DOCSLIB.ORG

THE CRITICAL LITERATURE OE ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISM By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE CRITICAL LITERATURE OE ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISM By The critical literature of abstract expressionism Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Whittaker, Larry, 1941- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 18:02:30 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/317997 THE CRITICAL LITERATURE OE ABSTRACT EXPRESSIONISM by Larry Whittaker A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OE- ART In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the History of Art .In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 6? STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted, in partial fulfill­ ment of requirements.for an advanced.degree at The Univer­ sity of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permis­ sion for extended quotation from or reproduction of '.this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is- in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. • SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: SHELDON REICH Professor of Art History TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABS TRACToeooooooeooooooooeoo eo IV I INTRODUCTION ...... .. 1 II FORMAL HISTORICISM VERSUS REVOLUTIONISM .... 13 III REACTIONS TO ACADEMIZATION, DECLINE, AND NEW" ART 00900000.0OO.o'.00.0000 31 IV SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION o , . S4 APBENDIY 000000.00.00.000000 000 03 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY o... .... o. 95 iii ABSTRACT This thesis ■ examines the art criticism which emerged in support of a new painting.style,Abstract Expressionism, in America during the forties and fifties. This criticism broke with prevailing standards of objec­ tivity to provide partisan support for Abstract Expres­ sionism. •However, the critical literature comprised two diametrically opposed philosophies. Clement Greenberg, who may be taken as representative of one concept, concentrated upon analyzing the formal qualities of the painting. More­ over, he insisted upon the close relation of the new American movement to preceding modern art. Harold Rosenberg, who provided the most important counte.rconcept to the historicist-formal philosophy felt an obligation to interpret the content of the work of art in psychological and social terms. He also believed that Abstract Expressionism embodied certain innovations which set it apart from pre­ vious modern art. As Abstract Expressionism went through a period of change during the late fifties, the accuracy of each philosophy was revealed. Critics who shared Greenberg’s viewpoint believed that the artists’ activ­ ities fostered academism, and they championed new art. Rosenberg and his supporters, by contrast, held Abstract Expressionism, to be the last serious moment in art „ Herein, they established a critical principle which, being conceptual, rather than visual, emerges as inflexible and contradictory <, I INTRODUCTION This thesis represents an effort to identify, class­ ify, and evaluate the dominant trends in critical writing pertinent to the recent American painting style, Abstract Expressionism. It will be demonstrated that such writing falls naturally into two categories, designated herein as histori'Cist-formal and revolutionist. These philosophies may be exemplified by the criticism of Clement Greenberg and Harold Rosenberg, who emerged as the leading critics of the movement. In this discussion, the historicist-formal method, as represented by Greenberg, will be proved the more instructive and less contradictory view of Abstract Expressionism. Such considerations as which painters can properly be called Abstract Expressionists, what stylistic quali­ ties their paintings share, and whether the movement should be known by a different title are still at issue. It is not the-purpose of this study to answer these par­ ticular questions. However, since consistent terminology is essential in discussing the critical aspect of this' period, certain assumptions must be made in order to pro­ vide a basis for commentary. 1 2 Abstract Expressionism is used here to refer to a style of painting which a small number of artists in New York evolved during and immediately after . World War II„ During the decade between 1950 and i960, Abstract Expres­ sionism became dominant in American painting and subse­ quently was accepted internationally. The term itself was first used in relation to American painting in 1946 by - - t_ Robert Coates, art critic for the New Yorker magazine. It is by no means a popular designation among the artists it identifies or the critics who supported them. However, Abstract Expressionism is at present the best-known title and, if the misleading or pejorative labels appended to past styles in art are any indication/ the most likely to 2 endure. The major artists who are usually considered Abstract Expressionists are Hans Hofmann, Arshile Gorky, Willem de Kooning, William Baziotes, Jackson Pollock, Robert Motherwell, Adolph Gottlieb, Mark Rothko, Clyfford 1, See "The Art Galleries," New Yorker, March 30, 1946, p, 75, 2, The term New York School derives from an exhibition of that name held at the Frank Peris Gallery in Los Angeles in 1951 and for the purposes of this essay may be considered synonymous with Abstract Expressionism, Action painting refers to a personal inter­ pretation of the style and thus cannot be employed inter­ changeably with the other categorizations. The concept of Action Painting will be considered