Page 56 - Studio International - May 1972

one does not like to admit, on intuition alone, accord here among the quality of the strokes, the I Sue Ann Childress
that there is so much bad painting being done. untautness of the canvas, and the sort of dimness Diddleyitis
35 x 7o in.
But it simply isn't possible to see the large produced by the colours, that makes the painting Acrylic on canvas
majority of work on hand as strong or interesting. very memorable. I think the artist may be 2 Neil Welliver
Unfortunately, formalist critics so narrowed the getting a grasp on her own way of dealing with Girl with Striped Washcloth
sense of purpose available to contemporary the claim of drawing, or marking, on the surface 6o x 6o in.
serious painting as to make it seem that not as a literal element. But the painting has an Oil on canvas
many more 'good' paintings are possible. One emotional tone that is somehow very troubling 3 Chuck Close
Nat
can't believe that to be the case, and yet and which doesn't seem to be traceable to a 100 x 90 in.
formalist criticism did establish a level of formal source. It gave me somewhat the sense of Acrylic on canvas
explanation and of access to art which one hates a slackening hold on inner experience that I 4 Mary Heilmann
to see compromised. Looking at a show like the associate with fever. This picture didn't really The Closet
Whitney Annual, it is as if most of the paintings deliver any new sense of pictorial problems, but 74 x 6o in.
in it can't accommodate satisfying access, as if it did convince me that the person who made it Acrylic and cotton on canvas
they are not susceptible to the formalist style of is a painter first and foremost. That's a feeling I 5 Walter Darby Bannard
Spring and Increase 5972
explanation while not having any other kind of didn't have in front of most of the works in the 78 x 155 in.
fulness either. Regardless of one's feeling about Annual. Alkyd resin on canvas
the spirit of formalist criticism, the notion that Reviews of the Whitney Annual usually
quality is incompatible with arbitrariness in art reduce at some point to the mention of names
holds in one's experience of a show like the and complaints about who was left out. And that
Annual. But then, how often does innovation may be the most informative approach to a show from doing is just what the show subliminally
look like arbitrariness ? like this after all. To begin with, I missed at least recommends, judging the 'state' of painting in
Another problem with the formalist position two first rate painters in the exhibition, Ron America by the contents of this exhibition.
is that it rules out partial successes in art, Davis and James Bishop. At least the latter gets The high point of the show for me was
perhaps because of the way its own successes a one-man show in New York in April. For the Walter Darby Bannard's SurfurQueen. This is a
have been achieved. There are a large number of record, there are strong paintings in the show by very risky painting. It is done almost entirely in
pictures in the Annual that I find somewhat Jack Tworkov, Kenneth Noland, and Jasper yellow, a colour difficult to control because it is
interesting or about which I like a single aspect Johns, among established artists. To mention a so difficult to modulate and because it can heat
very much. Quite often one can't tell whether it few lesser-known people, Joan Snyder, Sharon up a picture so quickly. As one studies this
is the work or one's view of it that causes what Brandt and Mary Heilmann all produced works painting it comes to look less yellow than a sort
feels like an 'unfinished' response. There is, for that stand out in the show without contriving of sand colour, and in fact it seems to have been
instance, one modest, provocative painting in aggressiveness or charm. underpainted in light tan. But the yellow is
the show by a young artist named Sue Ann One of the surprises in the Annual this year applied mottled over the tan in such a way that
Childress which got this kind of response from is the number of straight figurative paintings the latter seems to be under brilliant illumination
me. The work is an unstretched canvas loosely included (why was Fairfield Porter neglected ?). from a source within the painting, and this
painted with a kind of diamond shaped pattern There is no way to tell whether this represents a without resort to defining an area with
at the left which dissolves into broad trend in current American painting or whether modelling. The effect is apparently obtained
splashy strokes as one reads to the right. The it reflects the interests of one of the Whitney's by the juxtaposition of colours alone, and it is an
colours are muted mauves, pinks and greens, curators; I think the latter is more likely, but it's effect which seems to distil the sense of
rather 'ungenerous' colours. There is a peculiar hard to know. One thing the critic must refrain expansiveness available to pictorial space,
226