 |
|
|
|
Art Review Archives:
|
Surviving Modernism: The Narrative Figure: Philip Pearlstein, Ruth Weisberg, Leon Golub, Margaret Lazzari,
Gwenda Jay/ Addington Gallery Creative relationships between artists are always fascinating. For centuries, younger artists have learned from The Masters; colleagues have paced each other, often in schools or 'movements.' And many have polemicized on canvas for and against techniques and trends, or acknowledged affinities even over entire centuries. Only in modern times have we the opportunity to ask any artist directly "which artist has been important for you?" Rarely are the two brought together; at least while still breathing. 'Surviving Modernism: The Narrative Figure" at the Gwenda Jay Addington Gallery in Chicago offers an uncommon chance to view, consider and thoroughly enjoy the works of four contemporary artists who share creative affinities. When Ruth Weisberg was asked about the artist most important to her creative directions, she answered "Philip Pearlstein." Pearlstein's four artworks on the north wall of the front gallery face Ruth Weisberg's three renderings on the south wall of that room. Similarly, eight lithographs of renowned Chicago artist, Leon Golub, in the second gallery room, hang opposite one oil painting and eight watercolors by Margaret Lazzari, who cited Golub's art as a impetus for her creative concerns. The exhibition title deserves comment -- it unites all four artists, despite their very divergent and distinct expression. Tom Wolf in The Painted Word gave a satiric, but cogent critique of 'Modernism'. And after decades of 'stripping art down to bare essentials,' even stripping it of meaningfulness -- 'Modernism," a more sober reassessment has been asserting itself, among artists as well as art markets and the public. As art again inclines toward meaning and content -- and human values, aesthetically and in content -- the stature of independent and insightful voices, such as Pearlstein and Golub, has risen noticeably. Pearlstein and Golub, each with different inspirations and convictions, built upon their insights. They braved it out, produced enduring art, and liberalized 'artsy' attitudes into again giving serious regard for the figurative, and the narrative. Consequently, artists like Ruth Weisberg and Margaret Lazzari enjoy a more open art environment, sustenance and encouragement, a certain freedom to develop what are quality abilities. And, they have also found a fertile approach and kindred perceptions in the artists they named as significant. Philip Pearlstein is now 'canonical' -- well documented, explicated, the subject of excellent, even luxurious volumes. Critic Ralph Pomeroy once quoted Pearlstein's own description of his work as "a sort of stilled-action choreography." He often treats human forms as if they were abstract objects within a rectangle, or arranges them along compositional diagonals, ignores canvas edges, applies unexpected cropping: his art subtlely unorthodox in execution, and, at first, disorienting to the unsuspecting viewer. One pundit called his paintings 'human still-lifes." In "Surviving Modernism...," Pearlstein has four pieces. The first three etching/aquatints are: "Hunzinger Chair & Swan" (1995), "Tiger Marionette" (1995), and "Model Boat" (1993). "Tiger Marionette" exhibits a playful touch: the human figures seem like objects arranged according to the artist's will -- the marionette is surprisingly animated, lively. These first three works seem like digressions; "Hunzinger Chair & Swan" perhaps even a bit hasty. The fourth work, "Two Nudes, Emes Chair" (1997), is highly representative of the Pearlstein aesthetic -- the aslant, tensing placement of the artist's two figures, and the unorthodox viewpoint which sets the image as a whole, create a visual dynamic which does duty for the vitalism or any 'implied movement' traditionally associated with human forms. The portrayal, not the portrayed conveys liveliness to the viewer. This typifies much of Pearlstein's art, but it is enduringly effective: it still disorients many galler-goers. And it is important to note the means with which the artist makes, not the subject matter of a painting, but its matrix, the painting itself as viewed, the vehicle of communication. If there is a narrative aspect to Pearlstein's aesthetic, it is latent, covert. His paintings often create the impression that the 'conversation,' the action, ...has stopped just as the viewer enters into the image. The viewer applies his own surmise. One sees this also in Ruth Weisberg's "Study for Dante's Inferno" (1999), but with her two smaller pieces a narrative element comes from 'offstage," from Dante and the viewer. This appears to be the spirit that draws Ruth Weisberg's admiration to Pearlstein. Her three impressive renderings in "Surviving Modernism..." do display affinities, both with his treatment of the human form as a pose-able object, and in her own building up of movement in the matrix which surrounds that human focus.
