Page 55 - Studio International - November 1969

modern masters, from Monet to Leger, she enough or deep enough to be regarded as wall. There will be, judging by two impromp-
regards as 'protean subject matter'.) The either parodist or ironist. And it is precisely tu visits I made to two very different kinds of
extravagant claims for Lichtenstein's formal because as the cool problem-solver he cannot galleries, lots of writing on the wall this
invention are made again and again. He has permit himself to become involved that this is season. At the DWAN GALLERY, Sol LeWitt was
always been a good designer, and a skilful so. He has everything needed: he can draw, just completing his directions to assistants in
stylist. But a Mondrian he's not. And partly he can design, he can control large surfaces, his wall exhibition, and one wall was already
because he never intended to be. Intentions and he is intelligent. But, when he gives him- completed : a total surface in squared-off grid
count heavily here. self his assignments, which become increa- formation, lightly, ever so lightly, scored by
Once past the early 1960s, the fact that Lich- singly recherche, he works like the illustrator what appeared to be graphite lines in modular
tenstein responds to his tasks as though they who remains emotionally detached from his sequences. As there were no wall labels, I was
were problems becomes more apparent. To task. free to 'see' the wall as a wall. The 'drawing'
each 'problem' he brings relatively similar, but The WHITNEY MUSEUM resumes its welcome is so subtle that it could easily be overlooked.
more and more skilful, answers. Whether it series of intimate exhibitions with a showing The plaque-like effect could be mistaken for
is a matter of re-constituting the 1920s style of six ceramic cups by the West Coast sculp- wall articulation rather than wall painting.
moderne (not the art of the 1930s, in fact, as is tor Kenneth Price. These very small, What would make the 'seeing' more interes-
mistakenly suggested, but that recherché imaginative artifacts (they are real cups and ting is, of course, the explanation of what
moment in the late 1920s, when modernism could, if worst came to worst, be drunk out needs to be seen, as is often the case with so-
was vulgarized through industrial design), or of) are a facet of Price's work that is endearing. called conceptual art. At the BYKERT GALLERY,
of re-doing Leger, Lichtenstein used his His surrealist impulse is still there, in the idea Peter Gourfain makes it quite plain what
`style' to make it his own, or almost. That of a 'nose' cup, or a 'rock' cup, but so is a must be seen: very emphatic, broad swatches
style is mainly a predictable reduction of more traditional, whimsical impulse in the of chalk. The wall as carrier is agreeable
means based on his trusty Benday grid. various animal forms he elaborates. As enough, but its solid functionalism makes the
It could be argued that by dropping out the always, his glazed surfaces are colourful and chalked marks ever so transient. q
subtleties and coming on each problem with marked by his special feeling for outlandish
the same rudimentary formal language, but workable juxtapositions. Price is an origi-
Lichtenstein is indeed parodying the past. nal, and it is well that the Whitney can show
But, despite the handsome and truly impres- him in the modest scale his work demands.
sive recent 'machines', particularly Prepared- At this writing, the 'season' is not quite under
ness, Lichtenstein still doesn't cut sharp way. I can, however, see the writing on the