The Human Zoo

Abstract Expressionism and the Making of a Heroic Art

1. Intro: Class Participation
   1. Word Association – write down what you typically think of when you hear/read the following words:
      1. i.      L.K.
      2. ii.      Nude
      3. iii.      Heroic
   2. Discuss-
      1. i.      What do these words imply?
      2. ii.      Are these words associated with a particular gender?
      3. iii.      How would our class’ answers differ if we had any guys?
      4. iv.      Heroic: think about where this word originates…
         1. Greeks: heroic is a male trait. Heroic age=glorious battles, etc. (Iliad and Odyssey are survivors of that time)
         2. Latin: words like ‘virtue’ and ‘virile’ come from vir, meaning man
   3. Heroic/heroism as a masculine objective
      1. i.      The calling of Abstract Expressionism as a “heroic” art leaves little room for a woman’s place.

1. Clement Greenberg, “American-Type Painting”
   1. Summary: Greenberg outlines what is and isn’t Abstract Expressionism, as well as its origins and major influences.  He then goes on to briefly describe the style and character of the heavy-hitters of the movement, including Pollock, Hofmann, and Toby.
   2. Greenberg claims that Abstract Expressionism is progressive – but for art’s sake, not socially
      1. i.      Not only is Abstract Expressionism a ‘boys club,’ calling it a ‘heroic’ art leaves no room for women to participate.
   3. Language
      1. i.      Note the language he uses to describe Pollock’s art:
         1. (We will compare this language to how Krasner’s art is described later)
      2. ii.      Does Greenberg’s description of Abstract Expressionism allow any room for women to participate?
         1. Furthermore, according to Greenberg, do women have a place in art at all?
      3. iii.      How would Greenberg have reacted to a woman calling herself an Abstract Expressionist?
      4. iv.      Can the Abstract Expressionist style be created in a feminine hand?  Should Gender be removed completely?

1. Harold Rosenberg’s “The American Action Painters”
   1. Summary: Rosenberg rambles on about something to do with Abstract Expressionism, although it’s difficult to say what he’s actually trying to get at.
   2. Does he agree with Greenberg’s assessment of Abstract Expressionism?
   3. Language: Does it allow for female art?
   4. What in the world was he on when he wrote this?

1. Anne M. Wagner’s “Lee Krasner as L.K.”
   1. Summary: Wagner describes how Lee Krasner’s accomplishments and identity as an artist were accompanied by a gendered qualifier and the title ‘Mrs. Jackson Pollock,’ against which she would struggle for her entire career. Wagner’s central argument is that the gender politics of the era created an uncomfortable tug of war between female artists’ identity as women and as artists, something of which they were constantly made aware.
   2. Initials and Names: Are they gender biased?
      1. i.      L.K. is intentionally androgynous.
      2. ii.      She refused to sign many of her works – in fact, it is mentioned that Pollock signed some of them for her.  Why?
      3. iii.      She chose to go by Lee instead of Lenore, again preferring a more ambiguous name for herself.
         1. Compare to Nochlin’s example of Meret Oppenheim, a distinctly androgynous name.
   3. Krasner vs. Pollock
      1. i.      She destroyed many of her works that resembled his style.  Why do you think she did this?
      2. ii.      During their marriage, Krasner’s lack of self-identified art was an effort to establish herself artistically as related to Jackson Pollock in a non-engendered way.
      3. iii.      Her art is typically more masculine, a conscious decision to separate herself from feminists/women artists as well defining herself as an individual rather than with Pollock.
         1. Why would she choose a masculine (or intentionally genderless?) style of painting?
      4. iv.      La donnesco mano: the female hand
         1. Krasner lacks any kind of femininity in her art – and the paintings that contained any delicate style were later destroyed by the artist.
         2. She removed any kind of gender from her art. (Her art lacks the female hand)
         3. Page 429, Virtuosa
      5. v.      Her art is described as “quiet” and “harmonious” – an “understated presence” in publications like the New Yorker.
         1. Pollock’s art is viewed as aggressive, violent, etc.
            1. How does this separate her from Pollock?
            2. How does this further separate her from women’s art?
            3. How does it simultaneously bring her closer to women’s art?
   4. Krasner as a wife
      1. i.      Why would Krasner give up her art for Pollock?
         1. Was it a decision she made willingly or because she is a woman and therefore expected to?
         2. Judith Leyster’s art took a back seat to her husband’s more prolific art (Jan Miense Molenaer)
      2. ii.      The irony of Krasner as a housewife – seeing herself as “Mrs. Jackson Pollock” instead of “Lee Krasner”
         1. The New-Yorker made her out the be the typical ‘little missus’ and caretaker of Pollock’s home, making jelly on a Saturday morning instead of painting (refer back to article)
         2. Consider people’s reactions to the “Artists: Man and Wife” exhibition:
            1. Description of her work as “tidying up” her husband’s.
            2. Did this infuriate her?
   5. Krasner after Pollock’s death
      1. i.      How do you think she reacted to articles describing her art after Pollock’s death?
         1. “found her own voice”
         2. came “out of the shadows”
   6. Krasner as a woman
      1. i.      She refused to associate herself with feminism or any kind of femininity.  Why would she make that choice?
2. How does gender play into Krasner’s art?
   1. Abstract Expressionism is inherently a man’s style – the aggression flowing through Pollock’s art, as an example
      1. i.      Can it even be recreated with a feminine hand?
      2. ii.      Does gender need to be removed completely for this style?
3. Final thoughts: Abstract Expressionism is typically the “boys’ club” – there was no room for any female artists.
   1. If Krasner hadn’t put her work on hold for Pollock, had she actually focused on her own style, would she have been accepted into the club?  Or would she have been rejected?
   2. Would she have been accepted because she removed gender from her art?
   3. If there was gender in her art, if the “female hand” was seen, would she still have been accepted?

