art School or to visit a nearby artist's collective in Lysekil (reported accounts vary as to his intended destination).

[108] Hübner's disappearance on July, 29, remains unsolved and may be connected to three other young men (Gay Karlsson, 22, Jan Olof Dahlsjö, 21, and Kjell Åke Johansson, 16), who, out for a drive in a borrowed blue Volvo PV 444, went missing on the same day.

[111] Lundquist, ever conscious of his public persona and reluctant to write about negativity, made one singular entry about his son's disappearance, "A great sorrow, but that is life after all.

The whitewashed studio, with its Art Nouveau architecture and its large arched windows, was originally used to generate electric power to Drottningholm Palace at the beginning of the 1900s.