Page 31 - Studio International - September 1973

Footsteps of a application of paint, and in each case the parts. The pastel elements at the bottom would
be quite crushed by the darker area above were
reconciliation of surface unity and local incident
master: has been enhanced. The resulting holistic it not for the fact that their soft pink is low in
pictures are a prime distinguishing feature of
gloss and hence weightier than would otherwise
theJules Olitski post-war American art. be the case. This concern with gloss is
Moffett's selection of paintings emphasizes
indicative of how thoroughly Olitski has
retrospective the core of Olitski's work. There are a few mastered colour (hue, value, and chroma are
not the only dimensions of colour) and also of
materiel paintings from the late 195os and a
few transitional works from the very early just how thoroughly painterly an artist he is.7
Ken Carpenter
1960s, but the great bulk of the show consists But the extraordinary level of
of mature work. accomplishment in Darkness Spread calls into
In part at least, this is desirable. Olitski's question the balance within Olitski's work that
THE OLITSKI RETROSPECTIVE IS AT paintings are unusually resistant to has been provided by the retrospective. First
THE WHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART, reproduction, even in colour. Hence even of all, there might have been a few more of
NEW YORK, UNTIL 4 NOVEMBER 1973. frequently reproduced works may not be truly Olitski's most recent works. This would have
familiar. I was struck by how beneficial it is to been especially desirable since in the last
In the last year or so, a critical consensus has the fine and well-known Tin Lizzie Green year or so Olitski has expanded his method
been forming to the effect that Jules Olitski is (acrylic, 1964) that the coloured dots along of applying paint and now uses squeegees,
now the leading painter in the United States. its right side should be pastel chalk. That, brush, mitten, etc., to produce some of the
Such an excellent critic as Darby Bannard1 came strangely enough, gives them the force they finest work of his career.
to this conclusion in the pages of Artforum. Two need in this context of contrasting scales. In Further, Olitski's work is broader in scope
recent articles in Art International have said as general, the 1964 pictures, with their facture than the retrospective indicates (although the
much. Kenworth Moffett argued the case on contrasts and their subtly contrasting and catalogue acknowledges this). In particular, I
historical grounds in Arts Magazine. And in the overlapping hues, are much more complex and would have liked to see the 1959 materiel
more popular press, Thomas Hesse claimed much less sweet than they have seemed in paintings shown at the Metropolitan in
recently in New York Magazine that Olitski's reproduction. Geldzahler's grand survey show of 1969;
innovations have led to an important The 1965 and 1966 pictures are rich in without them, the retrospective leaves a gap in
breakthrough. In April Olitski's travelling masterpieces, and surprisingly enough they Olitski's development. That development is
retrospective opened at the Boston Museum have not yet been fully discussed. A few of presented, moreover, as rather more linear
of Fine Arts. Organized by its Curator of them are marred by gratuitous contours than it really is. Olitski is especially remarkable
Contemporary Art, Kenworth Moffett, the accidentally introduced by small folds in the for his willingness to work with uncertain aims.
retrospective includes 75 paintings dating from canvas during the spraying process, but this is (It does not matter that sometimes, as with
1957 through 1973. relatively infrequent. A peculiar property of a the paintings done on carpet in 1968, the
In the light of Moffett's thorough exhibition number of works of this period and a little later, results can be unsatisfactory).
catalogue, Olitski appears as the master Instant Love-land for instance, is that lighter At the same time, Olitski maintains explicit
craftsman, typical in his development of the areas where the picture's surface is most contact with traditional painting. He still
best American modernists. He was trained in exposed do not read as surface; but those areas occasionally draws from the nude model —
portrait painting, as was Kline, but at the where the surface is covered with paint and beautifully and very traditionally. To him, the
National Academy of Design in New York hence inaccessible read very much as surface. standard is still that set by the great portrait
(194o-42). For a few years (1949-51), he lived in This inversion of function and denial of visual painters — Titian, Rembrandt. Perhaps no
Paris, an experience he shares with Francis, expectation is typical of Olitski. retrospective could encompass so rich a
Kelly and Noland. Like so many American The excellent 1966 painting, Doulma, is figure. q
artists, he achieved maturity only after notable for its use of gloss contrasts. Gloss or
assimilating a rich admixture of both European sheen has been a recurrent concern in 1Bannard's article appeared in October 1972.
The Art International articles were John
and American predecessors, amongst whom Miró twentieth-century art. For instance, Léger, Elderfield's and mine, December 1972. Moffett's
is especially important, just as he was for Gorky. Derain5, and others made use of raw canvas and article appeared in March, 1973, and Hess's article
appeared 2 April 1973.
But the greatest momentum in Olitski's career low-gloss, unvarnished paint in a number of
'The title of his article, 'Empty-centre Painting', is
stems from his involvement in what might be early works. quite misleading because it gives no indication of
called the new painting technology. In 196o his In Doulma, there is strong counterpoint the tremendous surface continuity and hence
work changed markedly under the influence of between drawn elements on the left and right unification in Olitski's pictures.
'Other artists had used spray before Olitski,
the staining technique perfected by Morris sides. Olitski's well-known sprayed-and-masked especially Paul Klee, but Klee's structure was never
Louis and others. For several years Olitski drawing prevails at the left, and at the right integrated with the spray technique.
'William Rubin has suggested that 'poured pictures
elaborated on staining with his own quite there are some hand-drawn elements
is a more apposite term than drip', in part because
personal use of sponges and (in 1964) rollers. providing the Cézannesque 'visual stutter' first it is more indicative of the control available to
In 1965 he began to develop the technique of noted in Olitski by Rosalind Krauss.° To the Pollock in his widely misunderstood method. See
`Jackson Pollock and the Modern Tradition, Part I',
spraying°. Olitski's use of spray has been a outside of the drawn elements, Olitski has used Artforum, February 1967.
complex matter, involving numerous a matte finish, in contrast with the higher sheen 5Reinhold D. Hohl discusses some of these works in a
applications and a variety of guns and nozzles. in the central expanse of the picture. Hence note, 'How to ruin a painting', in Art News,Feb. 1973
Olitski: Recent Paintings (catalogue for
Viscosity and translucency of the paint can be the relative continuity of facture and hue across 'Krauss
Olitski's exhibition at the University of
controlled by adding to it ammonia or gel. The the drawn elements is interrupted by both Pennyslvania's Institute of Contemporary Art, 1968).
structure of Olitski's work is vitally affected by drawing and changes in gloss. This broken 'Conversation with Kenneth Noland.
this battery of techniques. As Moffett quite continuity is one of the most deeply moving
rightly sees it, Olitski should therefore be features of Olitski's art. (Overleaf)
p.78 Darkness Spread I 1973
grouped with Pollock in his poured-and- Sheen contrast also contributes vitally to Acrylic on canvas, 134 x 97 in.
spattered4 paintings and Morris Louis in his the most recent painting in the show, Darkness Private collection
mature (stained) work : each artist has been Spread I (1973). This has some affinity, I think, p. 79 Instant Love-land 1968
Acrylic on canvas, 120 X 252 in.
responsible for &major innovation in the with Gottlieb, in its contrast of slow and fast Kasmin Gallery, London
77