Madison Brennaman

ARTH 460

October 1, 2009

1. Intro
   1. “Every prominent scholar of nineteenth century art planted himself in front of her, writing paraphernalia at hand. All thought their engagement disinterested, but it wasn’t. They circled her from above, close up, on top. What did they mean to do with all those words? Describe her? Analyze her? Situate her? Or: Posses her? Control her? Silence her?” p. 15 Alias Olympia
      1. i.      What did the writers mean to do with all those words?
      2. ii.      What were Lipton’s intentions researching Victorine/writing Olympia?

1. Alias Olympia
   1. The story of Eunice Lipton’s search for the true identity of Victorine Meurent, painter and model to Manet.  For decades she had been portrayed as a dissolute and promiscuous drunkard who died destitute in the 1890s.  Lipton’s sleuthing did not recover any of her paintings, but it did uncover a rather different life story. Meurent exhibited paintings at the Salon, she was a member of the distinguished Societe des Artistes Francais, and she did not die until 1928 at the age of 83.
   2. Discussion questions
      1. i.      Were Manet’s paintings true descriptions of her life?
      2. ii.      What image did he portray of Victorine compared to the paintings by Goenuette? (refer to p. 104-108)
      3. iii.      What category of model did she fall into?
   3. Images
      1. i.      Olympia
         1. Manet
         2. 1863-5
      2. ii.      Dejuner sur l’herbe
         1. Manet
         2. 1863
      3. iii.      Madoiselle Victorine in the Costume of an Espada
         1. Manet
         2. 1862
      4. iv.      Street Singer
         1. Manet
         2. 1862
      5. v.      Woman with a Parrot
         1. Manet
         2. 1866
      6. vi.      Portrait of Victorine Meurent
         1. Manet
         2. 1862
      7. vii.      Palm Sunday
         1. Victorine Meurent
         2. 1880’s (?)

1. Realist quandaries: posing professional and proprietary models in the 1860s
   1. Susan Waller explains the difference between the three types of models in the 1860’s: modèles de profession, modèles à l’occasion, and modèles privilégiés. During this time artists began to move away from the traditional usage of professional models to non-professional models.  Artist preferred to use a diverse range of models (including other artists) to gain a more natural element in their works.
   2. Model types:
      1. i.      Professional-  Artist poses the model exactly how he wants them. Model is paid for services.
      2. ii.      Proprietary-  Someone who pays the artist to paint them, as in a portrait.  The model has the final say in their portrayal, but pose could be natural or more avante garde.
      3. iii.      Occasional-  Artist’s associates: family, friends, etc. Not paid.  Artist worked with the model in mind, rather than to make the model fit the scene (though he had influence on the model’s pose).  Pose is not meant to draw attention to the model’s identity.
   3. Discussion questions
      1. i.      Discuss the shift in the artistic community from using professional to proprietary and occasional models.
         1. How did Manet help influence this shift?
         2. What problems did Manet and other artists face after the shift?
      2. ii.      What sort of issues did female models face?
         1. Consider why there are more paintings in the salons that feature male models rather than females.
            1. Morrisot: accompanied by her mother to Manet’s studio.
            2. Manet asking a young woman on the street to model for him, which she hotly rejects.
            3. Kate Dickens and the Pre-Raphaelites: “Dickens agreed, and Kate Dickens, …went to Millais’s studio, accompanied by an elderly friend of the family, pose …” p. 241
            4. Posing in the garden is less scandalous than posing in an artist’s studio: “for a middle-class woman, posing in a garden was less fraught than posing in an artist’s studio” p. 260
            5. People’s attitude towards Victorine: how was this influenced by her modeling and how she was portrayed by Manet and others?