The two smaller renderings, measuring 30 x 22 inches, are "Dawn" and "Dusk," and both were completed in 1999. These two pieces, and the "Study for Dante's Inferno" (1999), which measures 46 x 34 inches, are inspired by William Blake's engravings for Dante's poetic epic. Weisberg was invited by the Huntington Library and Art Gallery in San Marino, California, to choose a work from their collections as a source and inspiration. The series, these three of which are at the Gwenda Jay/ Addington, will be exhibited at the Huntington Art Gallery this autumn. In these works, Weisberg's art is informed by several aesthetic mentors. Both "Dawn" and "Dusk" echo the light and shadow moulding of the chiaroscuro Renaissance prints and drawings: there is the feel of silverpoint and of successive color layering to build out form, a visual depth. This is an effect apart from the supple suggestion of twilight, both pre-dawn and evening. In The Renaissance Print (Yale Un.Press: 1994), by David Landau and Peter Parshall, the authors note: "... artists began turning more often to pen and ink or brush drawing in tinted paper. Though colored papers were usually tinted by wiping them with a rag or washing them with a brush in the workshop, some tinted papers could be purchased." and they cite the famous Venetian blue paper prized by Albrecht Durer, Gentile Bellini, and Carpaccio. In these pieces, Ruth Weisberg also starts with tinted paper as her ground, developing the image over the prevading hue. Even a rapid perusal of prints by Albrecht Durer or Domenico Beccafumi will reveal affinities with Ruth Weisberg's aesthetic and technique, and yet,at the same time, clearly highlight at how very contemporary is her expression. "Dawn" and "Dusk" present the female figure face on. At first viewing, this seems as if the viewer hovers above and looks down upon a supine figure... but, as with the ancient Egyptian heavens, it could equally be seen as a view from below, looking out into a canopy of sky, the genii of the two twilights enwrapped in sheets of cloud above. It is a placement found on temple ceilings and Baroque churches, employed by William Blake in his art -- and still effective. The human form is at repose and static in this art; but the delicacy and restless detail that envelopes about the form, in a spirit akin to Baroque carvings, lends a subtle, continual energy to the pieces. One can sense an affinity with Pearlstein's visual ethic of human form: figures are placed and posed, not to reveal insights from within the human, but to serve intents which seem indifferent or transcendent to the personal psychologies. It is an aesthetic of form and implication, an impersonal metaphor which our age of individuality and emotive personality all but forgets. At the opening, a woman visitor raised the point of whether Pealstein's art didn't equate female nudes with objects. (A contemporary, and very predictable, plaint.) Pearlstein has painted many male nudes. In his work, human forms, male and female, are objects, objects which occupy space and which the eye discerns as aligning in arrangements, forming visual masses, defining lines and planes. The medievals fashioned alphabetic letters composed of acrobatic, contorted figures; sculptors have used human and animal forms as formal elements, moulding clay, in architecture; and still-lifes of fruit were rarely intended to provoke salivation or hunger. The 19th century often modeled clouds strategically, to orchestrate a focus or to convey mood; but not as meteorology. Neither Philip Pearlstein or Ruth Weisberg are empiricists. They employ the 'realistic' to other intents. In the art of Ruth Weisberg, there is more concession, perhaps, to the 'humanity' of the model. But it is less physical to many viewers, subtler, because the actual 'pose' is closer to contemporary, mainstream acceptances: her figures harmonize more finely with poses one sees in print and on screen. And this is communicative as well. It is true that, say, in her "Study for Dante's Inferno," one notices the unconventional angle of view and the strong diagonal bias of the composition, and there is a ressonance toward Pearlstein. But there is a repetoire of gesture and pose strongly reminiscent of contemporary photography and illustration, a graphic quality, akin to the commercial but refined by technique and for Weisberg's aesthetic purpose. And it has a subjective overtone. As with many contemporary artists, Pearlstein takes aspects of centuries-old artist technique and, rather than employ them 'under the hat,' so to speak, openly explores their potential to the utmost: he is very mindful of underlying shapes and lines; arrangements. Pearlstein almost seems to bring abstractionist principles into imagery. (Even Renaissance painters placed pure colors together, in small strokes, so that the eye might blend them with vibrance... the Pointalists, and Fauvists, made the effect central to their philosophy.) Weisberg returns to, and retains a veneer of much older technique and approach, but facial expression and body language in her works are very much of the times. Both Philip Pearlstein and Ruth Weisberg have taken the narrative figure into pathways that are individual: Pearlstein, using real forms and objects, builds a sense of almost abstractive compositions; and Ruth Weisberg employs her figures to convey personifications, rather than personalities, and does so at the behest of a narrative frame apart from the images themselves. But in her art, the figures are not so much objective, as metaphoric. But -- the foremost consideration, whatever the aesthetic or underlying intents or purposes -- Ruth Weisberg and Philip Pearlstein produce fine art: works of high artistic value, works desireable and enduring, and which represent original and contemporary interpretations. And both Ruth Weisberg and Philip Pearlstein stand in contrast to Leon Golub and Margaret Lazzari, the two other painters of the narrative figure in "Surviving Modernism..." , an exhibition at the Gwenda Jay/Addington Gallery. Leon Golub abd Margaret Lazzari are the focus of Part II of this review. "Surviving Modernism: The Narrative Figure" will run through August 16, 1999. The Gwenda Jay/ Addington Gallery is open: Tues. - Fri. 10-6 PM; Sat. 11-5 PM, and its telephone number is 312/ 664-3406; website: www.gwendajay.com --G. Jurek Polanski Jurek Polanski has previously written and art edited for Strong Coffee in Chicago. He's also well known and respected among the Chicago museums and galleries. Jurek is currently a Visual Arts Correspondent for ArtScope.net. |
Home | Art Reviews | Bookstore | eArtist |Galleries | RSS
Search | About ArtScope.net | Advertise on ArtScope.net | Contact
