At first glance Reclining Figure is quite similar in overall shape to Pangnark’s Waving Figure from 1968 (First Arts, May 2019, Lot 33). Aside from being considerably larger, however, it is also further along the path of Pangnark’s journey into abstraction. The face is smaller and more difficult to quickly discern; the limbs are barely hinted at; and the overall shape of the figure is more amorphous, more dependent on the original form of the stone. Pangnark’s path was not unswerving, however; he was constantly experimenting, and would revisit ideas probably when stones of different shapes presented themselves. With Figure of 1974 (see Hessel, 1998, fig. 103), Pangnark was back in geometric mode, inventing yet another blocky figure with a pronounced backward lean.

Once we read Reclining Figure as a human figure it becomes more lifelike than the other two examples we have mentioned, despite it being highly abstract. We are certain this is because it is less geometric and so has a more organic feel to it. We can sense that Reclining Figure is actually in a relaxed posture; it even takes on a sensuous character.

References: For a similarly shaped work by Pangnark see First Arts Auctions, May 2019, Lot 33. See Figure from 1974 (in the Sarick Collection at the AGO) with a similarly pronounced backward lean in Ingo Hessel, Inuit Art: An Introduction (Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 1998), fig. 103. For numerous other works by Pangnark in various shapes and sizes see George Swinton’s Sculpture of the Inuit (McClelland & Stewart, 1972/92), figs. 56, 615-624; Norman Zepp, Pure Vision: The Keewatin Spirit (Norman Mackenzie Art Gallery, 1986), cats. 20-31; and Bernadette Driscoll, Eskimo Point/Arviat (Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery, 1982), cats. 59-72.