Kahlo’s Broken Column is what first drew my attention to this topic.  I have always enjoyed Kahlo’s work but I knew little about her until I saw this piece in a book and was taken aback by the brutality of the scene.  She depicts herself with her bare torso bound by a painful body cast, while a cruel rend in her body exposes her spine, which has been replaced by stone column broken in several pieces, symbolizing the consequences of the terrible bus accident of her youth.  The nails that pierce her flesh allude to her constant suffering from surgery after surgery to fix her broken body.   I read on to learn about her lifetime of pain and illness and how it shaped herself and her art, which lead me to consider to what extent it defined her.  This preoccupation in her portraiture of her own pain and suffering have led some critics to question whether or not she has become such a popular and well-known artist due to her personal tragedy or the quality of her work.

In my paper I will examine the following:   how the illness and injury suffered by Kahlo throughout her life define the expression of her sexuality and unique personal symbolism that characterize her self portraits, if her health problems define her sexuality and self image to the point that it cannot be ignored in an examination of her body of portraiture, and whether her interest in depicting women and her own sexuality in such an honest (at times bordering on grotesque) way are defined solely by the accident which left her with severe damage to her uterus and probable infertility.  I will also analyze several of Kahlo’s self portraits from a feminist and psychoanalytical perspective, as well as in the context of her personal symbolic vocabulary, to illustrate how her sexuality as depicted in her art is defined by the mental and physical trauma of her injuries and to examine why she wanted her audience to view her this way.

*Ha see what I did there? It’s a French Revolution pun!! Ok now to the serious bit.*

Contemporary ideas of what constitutes the canon are, for the most part, derived from H.W. Janson’s The History of Art, the most prevalent college survey text since its publication in 1962, which in turn borrows heavily from Vasari’s Lives. Despite what has taken place in the art world over the last few centuries, the canon has changed very little since 1550. Vasari continues to dominate art historical thought even today because he judges artists based on innovation and influence. The innovations on which the canon itself is defined is, in reality, based on innovation within the terms of an established authority, i.e. classical antiquity. Therefore art historians find themselves limited to considering art on the basis of who influenced whom and excluding those (such as women, minorities, and non-Europeans) that operate outside of this master/student relationship and the established authority.

Craft has never truly been included in the canon because it has little, if anything, to do with classical antiquity, nor does it build upon itself through relationships between artists. Craft in its most basic form does not particularly constitute what most people think of as ‘art,’ but some talented individuals manage to stretch the boundaries between art and craft. Thai artist Kittiwat Unarrom accomplishes this while stretching the boundaries between delicious and vomit-inducing. As an undergraduate art student, Unarrom started painting portraits. He then moved to mixed media and finally dough. Yes, his gruesome and hyper-realistic sculptures of dismembered human body parts and organs are made entirely from bread, often displayed impaled on hooks in his shop window (see pictures below). As the son of a baker, Unarrom combined his art school training and inspiration from anatomy books and visits to forensic museums with the family business. Now a Master of Fine Arts, he opened his aptly named “Body Bakery” in the village of Ratchaburi (about 60 miles from Bangkok) in 2004 as part of his final dissertation.

His horrifically realistic (and edible) creations have been gaining attention around the world through the internet and sites like digg.com that have become repositories for the unique and bizarre. Unarrom regards his works as something more than simply bread: “Of course, people were shocked and thought that I was mad when they saw the works. But once they knew the idea behind it, they understood and became interested in the work itself, instead of thinking that I am crazy.” Yet despite the skill and craftsmanship involved in its creation, each piece is still meant to be eaten. “When people see the bread, they don’t want to eat it. But when they taste it, it’s just normal bread. The lesson is don’t judge just by outer appearances.”

