Page 19 - Studio International - January 1969

Corres ondence attention to what the critics say-they're always Another crucial point is that the whole idea of the
p
masterpiece is now being discredited. Leavis and
t ry ing to put you down'-this is a commonly-found
attitude. Few artists, apparently, acknowledge that
that kind of greatness which is slow to give up its
any critic has helped and guided them to the full his school go to literature primarily to ·confront
Victimised staff exhibition, realization of their powers. Yet in litera ry histo ry meaning and which will not do so without an effort
Dear sir, there are many classic cases of writers of genius who, of thought and imagination. There is an influen­
Because of the deplorable actions taken against meeting no critical intelligent appreciation from tial view that this kind of approach is increasingly
forty members of staff at Guildford School of Art, the public, have turned to vertiginous ways of their inappropriate in the visual arts. Artefacts come to
their professional careers have been jeopardized. own choosing, with a hypertrophy of one artistic , be valued for their environmental impact, or for
It is now our intention to show through our own element at the expense of others. I am thinking of extending the sensibility. As Ralph T. Coe writes
media, the responsible and productive nature of the long poems of Blake, or the late novels of Henry in the catalogue of his exhibition Magic Theater at
our capabilities. James. The same hypertrophy may well be hap­ Kansas City, Missouri:
So far we have fought in political terms through pening today as each artist, to survive, guards the 'In the past, art has been looked at as beauty, as
newspapers, unions, etc. and strictly within the identity and inviolability of his own personal style. entertainment, as social content, as abstraction,
educational framework. The issues, however, are It is a great pity that the tradition of litera ry criti­ and as illusion. Now it is to be experienced
now so broad that we need the involvement of the cism associated with Cambridge, so influential in through the mind as perceptual infinity on a
professional art world. Accordingly we are organiz­ education and the study of culture, should have
ing an exhibition at the Royal Institute Galleries, parted so far from the development of twentieth
195 Picadilly, W.l , from December 30, 1968 to centu ry art. Many faults have been found with
9, 1969. The exhibition consists of three F. R. Leavis and those influenced by him, distract­
Janua ry
areas: ing attention from their true relevance. It is true
(1) Work by painters, sculptors, printmakers, that the dimmer disciples of Dr Leavis tend to be
designers, photographers. priggish and doctrinare. But this is likely to happen
(2) Events produced by Complementa ry ·Studies with any strong ideological movement that sub­
staff (poets, writers, film-makers, historians, stitutes a new canon of excellence for the old. As
economists, etc.). the dust settles on Scrutiny's conflicts with the old
(3) A documentation of occurrences leading up academic and litera ry establishment, the Scrutiny
to the present situation both at Guildford and interpretation of English literary tradition emerges
nationally. as a new standard-a standard which of course
And for the occasion a number of people are show­ needs constant questioning and revaluation.
ing their sympathy by contributing performances: �t is also true that the Cambridge English school
John Lennon and Yoko Ono, Bruce Lacey, John has tended to be· rather monoglot and provincial.
Latham, John Tilbu ry , Pete Brown and his Bat­ This is due partly to Leavis's reasoned case for the
tered Ornaments, Mark Boyle, Stewart Brisley. superiority of English literature over most others
Due to the importance of the issue a�d the calibre (except the Russian ), and partly to the conviction
of our guests and supporters, we feel confident of an that a profound knowledge of any language and
event that will merit the fullest media coverage. literature other than one's own is ve ry difficult to
Yours sincerely, acquire. Whereas Cambridge literary criticism is 75 years ago
Ferris Newton, protestant and unashamedly English, the develop­ Some new studies by Count Von Gloeden, of Taor­
pp. Exhibition Committee. ment of modern art has been catholic and cosmo­ mina, Sicily, deserve especial praise, as, although
Some of our present supporters are: politan. It is not then surprising that there has been professedly subject pictures, they are each printed
John Lerinon; Hen ry Moore; Ivon· Hitchens; so little contact. Yet in its essentials the imperative from one negative, taken for the most part in the
Graham Sutherland; Bernard Cohen; Andrew of Scruti ny was simply that intelligence and the open air. The selection of models displays genius;
Forge; Sir Hugh Casson; Bridget Riley; Roger de moral imagination should be fully applied to art the Socrates and Young Nero, each in classic sur­
