Page 25 - Studio International - March 1965

The Phenomenon of British Sculpture

3 4
1 Gallery, in which foreign work has at last been seen, were those of Caro and Wall rather than Moore. The
Brian Wall
Unlltled Sculpture/Grey 1964 underlines our dislike of experimental forms and disap­ Young artists seemed to huddle together stylistically
80 , 140 X 59 in. proval of non-functional machinery. for comfort. The work of the rare American or Israeli
2
Bryan Kneale I will not comment on the younger artists at the White­ student stood out with welcome difference and
Camberwe/1 Beauty Maquette 1965 chapel Gallery, chosen by Bryan Robertson, since no commitment.
Redfern Gallery
3 final list was available in time. There is a wealth of As I said at the beginning, the mere fact of contem­
Robert Adams sculptural talent in Britain at the student or graduate porary British sculpture is worth shouting about, but
Circular Form & Bar 1 962
Bronzed Steel Height 74 in. level. Names like Isaac Witkin, John Wragg, Philip King that should not mislead us into the belief that apart from
Gimpel Fils Gallery
4 and William Tucker come to mind. The Pop Movement Henry Moore, and possibly Hepworth, we have made a
John Wragg has produced novel ideas in the use of plastics, but little lasting impression on the international scene. There is
Evolu11on 1964
Cast aluminium so far to establish a progressive movement. Encourage­ nothing to be ashamed of in the serious, well-inten­
24 o< 9 X 7 in. ment for the young is clearly desirable, but 'the cult of tioned, craftsmanlike work of many of our younger
Hanover Gallery
youth' fostered by the press, glossy magazines, tele­ sculptors, and some may well go further. It seems that
vision and some art galleries can be far more dangerous we shall continue to be hamstrung by our good manners
than a period of frustrating isolation. and need for conformity. On the one hand we lack the
One of the distinctive features of British sculpture, and vivacity and exhilaration of experimentation for its own
part of its failing, is its unified, cohesive character. At the sake, and on the other the deeper probings of the
Battersea Park exhibition in 1963 the American con­ solitary genius. It is hard to imagine English sculptors
tingent looked like a bunch of extrovert exhibitionists like Calder, Cesar or Tinguely; or Robert Muller, Tajiri,
in contrast to the well-mannered, easily grouped, con­ lpousteguy; Hoflehner, Lardera, Ch ii Iida; Etienne­
formist British. The British seemed to seek the security Martin, Zadkine, Gonzales, let alone Pevsner, Gabo,
of likeness. This could also be seen at the 1965 Young Archipenko or Brancusi. But then it is difficult to
Contemporaries show despite the fact that the influences imagine any other country producing a Henry Moore!■

105