Page 22 - Studio International - December 1967

The two dominant trends were optical art,
COMMENT in its constructivist and purist versions to their own style, certain artists prefer to
abstain from the contest and avoid
Liverpool-London-Paris (chromatic and retinal), and modern immobilizing an important work for
expressionistic realism with the British several months. Their absence is under-
colouring of pop mythology. To this extent standable, but it makes for a lack of
the prize list reflects the composition of the balance in the exhibition as a whole.
exhibition fairly accurately: the first and The Draconian rule which excludes
third prizes were awarded to David Hockney sculpture altogether seems out of date
and Joe Tilson, while the second went to today. Modern experimental art is an art
Malcolm Hughes (rewarded in some of synthesis which calls upon highly complex
measure for his long years of militant dimensions of language and structure. In the
activity in the field of geometrical and last resort the question arises as to how far
constructivist research). Leaving aside the jury can accept three-dimensional works
Pierre Restany personal considerations (in my opinion the without disregarding the regulations. There
major omission from the prize list was Allen is an element of doubt, and this may well
Jones), I can only express my solidarity discourage artists who work on the margins
with the decisions of the jury, which I of clearly defined notions of style and feel
It was a rich experience to serve on the helped to elaborate. But I do wonder what themselves the victims of an antiquated
jury of the John Moores Exhibition. This the precise percentage of abstentions is in concept or of orthodoxy in art.
exhibition—like other cultural occasions in terms of the real field of English art. How The British experimental artist tends to
which I have been privileged to participate, many important artists were not repre- withdraw into his shell or emulate the
in particular the Prix Marzotto—raises two sented? I was surprised by the paucity of ostrich; London has confirmed me in this
problems: selection, and the promotion of experimental work and pluri-dimensional impression. Beyond the official avant garde,
new talent. research: there were very few assembled whether op or pop, unpublicized research
The John Moores Exhibition is an open objects and luminous or animated reliefs. goes on and owes its freedom to both a
contest in which any artist residing in the Again, there were very few objective and measure of indifference to official recognition
United Kingdom can take part. In addition structural reflections of contemporary and a modesty of ambition as far as public
to awarding various prizes (the first three technology. The plexiglass structure by acceptance is concerned.
are acquisition prizes to enrich the perma- Hallaway was a pleasant surprise—but Unfortunately I have no solution to put
nent collection of Liverpool's WALKER ART unfortunately it was an isolated example. forward, because I remain firmly attached
GALLERY), the jury has a further task to We found it extremely difficult to select a to the principle of the open contest. At all
select just over a hundred works which go few items good enough to form a techno- events a greater diversity in the jury is
to make up the actual public exhibition. logical section within the exhibition as a called for; the final discussions in Liverpool
Is this a sufficiently representative sample? whole. had a serenity arid calmness which did not
That is the basic problem. Out of 1,600 Are there in fact any signs of experimental reflect great credit on the jury members.
works submitted for the Moores prizes, research in the visual field in England ? A While something more than the intellectual
about twenty showed real power of expres- stay in London and a visit to a few critics, anguish of a transitional period may be
sion or original vision. Some sixty others studios and exhibitions showed me that needed to rouse London from the official
showed average quality in the development research of this kind is going on. The appendages of a phlegmatic temperament,
and expression of initiative structural English contributions to the various Paris Paris at last shows signs of shedding its
concepts. The remainder were the usual Biennales have been highly significant in disquieting torpor. We are witnessing a
left-overs inherent in this type of demo- this respect. It seems that artists of real gradual but important phenomenon: the
cratic competition where no prior selection talent have made their participation in the State and Municipality of Paris—the official
is made. Basically these proportions are exhibition dependent on how they assess administrations—are gradually renovating
fairly honourable. We were able to gather the personality and outlook of members of the organizational structure to promote and
sufficient material for a young, living, up- the jury. The artist has become in some develop artistic talent and knowledge. This
to-date exhibition. I shudder to think what measure the critic of the critic, and the phenomenon is very important for a
would happen if a John Moores Exhibition consistency of the exhibition reflects the idea cosmopolitan city grown accustomed to a
were organized in Paris: some 20,000 works which creative artists have in their own permanent divorce between official life and
would be submitted and the jury would find mind of individual critics. If they consider the reality of artistic life. Since 1960 the
it difficult to select 200 worth exhibiting. the psychology of the jury is too antagonistic simultaneous crisis in abstract art and in

Contributors to this issue David Thompson was formerly art critic for The Charles Harrison, assistant editor of Studio Inter-
Times and now writes regularly for Queen magazine national, studied art history at Cambridge University
and Studio International. He has also worked in tele- and the Courtauld Institute.
vision and the theatre, as well as writing art criticism.
Charles S. Spencer writes for several journals and
Jasia Reichardt, assistant director of the Institute of Michael Rothenstein, currently at the Vancouver reports on art in Britain for the New York Times.
Contemporary Arts, Dore Ashton, American writer Print International, has a show at Belfast opening in
and critic and George Savage, member of the Council two weeks, and another in Philadelphia next year. He Christopher Prater established Kelpra Studio, the
of the British Antique Dealers' Association, are fre- is also involved in setting up print projects at various fine art printers, about ten years ago.
quent contributors to Studio International. art schools.
Peter Bird is assistant art director at the Arts Council
Pierre Restany, the French critic and writer, was a Frank Whitford is at present living in Berlin and of Great Britain and was formerly director of Bradford
member of the jury for this year's John Moores researching into early twentieth century painting and City Art Gallery. He has visited Sweden many times
Exhibition in Liverpool. graphic art. and is married to a printmaker, Birgit Skiold.