in detail below, pp. 29-32, 3 Still, and Barnett Newman. Somewhat later, but also a part of the group, are Franz Kline, Philip Guston, and Jack Tworkov. This list is not complete; some important artists who came to prominence late in the development of the movement have been omitted. Also missing are artists who figured at an early date, but not prominently, and others who figured only peripherally. The painters listed have in common the fact that they were dominant in the critical literature which supported Abstract Expressionism from its beginning until its decline. With these broad definitions established, the emergence of the new painting and criticism from the milieu of American art in general may be observed. Prior to the popular acceptance of Abstract Expressionism a- variety of styles and influences comprised the art world of this country, and the critical apparatus was corres­ pondingly objective and catholic. The magic realism of ■Andrew Wyeth, the geometric purism of Burgoyne Biller, and the landscape abstractions of Karl Knaths exemplify only a i part of the variety which then existed in American paint­ ing. Such work continued to share most of the pictorial and literary space of Art News and Art Digest with that of the modern European masters and their Surrealist and School of Paris successors throughout the forties. 4 Museum officials conceived of their function as primarily educational and endeavored to bring before the public as wide a selection of styles as possible. As late as 1949, the Museum of Modern Art’s Alfred H. Barr Jr. still held this opinion: T,I do not think there is a single well-marked trend or direction in American art today „ . .freedom of choice among many styles I believe to be a good, not a bad thing.In the same article, Lloyd Goodrich of the Whitney Museum gave his affirmation to Sir Herbert Read’s contention that both abstract and representa­ tional art may be practiced simultaneously — even by the same artist — with equal validity.^ There is no better way to gain an overall .impres­ sion of the art criticism of the period than to survey the ’’box score of the critics” columns published in every issue of Art News until early 1950. .Arranged for compara­ tive purposes, these columns present diverse opinions on important new shows in New York by such leading newspaper critics as Howard Devree and Edward A. Jewell of the Times, Henry McBride of the Sun, and Emily Gqnauer of the World Telegramo The tone of these reviews, as one scans through them, whether criticizing Henry Varnum Poor, Josef Albers, . 3 o ”A Symposium: The State of American Art,” Magazine of Art, XLII (February, 1949), 85. 4. Ibid., p. 91«. or Salvador Dali, invariably leaves an impression of toler ance and restraint. In the eyes o f an English observer, Denys Sutton, the audience for contemporary art in New York in the late forties consisted of a small coterie centered around the Museum of Modern Art,, which assumed the attributes of a club or secret society. A converse evaluation of the Museum of Modern Art by an American critic writing at .approximately the same time pictured it as an authorita­ tive index of prevailing taste, reflected by sales in the fashionable 57th Street Galleries.^ What' sold best was Erench modernism; because of its "official" position in the museums, galleries, and. the eyes of collectors of contemporary art, the School of Paris continued to flourish well into the early fifties 7 ' out of proportion to its creative vigor. Yet the task of winning approval for modern European painting undertaken by the Modern Museum and by the progressive galleries did a positive.service to the young New York painters who were 5« "The Challenge of American Art," Horizon (London), XX-(October, 1949), 278. 6. Clement Greenberg, "The Present Prospects of American Painting and Sculpture," Horizon (London), XVI (October, 1947), 28. 7 o See Hilton Kramer, "The New American Painting, Partisan Review, XX (July-August, 1953), 421.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Press Release for Immediate Release Berry Campbell Presents Raymond Hendler: Raymond by Raymond (Paintings 1957-1967)
    PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE BERRY CAMPBELL PRESENTS RAYMOND HENDLER: RAYMOND BY RAYMOND (PAINTINGS 1957-1967) NEW YORK, NEW YORK, June 29, 2021—Berry Campbell is pleased to announce its fourth exhibition of paintings by Raymond Hendler (1923-1998). Raymond Hendler: Raymond by Raymond (Paintings 1957-1967) features paintings created between 1957 and 1967, a transitional period for Hendler in which the artist moved away from an Abstract Expressionist mode and employed a more stylized line, producing distinct shapes and symbols. The exhibition is accompanied by a 16-page catalogue with an essay written by Phyllis Braff. Raymond Hendler: Raymond by Raymond (Paintings 1957-1967) opens July 8, 2021 and continues through August 20, 2021. Gallery summer hours are Monday - Friday, 10 am - 6 pm. ABOUT THE ARTIST A first-generation action painter, Raymond Hendler started his career as an Abstract Expressionist in Paris as early as 1949. In the years that followed, he played a significant role in the movement, both in New York, where he was the youngest voting member of the New York Artist’s Club. Hendler became a friend of Franz Kline, Willem de Kooning, Jackson Pollock, and Harold Rosenberg in Philadelphia, where he ran an avant-garde gallery between 1952 and 1954. Raymond Hendler was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1923 and studied in his native Philadelphia, at the Graphic Sketch Club, the Philadelphia College of Art, the Pennsylvania Academy of Art, and the Tyler School of Art (Temple University). In 1949, he continued his art training in Paris at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière on the G.I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Modernist Iconography of Sleep. Leo Steinberg, Picasso and the Representation of States of Consciousness