As Unarrom’s work should certainly evidence, craft should be included in the art historical canon, and the canon ought to be rewritten to accommodate it. Works such as those by Unarrom are the link between fine art and craft, and should be celebrated as innovations rather than regarded as a novel curiosity. The arts and crafts movement is gaining ground as artists and craftsmen around the world fight to preserve traditional (and often centuries old) skills and techniques that are rapidly dying out. By taking an ancient practice like the production of ornamental breads, which began as a gimmick and became a source of pride for bakeries, and giving it a modern, albeit grotesque, twist, Unarrom is both observing time honored tradition while bringing it into the world of fine art. Hopefully this and other works that do the same will pave the way for a radical change to the canon that includes craft.

A peek into the window of the 'Body Bakery.' Most people would turn and walk away at this point. Am I mental for liking this so much?

Severed heads packed up and ready to be sold!

Honestly, how else does one display something like this?

Kittiwat Unarrom admires his HANDiwork. I'm really on a ROLL with the puns today.

If anyone is interested in more information as well as additional pictures and video, please check out the following links:

http://13visions.blogspot.com/2008/10/deliciously-gruesome.html

http://shapeandcolour.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/kittiwat-unarrom-body-bakery/

http://www.geekologie.com/2008/05/wtf_thats_gross_bread_head_bak.php

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=43707

Vinnie and the Cats is a lot like Waiting for Godot, except the end is even more disappointing and pointless.

Anyways, this post was supposed to be about the Ledger Line, an online journal that my roomate had to put together for a class.  The reason why I thought it was interesting to post about was that it is based around trans-genre subjects, and there are quite a few of those in art.  So what does that mean?  Everyone involved in the project was rather vague on that, but they assured me that they knew a trans-genre submission when they saw one.  Apparently it was something to do with pieces of art or writing that belong to multiple genres and intentionally cross the boundaries between them.  So, to be kind of an ironic twit, I submitted a poem I wrote…well, more like found in pieces and compiled.  I’ll post it here then explain what it is.

Whilst she falls madly through these silly questions,
do you ride a blowpipe is spouting off nonsense,
but we can’t let our crowds be fed on the floor.
The nerves are important questions.
Soon it hits my brain, deep,
and that’s the hills wondering why you don’t normally see left-handed shovels hooked up to ball?
Why the people sing?
The lost ones who fell away free sex the giraffe.
Draw the line dividing laugh and aubergines garnished with a large trout.
The sphinx is my mom
never met a black sheep,
and under the sea a carnivore is lacking.

Well, that it, in all its inane glory.  This poem is the product of a self-learning AIM chatbot that someone on an online forum I belong to programmed.  The chatbot is initially languageless until it is spoken to, in which case the program puts together a vocabulary and infers how the language is structured based on what is said to it.  Naturally, my fellow forum-goers began to assault the poor chatbot with swearing, internet memes, recipes, and volumes of Romance poetry.  What resulted is strings of interesting sentences like the ones that make up the above poem.  I was completely surprised when my joke poem became the most celebrated submission to the Ledger Line.  Why? Is it because it sounds like its practically dripping with hidden meaning, or because it lacks meaning all together?  What is the true signifigance of this poem that seems to have taken on a life of its own?

I called this post Vinnie and the Cats because the phrase sums up fairly well how I feel about this whole poem thing with the Ledger Line.  Its a phrase I found on another UMW blog, and when read outloud and out of context, my roomate and I immediately put it to the tune of Benny and the Jets by Elton John.  Basically, it’s something that sounds familiar but in reality it’s utter nonsense.

Portrait of Catherine de Medici. Attributed to François Clouet c. 1555

Catherine de Medici, Italian-born regent of France, is widely regarded today as one of the greatest patron/collectors of the Renaissance.  Through her court she launched a program of artistic revival, employing Italian artists and performers as well as more local talent trained and influenced by Italian and Flemish masters brought to France by her father in law, Francis II.  During her thirty year reign, Catherine stood at the forefront of a distinctive late French-Renaissance culture, with new forms emerging in literature, architecture, and the visual and performing arts.  Unfortunately, her ruinous spending habits plunged France into economic hardship and political instability.  Despite her hopes of a lasting cultural legacy, after her death in 1589 much of her collections were unceremoniously sold to pay off her significant debts.  However her legacy endures.  Catherine’s interest in patronage and collecting influenced similar activities on a grander scale by Louis XIV, and the artists, architects, writers, and performers brought to France by Catherine eventually led the nation to become the artistic Mecca it is known as today.

