Page 12 - Studio International - March April 1975

economically or idealistically. He argues dear, nothing but the same old faces !' — as
that my answer to the question is a though novelty was some sort of criterion.
Why does this stuff get published ? Who
Andrew devious one because I made an initial wants to read anything about painting
selection of the selectors of the show,
other than hard information, unless it can
thus switching the deal from artists in
Forge general to these artists in particular. He be something vivid that enlists ideas and
feelings that have some immediate
then chides me for not having exercised
personal validity ? Underlying both the
my own preferences more openly and
answers incisively. It is nice to be encouraged to friendly and the dismissive reviews it
seems to me that there is a tremendous
say one's say but if my object had been to
undertow of hostility, a kind of
demonstrate my preferences, I would
have made a totally different show. It puritanical shying away from art itself.
criticisms of seemed to me far more important to make This is far more visible to me here than
it was in England.
the experiment that was in fact made. Of
course this reflects my preferences Peter Fuller concluded with the words
`British somewhat, as Fuller demonstrates by `It may be that in diagnosing the
undoubted malaise of British painting in
pointing to the fact that there are no
Photo-Realists in the show. It was neither 1974 far more attention should be paid to
Painting a matter of pulling names out of a hat nor the specific conditions affecting Britain
rather than to those affecting painting at
a razor-sharp selection. It was a
large.' It is a point which I agree with
calculated effort to bring different sorts of
1974' painting together; to create a situation absolutely. And I am certain that one of
the foremost symptoms of that malaise is
where painters could to some extent
the utterly moribund and negative state
demonstrate their allegiances; to set up
the circumstances for a wide range of of art reviewing and criticism.
experience, for comparison, contrast and The one issue that most writers could
reflection upon what painting is and what turn to with enthusiasm was the
I have been going through all the it offers just now. Certainly there is no `challenge' contained in the exhibition
reviews of the 'British Painting' 74 show such thing as 'artists in general' but there that painting itself was still 'alive'. The
at the Hayward which I worked on and I are networks, chains of affiliation, each of conclusion seemed to be not only
thought ought to make a report. In which constitutes a view of what painting that this was an illusion on my part but
terms of inches, the show got good amounts to. My idea was to display that the alternatives were equally
coverage. I saw twelve pieces for general experimentally one such network. I moribund. You might think that most
readership, ranging from the 'Yorkshire insisted all along that the idea would of the reviews had been written by people
Post' to 'Time Out' (these happened to only be proved if it was tried out in dedicated to the stamping out of art — not
be almost interchangeable, as a matter of different forms. It could take as many just stalwart old Terence Mullaly either —
fact: both appeared to have been written different forms as there would be people but swingers wasting and shrivelling its
by fifth-formers.) Then there were six to set it rolling. I doubt now if this will very fibres. You could almost feel
pieces for the trade: two in 'Arts Review', happen. their puritanical gloatingness as though
three which you published (I'm When I had finished hanging the show art had at last got what it deserved. 'To
including Terry Smith's long article in I was so filled with the visual excitement champion a medium because it once was
the December issue) and Marina Vaizey's of the galleries that I couldn't believe capable of marvellous things' Richard
piece in `Artnews'. that others would not be able to share it. Cork wrote in the 'Evening Standard',
Almost everybody objected with Of course there was a certain amount of `and therefore deserves to be loved almost
varying degrees of bitchiness to the dross and the more I saw it the less I liked irrespective of its present performance is
method of selection. Instead of seeing it it. At the same time I became more and to wallow in a sentimentality which can
as an attempt to achieve a positive object more convinced of the quality of a do no service to the future welfare of
they saw it as a monumental cop-out. number of paintings there. For me it was painting.' But there is no other service
Friendly notices characterized my part in exhilarating to get to know these paintings that one can render to the future welfare
it as 'self-effacing', less friendly ones as and after many days in the galleries I was of painting than to champion it in the
`cowardly'. William Packer described it still learning more about them. A lot of present, to look at it, to discuss it, to
as a device which allowed me to 'accept painters were gloomy about the show attack it when it is corrupt, certainly, but
what plaudits are going and disclaim all before it opened and expected a disaster. also to acknowledge it when it is not. And
criticism.' (He won me elsewhere in his In the event, every reaction that I had to acknowledge it, in my view, means not
piece by commending the hang.) This from painters was positive — even from just to report on names and reputations
reaction was about what I expected, artists who were not hung and had an but to find something to say about
though perhaps somewhat more interest in finding fault. I find it painting in its actuality. That is, to say
widespread. When one is reviewing, it is absolutely incomprehensible that not a something concrete and observed enough
convenient to have one's targets cut and single critic who wrote about the show to bring the experience of it alive to the
dried. What I had not expected was that felt able to communicate a positive or reader and thus to render it significant.
so few critics would get the point of the optimistic personal response, or to take Who knows, in the process something
experiment. This was not to make an advantage of some of the juxtapositions might be said that gave insight and
exhibition with a tendency nor an in the show to isolate and bring out the confidence to a painter, or brought him up
unveiling of novelties nor a balanced and qualities of work that they admired. short.
inclusive survey, but simply to make one Of course some kind words were said : I have made no mention of Terry
which would be interesting for the the 'Financial Times', 'The Observer', Smith's article which is in a different
general public to look at for information the 'Sunday Times', although Marina class from anything I have been
and to show how a certain method could Vaizey decided to knock it later for her discussing (as distinct from the other two
be used to construct exhibitions. American audience in `Artnews'. But the Studio notices which read to me just like
The only critic to tackle the issue of the friendliness that was allowed was almost the rest except for the jargon.) Smith's
method with any seriousness was Peter invariably cheery to the point of article is an extremely important one and
Fuller in the TLS. In a long and facetiousness, uninformed by any trace of no doubt it has been closely read and
extremely intelligent article he points out curiosity or wonder. Everything was discussed — it certainly should have been.
the impossibility of thinking of artists as a reduced to the same level of glancing If we can hope for writing of this
group with a common identity. What condescension. Nothing was looked at pointedness in the trade mags — and not
possible 'common interests are there with any effort to explain or unravel or just circling round the sick bed of
between successful portrait painter . . . share. In effect the friendly reviews read Formalism but pushing out in other
and an environmental artist who draws as the other side of exactly the same coin directions too, then there will be plenty
lines in the sand on beaches ?' There as the unfriendly ones, many of which of reason to go on reading them. But
cannot be anything between them, either were like petulant social jottings: 'My what can we hope from reviewers ? •
82