    60 (1/2021), pp. 53–73 The Polish Journal DOI: 10.19205/60.21.3 of Aesthetics Marcello Sessa* The Modernist Iconography of Sleep. Leo Steinberg, Picasso and The Representation of States of Consciousness Abstract In the present study, I will consider Leo Steinberg’s interpretation of Picasso’s work in its theoretical framework, and I will focus on a particular topic: Steinberg’s account of “Picas- so’s Sleepwatchers.” I will suggest that the Steinbergian argument on Picasso’s depictorial modalities of sleep and the state of being awake advances the hypothesis of a new way of representing affectivity in images, by subsuming emotions into a “peinture conceptuelle.” This operation corresponds to a shift from modernism to further characterizing the post- modernist image as a “flatbed picture plane.” For such a passage, I will also provide an overall view of Cubism’s main phenomenological lectures. Keywords Leo Steinberg, Pablo Picasso, Cubism, Phenomenology, Modernism 1. Leo Steinberg and Picasso: The Iconography of Sleep The American art historian and critic Leo Steinberg devoted relevant stages of his career to the interpretation of Picasso’s work. Steinberg wrote several Picassian essays, that appear not so much as disjecta membra but as an ac- tual corpus. In the present study, I will consider them in their theoretical framework, and I will focus on a particular topic: Steinberg’s account of “Pi- casso’s Sleepwatchers” (Steinberg 2007a). I will suggest that the Steinber- gian argument on Picasso’s depictorial modalities of sleep and the
    [Show full text]
  • Colorful Language: Morris Louis, Formalist
    © COPYRIGHT by Paul Vincent 2014 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED To UNC-G professor Dr. Richard Gantt and my mother, for their inspiration and encouragement. COLORFUL LANGUAGE: MORRIS LOUIS, FORMALIST CRITICISM, AND MASCULINITY IN POSTWAR AMERICA BY Paul Vincent ABSTRACT American art at mid-century went through a pivotal shift when the dominant gestural style of Abstract Expressionism was criticized for its expressive painterly qualities in the 1950s. By 1960, critics such as Clement Greenberg and Michael Fried were already championing Color Field painting for its controlled use of color and flattened abstract forms. Morris Louis, whose art typifies this latter style, and the criticism written about his work provides a crucial insight into the socio-cultural implications behind this stylistic shift. An analysis of the formalist writing Greenberg used to promote Louis’s work provides a better understanding of not only postwar American art but also the concepts of masculinity and gender hierarchy that factored into how it was discussed at the time. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to extend my thanks Dr. Helen Langa and Dr. Andrea Pearson for their wisdom, guidance, and patience through the writing of this thesis. I would also like to thank Dr. Juliet Bellow, Dr. Joanne Allen, and Mrs. Kathe Albrecht for their unwavering academic support. I am equally grateful to my peers, Neda Amouzadeh, Lily Sehn, Kathryn Fay, Caitlin Glosser, Can Gulan, Rachael Gustafson, Jill Oakley, Carol Brown, and Fanna Gebreyesus, for their indispensable assistance and kind words. My sincere appreciation goes to The Phillips Collection for allowing me the peace of mind that came with working within its walls and to Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Canonisation of Surrealism in the United States
    The canonisation of Surrealism in the United States Sandra Zalman In a pointed assessment of the first show of Surrealism in New York, in 1932, the New York Times art critic asked, ‘How much of the material now on view shall we esteem “art,” and how much should be enjoyed as laboratory roughage’?1 The question encompassed the problem Surrealism posed for art history because it essentially went unanswered. Even after the 1936 endorsement by the Museum of Modern Art in a show organized by its founding director Alfred Barr (1902-1981), Surrealism continued to have a vexed relationship with the canon of modern art. Above all, the enterprise of canonisation is ironic for Surrealism – the Surrealists were self-consciously aiming to overthrow the category of art, but simultaneously participating in a tradition of avant-gardism defined by such revolution.2 Framing his exhibition, Barr presented Surrealism as both the most recent avant-garde export, and also as a purposeful departure from the avant-garde’s experimentation in form. Instead, Barr stressed that Surrealism focused on an anti-rationalist approach to representation. Though Barr made a strong case to integrate Surrealism into the broader understanding of modernism in the 1930s, and Surrealism was generally accepted by American audiences as the next European avant-garde, by the 1950s formalist critics in the U.S. positioned Surrealism as a disorderly aberration in modernism’s quest for abstraction. Surrealism’s political goals and commercial manifestations (which Barr’s exhibition had implicitly sanctioned by including cartoons and advertisements) became more and more untenable for the movement’s acceptance into a modern art canon that was increasingly being formulated around an idea of the autonomous self-reflexive work of art.