So apparently Brandeis University has decided to close the Rose Art Museum and place their entire art collection on the public market “as part of a campus-wide effort to preserve the university’s educational mission in the face of the historic economic recession and financial crisis.”

Really?

Really?

What sort of educational mission are they hoping to preserve by getting rid of such a valuable resource? How can the university claim to be “streamlining [the university] for the future while bolstering its focus on undergraduates, the liberal arts and research” while using their art department as a sacrificial lamb? Hypocrisy aside, this is a substantial collection of contemporary art; dumping such a collection on the market would cause the value of contemporary pieces to plummet, causing hardships for others attempting to sell works. I do not think I really need to mention here how tragic it would be if most or all of the Rose collection ended up in private hands.

I honestly feel that it ought to be a crime to do what these idiots on the Brandeis University board of directors have done. I think I will wrap up this post quickly before I become too worked up over this situation.

I would like to take a moment, here, before I post about the plight of art in university museums, to discuss the work of Scottish sculptor and nature artist Andy Goldsworthy. His rather unconventional body of work is an interesting study in the use of natural materials and geometric shapes to create simple yet lovely compositions. Here are some of my favorites, courtesy of Google image search (mouse over for titles):

Goldsworthy regards all his creations as transient, or ephemeral, photographing each piece only once after it is complete. Each work grows, stays, decays – integral parts of a cycle which his photographs show at its height, marking the moment when the work is most alive. There is an intensity about his works at the moment of creation that is expressed in his photographs, though process and decay are implicit. Goldsworthy’s stunningly beautiful and intricate pieces are meant to drift away, melt, or otherwise return to nature. His goal is to understand nature by being a participant and interacting with it as intimately as possible. He generally works with whatever comes to hand: twigs, leaves, stones, snow and ice, reeds and thorns. He has been quoted as saying, “I think it’s incredibly brave to be working with flowers and leaves and petals. But I have to: I can’t edit the materials I work with. My remit is to work with nature as a whole.” I find that one of the most profound aspects of his works is the elegant simplicity of composition. He chooses to arrange his materials by boldly contrasting colors organized within clean geometric shapes to create a visual harmony that would bring a tear to the eye of Pythagoras.

I would love to hear what my ARTH303 compatriots think about his work and perhaps other artists who find their muse in nature, so please comment!!

I found that the most interesting of our required readings thus far is Belting’s The End of the History of Art? I believe he presents an interesting point in his insistence that the traditional approach to the scholarly study of art is flawed and outdated (old dog), and requires either a radical reevaluation or should be scrapped in favor of a new model (new trick, perhaps roll over?). I feel that art historians at times can become distracted by a particular artist or piece or style to the point where they become oblivious to everything else, even going so far as to overlook obvious connections. As in the Renaissance, the modern artist and historian should be well versed in a variety of disciplines, because art is so much more than an image in stone or paint (or a hoover in a box…). Perspective is vitally important in just about every field, but so much more so to the historian. I personally know history majors who can talk all day about a particular people in terms of epic battles, great kings, and when and where their empire existed, but could not begin to discuss who they were culturally. Likewise I have known art historians who were experts on the art of a region but knew nothing of their history. As art historians we must be careful not to pigeon-hole ourselves into one way of thinking: how can we go about the process of examining art in the context of the entire history of mankind and not just in relation to contemporary pieces or a particular style? Furthermore, Belting maintains that we must always remain aware of what is being produced in the art world today and be prepared to be a critic, not just an historian. One cannot become so absorbed in the past that one forgets the present.

In fewer words, art historians need to come up with a better way of examining art that does not limit us to one way of thinking. We need to be well read and flexible in our interpretations, and unafraid to try out new ideas and methodologies. So go forth into the shadowy future without fear, my esteemed colleagues!

Salve, friends, and welcome to The Human Zoo: an art blog.

Whether you’re a hard-core art junkie or just mildly enthusiastic, The Human Zoo should manage to hold your interest for at least five minutes or so. I would like to keep things entertaining, so aside from required posting I will periodically include fun little art-related tidbits and ramblings when I find the time. So stay tuned, America!