I believe the meaning of Endgame is to not have a meaning. This is a concept that many Surrealist artists took on, and Man Ray set out to make the audience question the deeper meaning of a this scene. What does two wooden mannequins on a chess board with some three-dimensional wooden pieces have anything thing to do with the title or Shakespeare? In an art review published on February 6th this year, author Philip Kennicott quotes Man Ray as he touches on the titles of his works: “'We would play games trying to get people to guess what play belonged to which picture,' he remembered. 'Sometimes they got it right; sometimes of course, they didn’t, and it was just as well!'”. Here, he pretty much calls himself out on the meaningless titles of his works, which I'm sure applies to Endgame as much as the other paintings in this series.
Endgame is just as successful as the other pieces in Man Ray's collection. This kind of art, using many different mediums as tools to create the final painting and then naming it ironically, is not something that can be pulled off easily without seeming like nonsense. Given the time period when this kind of art was avant-garde and unique, Man Ray was successful in creating interesting art. Endgame contains many of the same characteristics as many his other paintings, and definitely drew in an audience that could appreciate his work in both Paris and Hollywood.
My personal preference of this piece is that it would be a more exciting painting had Man Ray spruced up the color and separated from the boring brown and black color palette. The Phillip's Collection contained other pieces from the Human Equations series such as As You Like It II (Hands Free) and Twelfth Night have a broader color palette, making the work more aesthetically pleasing, to me. Overall, I find the composition to be nice and the subject interesting, which is why I chose it.