    [Show full text]
  • Motivation of the Sign 261 Discussion 287
    Picasso and Braque A SYMPOSIUM ORGANIZED BY William Rubin \ MODERATED BY Kirk Varnedoe PROCEEDINGS EDITED BY Lynn Zelevansky THE MUSEUM OF MODERN ART, NEW YORK DISTRIBUTED BY HARRY N. ABRAMS, INC., NEW YORK Contents Richard E. Oldenburg Foreword 7 William Rubin and Preface and Acknowledgments 9 Lynn Zelevansky Theodore Reff The Reaction Against Fauvism: The Case of Braque 17 Discussion 44 David Cottington Cubism, Aestheticism, Modernism 58 Discussion 73 Edward F. Fry Convergence of Traditions: The Cubism of Picasso and Braque 92 Discussion i07 Christine Poggi Braque’s Early Papiers Colles: The Certainties o/Faux Bois 129 Discussion 150 Yve-Alain Bois The Semiology of Cubism 169 Discussion 209 Mark Roskill Braque’s Papiers Colles and the Feminine Side to Cubism 222 Discussion 240 Rosalind Krauss The Motivation of the Sign 261 Discussion 287 Pierre Daix Appe ndix 1 306 The Chronology of Proto-Cubism: New Data on the Opening of the Picasso/Braque Dialogue Pepe Karmel Appe ndix 2 322 Notes on the Dating of Works Participants in the Symposium 351 The Motivation of the Sign ROSALIND RRAUSS Perhaps we should start at the center of the argument, with a reading of a papier colle by Picasso. This object, from the group dated late November-December 1912, comes from that phase of Picasso’s exploration in which the collage vocabulary has been reduced to a minimalist austerity. For in this run Picasso restricts his palette of pasted mate rial almost exclusively to newsprint. Indeed, in the papier colle in question, Violin (fig. 1), two newsprint fragments, one of them bearing h dispatch from the Balkans datelined TCHATALDJA, are imported into the graphic atmosphere of charcoal and drawing paper as the sole elements added to its surface.
    [Show full text]
  • Primitivism" In2 0 T H Century
    TH THE MUSEUM OF MODERN ART PRIMITIVISM" IN 20 CENTURY ART 11 WEST 53 STREET NEW YORK, NY 10019 Affinity of the Tribal and the Modern (212) 708-940U FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August, 1984 No. 17 NEW EXHIBITION OPENING SEPTEMBER 27 AT MUSEUM OF MODERN ART EXAMINES "PRIMITIVISM" IN 20TH CENTURY ART Few if any external influences on the work of modern painters and sculptors have been more critical than that of the tribal arts of Africa, Oceania and North America. Since the turn of the century when Gauguin, Picasso, Matisse, and others first acquainted themselves with masks and sculptures from these areas, modern artists have continued to display strong interest in the art and culture of tribal societies. The term "primitivism" is used to describe the Western response to tribal cultures as revealed in the work and thought of modern artists. Recognizing the importance of this issue in modern art history--and the relative lack of serious research devoted to it--The Museum of Modern Art in New York this fall presents a groundbreaking exhibition that underscores the parallelisms that exist between the two arts. Entitled "PRIMITIVISM" IN 20TH CENTURY ART: Affinity of the Tribal and the Modern, the exhibition, which opens on September 27 and runs through January 15, 1985, is the first ever to juxtapose modern and tribal objects in the light of informed art history. William Rubin, head of the Museum's Department of Painting and Sculpture and director of the landmark 1980 Pablo Picasso: A Retrospective, has organized the show in collaboration with Professor Kirk Varnedoe of New York University's more/ The exhibition and its national tour are sponsored by Philip Morris Incorporated.