Grey; John Berger; Anthony Caro; Leslie Wad­ and literature, which are therefore seen not as roundings, might delude a person with an incur­
dington; Prof. L. R. B. Elton; David Hackney; 'leisure' activities but as the stuff of civilization in a able ignorance 'of histo ry into belief that they were
William Turnbull; Kenneth Armitage; Richard perilous age; for, as Lea vis wrote in Education and photographs of the actual persons. A Young Monk
Hamilton; Paul Ove ry ; Kasmin; Philip Sutton; the University, is also noteworthy. Several nude studies are peculi­
John Piper; Garth Evans·; Carel Weight; Gimpel 'It is as if society, in so complicating and extend­ arly. good. In more than one instance ,the superb
Fils Galle ry ;Joe Tilson; Peter de Francia; Roland, ing the machine ry of organization, had incurred landscape of Sicily and its noble ruins are brought
Browse, Pelbanco Galle ry ;. Lord Beaumont of a progressive• debility of consciousness and of the into the picture with a resulting whole that does
Whitley; Ceri Richards; Dame Barbara Hep­ powers of co-ordination and control-had lost. not suggest unclothed models with appropriate
worth; Sir Roland Penrose; William Graham. intelligence, memo ry and moral purpose.' backgrounds, so much as faithful presentations of
This is certainly not contradicto ry to the spirit of, those old days when the nude figure was revealed
Inadequacy of art criticism for instance, the Bauhaus. with no sense of shame to the observer or the ob­
Dear Sir, In spite of the remoteness of 'Cambridge' from the served. Of course this is the only possib!e nudity
Paul Ove ry , writing a short while ago in The Times, art world, there have been some interesting forays admissible in art, and when it is so depicted the
discussed the inadequacy of art criticism today as into art criticism from the Cambridge Quarterly, only valid objection vanishes.
compared with litera ry criticism, where, largely which is run by five editors, one of whom was a From Photographic Portraiture: an Interview with Mr
due to F. R. Leavis and the Scrutiny circle of the colleague of Lea¥is's on Scrutiny (which ceased H. H. Hay Cameron.
1930s and 1940s, there exj.st standards of excellence publication in 1953). In the spring 1967 number,
and a tradition to which critics can appeal. Ove ry John Remsbu ry appraises · D. H. Lawrence's 50 years ago
suggests that in the visual arts there are, in fact, a vividly direct criticism ofCezanne against the more For book illustration and lithography the students
central tradition of modernism and a seconda ry litera ry approach of Roger Fry: have had during the past ten years the inestimable
. tradition of dadaism, surrealism and expressionism; 'Often it is quite difficult, reading F ry , to believe advantage of sympathetic instruction and broad­
··'virtually nothing that has happened in the visual that the painter under discussion is Cezanne, and minded advice from that masterly illustrator and
·arts since the last war is new or original' in the not Braque or Picasso. The language seems to draughtsman, Mr Edmund]. Sullivan. The student
sense that it was not anticipated or at least made float about without attaching itself to the can­ who intends to devote him ·or herself to book illus­
possible by one of these traditions. vases, as indeed the phrases minted by F ry tration is expected to acquire a full equipment for
I cannot accept without qualification Overy's sug­ continue to float about today ... ' expression by attending, besides the illustration
gestion that these traditions in the visual arts are Such writers as Mr Remsbu ry would not accept class, those of life drawing, design, lithography and
really comparable to Leavis's 'great tradition' of that the two alternative artistic traditions identi­ etching. With this wise understanding, the student
the English novel. But Overy's call for staridards of fied by Mr Ove ry -modernism on the one hand, is allowed to follow his or her own bent, and so
value in art criticism is ve ry welcome. What is and dadaism-surrealism-expressionism on the develop individuality on the way. Unlike so many
necessa ry above all is a criticism which commands other-are of the same standing as the traditions masters, Mr Sullivan discourages any tendency to
a consensus of respect, not least among artists and values established by modern litera ry critics. imitate his own style ancl methods, endeavouring
themselves. Degeneration of critical values is a For one thing, there are close equivalents of both to stimulate the expression of the student's per­
vicious circle. Critics come to be widely regarded as these traditions in literature, but they do not enjoy sonality by sympathetic guidance.
failed artists working off their own bitterness on nearly such wide or such serious acceptance as in From The Goldsmiths' College School of Art, by Mal­
th.e creative achievements of others. 'Don't pay any the visual arts. colm C. Salaman.
7