Page 17 - Studio International - March April 1975

but not by directly persuading people to figured out ways by which to locate them about an art that, fundamentally, is
invest large sums of money. In art today, in their proper time and place. By now, supposed to be directly attractive to the
sales-promotion strategies developed by that's been mostly done, as Frankfurter eye ?
galleries or artists' agents involve said, yet we have a continuation of the `The basic politics of modern art is that
retaining critics to write articles and techniques of analysis by which to the artist wants to act through his work.
books about the artist. Assuming that the perform this function, useless in relation If he merely makes something, he enters
critic is completely honest, and that he to contemporary art. Today we know into the commodity structure of society.
will not write in favour of an artist unless who did what. What need is there for the He must somehow transcend producing
he really admires him, the fact remains apparatus of formal analysis ? an object for the market.
that the use made of his writing is not to 'One reason I'm not terribly interested `We have to keep in mind that many
create a better understanding of the in so-called "field painting" or in cultures have died out, have become
artist but to stimulate his market, which conceptual art is that the fundamental incapable of creating anything; that
will then be advanced by further philosophical foundations of these many mediums, forms of expression,
activities on the part of the promoter — styles are feeble. What I seek in art is the have become exhausted, through forms of
until the artist has transcended combination of work and outlook that is social coercion or through mysterious
criticism altogether. In the end, it no both relevant to our time and stimulating causes. I regard the money mass that has
longer matters whether one thing or to the sensibility. I don't see anything come into the art world in recent years as
another is said about him. He has attained illuminating about a style of art which is a form of coercion, one almost on a par
the class of artists who must be included based entirely on thinking about art. with the coercion by the police in
in representative collections. Against a We are living in an ideological age. totalitarian countries. The action of
sufficiently powerful promotion drive, Everything in the art of the last hundred money is capable of shattering all values
criticism is ineffective, since it has itself years — to pick a rough period — is based and of demoralizing artists, old and
become in practice a species of on some kind of an idea. Impressionism, young — in other words, of providing an
promotion. Post-Impressionism, Fauvism — all almost impassable barrier to creative work.
`The device of the art historian-critic imply an ideological hypothesis. The One of our great problems is whether
and particularly the art historian feeblest forms of ideology are those that valid art is compatible with the present-
functioning as a curator of museum are purely aesthetic. An ideology day market. Doesn't this market tend to
exhibitions and catalogue writing, is to concerned only with the question of destroy the products and activities of the
link new works with works of the past, to whether this or that is the right thing to human mind ? We are obliged to have
show that Kenneth Noland or Morris paint in the fifties, is about as trivial and faith in the ability of the human mind to
Louis is related to Velazquez, to Matisse, narrow-minded as thinking can be. Who sneak around this obstacle and do
and so on. In other words, to pretend needs a field painting ? something worthwhile anyway. We are
that one is dealing with the order of `Barnett Newman had a very strong encouraged by the fact that this situation
masterpieces, since if these paintings are critical-metaphysical outlook. His has prevailed for the last hundred years.
not masterpieces, they are fairly vacuous. paintings were an attempt to assert this People stated flatly a hundred years ago
(In masterpieces, presumably, vacuity is outlook. He made the strongest protests that, given the capitalist system, nothing
not an objection). A young artist, such as against having his work merged into the can be created. Yet great art has been
Frank Stella, studies art history, but his field-painting category. He wanted his created, though always on the verge of not
art history is very thin; it reaches back an metaphysical views, and his idea about being created any more.
extremely short distance, and is highly painting — about painting in America There are many works that I don't
theoretical — perhaps the largest figure in needing to be totally abstract — to provide understand. It's not essential for me to
it is Jasper Johns. But these few links the intellectual environment of his regard myself as some kind of sensitized
qualify Stella as a master at the age of paintings. He was aware that his art instrument bound to record on a dial
twenty-eight. This exemplifies the requires an ambiance of talk. All painting exactly how valuable any creation is.
distinction between criticism and art in the twentieth century requires such an There are many things that escape me,
history. ambiance. There is no such thing as pure some for a long time. Suddenly I may
`Criticism ought to be related to painting in the twentieth century — nor begin to see them. How can I believe in
paintings, to particular paintings, and, was there ever any pure painting. To say reviewing art shows ? Some people
most important, to particular artists. that a painting speaks for itself is sheer believe that they can detect quality.
A critic must have a dramatic basis for nonsense. A painting speaks within a Nonsense. It is an empty word. One can
evaluation. By which I mean, the work is context of thought, and that's what fill it with anything one wants to put into
significant in so far as it relates back to criticism is about . . . . the critic it. People who have nothing to say will
the creator of the work, and the mode of illuminates the thought context with the talk about quality.
creation that he practises. There is a painting, and illuminates the painting I've become more and more impressed
fundamental metaphysical basis to the with the thought context. A reciprocal, a with naïve art, which used to be put into a
production of a work of art, and this is dialectical, activity takes place.' separate category because of academic
the ground upon which we can talk of `Are you led to prefer figurative values. Now that academic values have
values without constantly falling back art?' been crushed, how do you differentiate
into mythologized art history. Art history `Not necessarily. Although I admit naïve art from so-called fine art ?
is, of course, involved in criticism, I'm that I am getting bored with pure Something about naïve art attracts me.
not saying you can make an absolute abstraction, because to my mind pure There's been much interesting creation
break. On the other hand, art history is a abstraction rarely transcends decoration. even in the twentieth century. A definition
totally unstable affair, it is derived from It was the recognition of this that of the artist, could be a naïve who knows
certain interests. I think art history is brought Abstract Expressionism into all about art. That may sound
terrific when I find any of it, but most existence. There had been an abstract art paradoxical, but I believe the element of
current stuff is not art history at all — the movement in the thirties, in the United naïveté, of coming on things in a state of
connecting of this and that in twentieth- States. It failed to arouse real interest ignorance, is characteristic of all great
century art. It's not art history because it's because it appeared as just pattern- artists. They have to not know what they
based on a false analogy with the history making. One of the great services of Hans are dealing with. Once they know what it
of art in the Renaissance. In the Hofmann was to attack that idea of is and how to do what they want to, their
Renaissance there were city cultures in abstract art with the notion that work becomes routine . . . . How to
painting, evolution of forms, what abstract art must have content.' preserve naïveté, how to keep seeking is
Focillon called "la vie des formes". Now, `What's wrong with decorative art?' the guiding principle. One must be taken
as Alfred Frankfurter said, "we art `Nothing. What I object to is the cant by surprise. Otherwise, one merely lays
historians have practically finished our that goes with it, when it pretends to be down laws.' •
work". The science of art history that something other than decorative art.
developed in the nineteenth century was Decorative art doesn't need to be
primarily for the purpose of cataloguing written about much — it should simply
what Berenson described as provide a feeling of its beauty. Why have
"homeless" paintings. Art historians we had all these pumped-up theories