    [Show full text]
  • Clement Greenberg “Modernist Painting”*
    Summary: Clement Greenberg “Modernist Painting”* The Definition of “Modernism” Greenberg’s concern in this essay is to argue that there is a logic to the development of modern- ist art and, in particular, modernist painting. He identifies the essence of Modernism as “the use of the characteristic methods of a discipline to criticize the discipline itself—not in order to subvert it, but to entrench it more firmly in its area of competence”. (85) It is the intensification of a self- critical tendency that began with the eighteenth-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant. “Modernism”, Greenberg tells us, “criticizes from the inside [rather than from the outside], through the procedures themselves of that which is being criticized.” (Ibid.) This starting point has impor- tant implications for the thesis of autonomy. [See the handout on Clive Bell: “The Aesthetic Hy- pothesis”.] Self-Justification According to Greenberg, every “formal social activity” requires a rational justification, i.e. there must be reasons given to justify a particular activity. Without this justification, the activity in ques- tion (e.g. painting, philosophy, physics, poetry, mathematics, etc.) is discredited and weakened. Many take the view that this is what happened with religion. Post-Enlightenment art (i.e. roughly speaking, art produced after the Eighteenth Century) was at once in precisely this situation of needing a justification. Thus, it was called upon to establish its own autonomy by means of a “deduction”, i.e. an argument for its legitimacy and its capacity to provide us with experience that cannot be obtained through any other art or social practice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Most Important Works of Art of the Twentieth Century
    This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Conceptual Revolutions in Twentieth-Century Art Volume Author/Editor: David W. Galenson Volume Publisher: Cambridge University Press Volume ISBN: 978-0-521-11232-1 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/gale08-1 Publication Date: October 2009 Title: The Most Important Works of Art of the Twentieth Century Author: David W. Galenson URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c5786 Chapter 3: The Most Important Works of Art of the Twentieth Century Introduction Quality in art is not just a matter of private experience. There is a consensus of taste. Clement Greenberg1 Important works of art embody important innovations. The most important works of art are those that announce very important innovations. There is considerable interest in identifying the most important artists, and their most important works, not only among those who study art professionally, but also among a wider public. The distinguished art historian Meyer Schapiro recognized that this is due in large part to the market value of works of art: “The great interest in painting and sculpture (versus poetry) arises precisely from its unique character as art that produces expensive, rare, and speculative commodities.”2 Schapiro’s insight suggests one means of identifying the most important artists, through analysis of prices at public sales.3 This strategy is less useful in identifying the most important individual works of art, however, for these rarely, if ever, come to market. An alternative is to survey the judgments of art experts. One way to do this is by analyzing textbooks.
    [Show full text]
  • January 2002 CAA News
    s CUNY's Graduate Center. From 1969 to gela's Last Paintings (Oxford University CONFERENCE 1971, he was a CAA Board member, and Press, 1975); Borromini's Sari Carlo aIle was appo:inted Benjamin Frankl~ Quattro Fontane: A Study in Multiple Form SESSION Professor of the History of Art at the and Architectural Symbolism (Garland, University of Pennsylvania in Philadel­ 1977); The Sexuality of Christ in Renais­ HONORS phia in 1975. He retired in 1991, after sance Art and in Modern Oblivion (Univer­ teaching a semester as the Meyer sity of Chicago Press, 1983; the second Schapiro Chair at Columbia University :in edition:in 1996 was revised and doubled LEO New York. :in size by a "Retrospect" that responds to Steinberg has published and lectured critics); Ei1counters with Rauschenberg STEINBERG widely on Renaissance, Baroque, and (University of Chicago Press, 1999); and, most recently, Leonardo's Incessant Last he CAA Distinguished Scholar's Supper (Zone, 2001). Other writings Session was inaugurated in 2001 include studies of Filippo Lippi, T to engage senior scholars in the Mantegna, Michelangelo, Pontormo, Annual Conference and celebrate their Guercino, Rembrandt, Steen, VeHtzquez, contributions to art history. But its aim is and Picasso. Nonprofit Organization greater: At a time of great methodologi­ In addition to a prolific writing u.s. Postage cal shifts in the field, this session will career, Steinberg'S academic life has also foster dialogue within and among the been a full one. In 1982, he delivered the Paid different generations of art historians. s A. W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts at NewYork,N.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Nber Working Paper Series the Rise and (Partial)
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE RISE AND (PARTIAL) FALL OF ABSTRACT PAINTING IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY David Galenson Working Paper 13744 http://www.nber.org/papers/w13744 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 January 2008 The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2008 by David Galenson. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. The Rise and (Partial) Fall of Abstract Painting in the Twentieth Century David Galenson NBER Working Paper No. 13744 January 2008 JEL No. J01 ABSTRACT Non-representational painting was one of the most radical artistic innovations of the twentieth century. Abstract painting was created independently by three great pioneers - the experimental innovators Kandinsky and Mondrian, and the conceptual Malevich - virtually simultaneously, in the years immediately before and after the outbreak of World War I. It became the dominant form of advanced art in the decade after the end of World War II, as Pollock, de Kooning, Rothko, and their colleagues developed the experimental forms of Abstract Expressionism. But in the late 1950s and early ‘60s, Johns, Rauschenberg, Warhol, and a host of other young artists abruptly made a conceptual revolution in advanced art, and in the process reduced abstract painting to a minor role.
