But then, in a closer look, this “effigy of femininity” looks quite bizarre. Her head is too big in proportion to the body and arms. The hands are too tiny. Or should I say "the hand", since the right one is hidden behind the ball? (This mysterious "other" hand could be very well an extremely gigantic appendix almost covering the whole ball, or it may not be a hand at all). Also there is the hairdo with those strange shiny, oily waves, suspended in mid air, fixed like a cheap wig. And finally: the mouth. In the center of the painting, there is this red void, an obscene hole permanently open. What kind of expression is that? Try posing with your mouth that open and you'll see how silly you look… like a blow-up doll.
She's definitely a caricature, weird and grotesque. But we can't avoid looking at her. She attracts our attention, flirts with us… Suddenly, she doesn't seem monstrous any more. She got personality, charisma. She's kind of cute, actually.
Still, there is something uncertain, unresolved in this “effigy”. She is holding the ball, holding the ball, holding the ball... She's not throwing it nor catching it, not running or jumping. Right in the middle of the action, she stays still, like The Statue of Liberty at play on a summer day in Coney Island. She's posing. She proudly shows her clean, shaven armpit, her perfectly rounded breasts and stays like that forever, holding the ball for all eternity.
Besides, there is something more disturbing in the image: the sea, the waves of the sea (or is it an ocean?) showing behind her waist. The artist has violently cut the girl in half by the waist so we can't see where she's standing. Another mystery: Is she in the water? She doesn't look wet... I assume she is ashore and the water is far behind her. Obviously, it is a windy day, the water swings and her hair undulates. They are the only two elements really moving in the picture while the girl stays in her tense position holding the ball. If the girl were in the water, it would be very difficult to keep her posture because she would be pushed constantly by the waves. So we could assume that the water is behind her. And this is what really confounds me the most. Because if the water is behind the girl... I ask myself: What is behind the water? I approached the painting and I looked extremely close. I put my eye right on the tip of the wave and I saw something. Or I should say, I imagined something. There was somebody behind the wave. Somebody swimming in that sea or ocean or whatever it is. Somebody else was behind that girl, behind that wave: another girl with kaleidoscope eyes.