    [Show full text]
  • The Painted Word a Bantam Book / Published by Arrangement with Farrar, Straus & Giroux
    This edition contains the complete text of the original hardcover edition. NOT ONE WORD HAS BEEN OMITTED. The Painted Word A Bantam Book / published by arrangement with Farrar, Straus & Giroux PUBLISHING HISTORY Farrar, Straus & Giroux hardcover edition published in June 1975 Published entirely by Harper’s Magazine in April 1975 Excerpts appeared in the Washington Star News in June 1975 The Painted Word and in the Booh Digest in September 1975 Bantam mass market edition / June 1976 Bantam trade paperback edition / October 1999 All rights reserved. Copyright © 1975 by Tom Wolfe. Cover design copyright © 1999 by Belina Huey and Susan Mitchell. Book design by Glen Edelstein. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 75-8978. No part o f this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. For information address: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 19 Union Square West, New York, New York 10003. ISBN 0-553-38065-6 Published simultaneously in the United States and Canada Bantam Books are published by Bantam Books, a division of Random House, Inc. Its trademark, consisting of the words “Bantam Books” and the portrayal of a rooster, is Registered in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and in other countries. Marca Registrada. Bantam Books, New York, New York. PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BVG 10 9 I The Painted Word PEOPLE DON’T READ THE MORNING NEWSPAPER, MAR- shall McLuhan once said, they slip into it like a warm bath.
    [Show full text]
  • 191 Figure 1. Elaine De Kooning, Black Mountain #16, 1948. Private Collection
    Figure 1. Elaine de Kooning, Black Mountain #16, 1948. Private Collection. 191 Figure 2. Elaine de Kooning, Untitled, #15, 1948. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 192 Figure 3. Willem de Kooning, Judgment Day, 1946. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 193 Figure 4. Elaine de Kooning, Detail, Untitled #15, 1948. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 194 Figure 5. Hans Hofmann, Ecstasy, 1947. University of California, Berkeley Art Museum. 195 Figure 6. Elaine de Kooning, Untitled 11, 1948. Salander O’Reilly Galleries, New York. 196 Figure 7. Elaine de Kooning, Self Portrait #3, 1946. National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 197 Figure 8. Elaine de Kooning, Detail, Self Portrait #3, 1946. National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 198 Figure 9. Elaine de Kooning, Detail, Self Portrait #3, 1946. National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 199 Figure 10. Elaine de Kooning, Untitled 12, 1948. Salander O’Reilly Galleries, New York. 200 Figure 11. Elaine de Kooning, Black Mountain #6, 1948. Salander O’Reilly Galleries, New York. 201 Figure 12. Grace Hartigan, Frank O’Hara, 1966. National Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. 202 Figure 13. Elaine de Kooning, Kaldis #12, 1978. Private Collection. 203 Figure 14. Elaine de Kooning, Frank O’Hara, 1956. Private Collection. 204 Figure 15. Arshile Gorky, The Artist and His Mother, 1926-36. Whitney Museum of Art, New York. 205 Figure 16. Elaine de Kooning, Al Lazar #2, 1954. Private Collection. 206 Figure 17. Elaine de Kooning, Conrad #2, 1950. Private Collection. 207 Figure 18. Elaine de Kooning, JFK, 1963.
    [Show full text]