Elizabeth Harker Thesis

Home , Francesco Bonami, Ilona Staller, Peter Brant, Rainer Crone, The Art of Making Art, Tilted Arc

by Elizabeth Harker

B.A. in Art History, May 2004, Mary Washington College

A Thesis submitted to

The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

August 31, 2011

Thesis directed by

Alexander Dumbadze Assistant Professor of Art History

ii Abstract of Thesis

Jeff Koons

The purpose of this thesis is to recognize a shift in the artwork of Jeff Koons in the year 1992 by way of establishing two distinct periods of the artist’s career, pre- and post- 1992. A successful New York artist in the early 1980’s, Jeff Koons career spiraled downward in 1989. In 1992 and the following years, Koons was able to recover and boost his profile to superstardom. I explain this transformation in Koons’ career by investigating the period between 1989 and 1992, comparing critical reviews of the artwork in each of the two periods. Additionally, I illustrate the differences between the works created from the two periods by providing descriptions and examples of individual pieces. Koons typically works in series.

Therefore I rely heavily on the series produced directly before and after the two- year transition period. In particular, the series “Made in Heaven” (1989) and

“Celebration” (1994-2009) emphasize my claims. Individual artworks such as large- scale topiary sculptures Puppy (1992) and Split Rocker (2000) are also imperative to the support my argument. I further consider an examination of Koons comments about his work in order to support my claim that he significantly altered his style of art due a number of negatively received projects and tumultuous personal events. I claim that the artwork produced during second period of his career was a reaction against these developments. Koons responded by producing overtly pleasing, visually spectacular, large-scale sculptures that eventually elevated his career into the phenomenon it is today. iii

Table of Contents

Abstract of Thesis …………………………………………………...……..iii

Table of Content…………………………………………………………….iv

List of Figures……………………………………………………..………….v

Text of Thesis…………………………………………………….….……….1

Bibliography…………………………………………………………..…..…24 . Appendices………………………………………………………….…...…..34

List of Figures

Figure 1………………………………………………………………………………...34

Figure 2………………………………………………………………………………...35

Figure 3………………………………………………………………………………...36

Figure 4………………………………………………………………………………...37

Figure 5………………………………………………………………………………...38

Figure 6………………………………………………………………………………...39

Figure 7………………………………………………………………………………...40

Figure 8…………………………………………………………………………..…….40

Figure 9…………………………………………………………………………..…….41

Figure 10……………………………………………………………………………….42

Figure 11……………………………………………………………………………….43

Figure 12…………………………………………………………………………….…44

Figure 13……………………………………………………………………………….45

Figure 14………………………………………………………………………….…....46

Figure 15…………………………………………………………………………..…...47

Figure 16…………………………………………………………………………..…...47

Figure 17…………………………………………………………………………..…...48

Four stories high, Puppy (1992) towers over its viewers with a whimsical and playful atmosphere (Figure 1). With its amiable subject matter, the piece characterizes the recent work of Jeff Koons. His art from 1992 onwards, particularly,

Puppy, Split-Rocker (2000) (Figure 2), and his sculptures from his “Celebration” series (1994-2005) beg for attention due to their size, subject, locations, and material. Koons’s artistic career, I argue, can be separated into two distinct periods, pre- and post-1992. Koons began to expand his art, in particular his sculptures, to tremendous proportions after 1992. He pumped up their eye-catching appeal with bright colors and shiny materials. Additionally, he produced works that represented nostalgic, childish themes. What caused him to change his work so suddenly and drastically? The answer for this question will be determined by in depth examination of the period between 1990 and 1992. It will be supported by an assessment of the reception of Koons’ artworks just before and following the period of transition.

I assert that due to negative critical reaction and several personal issues

Koons shifted the mood of his artwork to more light-hearted themes, from more serious topics such as consumption and sexuality. With this change, he instantly found success with the exhibition of Puppy in 1992. This is not to say that Koons was not successful before 1989. He did receive positive critical responses from his early artwork. However, it was not until 1992 that he achieved widespread critical and public achievement. Additionally, the sale of his works sky rocketed on the secondary market and he was able to insert himself into pup culture. The positive reaction from both critics and the public of his new style of art was enough to

inspire Koons to adjust his body of work to this new mode of working. He has overtly stated that his large sculptures were necessary to pump up their size to gain attention, “It’s a really big world… People are used to looking at larger things. You just have to compete with the rest of the world.”1 In addition, he has repeatedly divulged that the conception of these new works originated from his desire to insert joviality into the minds of the viewers. Koons stated, “I’ve tried to make work that any viewer, no matter where they came from, would have to respond to, would have to say that on some level ‘Yes, I like it.’ If they couldn’t do that, it would only be because they had been told they were not supposed to like it. Eventually they will be able to strip all that down and say ‘You know, it’s silly, but I like that piece. It’s great.”2 Simply put, Koons established these changes in order to add joy into his work, and to appeal to the greater public.

The material Koons used, the subject matter he employed, and the scale of his art distinguish the two periods separated by the two and a half years of transition.

The periods before 1990 and after 1992 possess noticeably different characteristics.

In his art from the 1980s, Koons produced work in accordance with the trends of the

East Village art scene. Concentrating on appropriation and consumerist themes, he established himself as an emerging artist with achievements in small, but influential

East Village galleries, like International with Monument. Examples of this are his works exhibiting vacuum cleaners, alcohol and basketball advertisements, or small knick-knack replicas, such as Dr. Dunkenstein from 1985 (Figure 3). This work is an appropriation of a Nike poster of Darrell Griffith, at the time a famous professional

1 David Bowie, “Super-Banalism and the Innocent Salesman,” Modern Painters (Spring 1998): 32. 2 Jeff Koons and Robert Rosenblum, The Jeff Koons Handbook. (New York: Rizzoli, 1992),112.

basketball player, splitting open a basketball while dressed as a doctor. Koons purchased the poster from the manufacturer, framed it, and presented it as an original artwork.3 Other artists also created pieces that appropriated specific advertisements in the early 1980’s. For example, Richard Prince was inspired by

Marlboro cigarette advertisements, often re-photographing popular advertisements as seen in Untitled (Cowboy) from 1983 (Figure 4).

It was not until after 1992, or the start of the new phase in Koons career, that he identified a means for major critical and financial success: charming themes, bright colors, and immense size. In both his later paintings and sculptures he employed subject matter of a more upbeat and joyful nature: toys, animals, cartoons, balloons, and food. The reason for his sudden transition from his earlier consumer based appropriation works in the 1980’s to his later amusingly themed large-scale sculptures of the 1990’s has not been addressed.4 By establishing the differences between the two periods and delving into Koons’s background, persona, and artwork, a potential justifications can be established.

Throughout his career, Koons has worked in series. Each series maintains comparable styles, topics, and themes. Koons's method of grouping his art into

3 Dan Cameron, “Art and its Double: A New York Retrospective.” Flash Art 134 (May 1987): 68. 4 For a reference of recent major studies on Jeff Koons see the bibliography section of this paper. In a monograph on the artist, Francesco Bonami, ed. Jeff Koons. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008, Bonami claims that Jeff Koons is one of the most elusive yet open minded artists of his time. He investigated the artwork of his entire career and likens the majority of it to Baroque Art and claims Koons finds faith in his art as one would through religion. He also asserts that many of Koons works can be seen as sexual in the way of a metaphor for aesthetic pleasure. Thomas Kellein’s study of Koons, Pictures from 2003 is purely an investigation into the development of his early sculptures and the formation of his paintings. He claims the early sculptures were a precursor and titles them “three- dimensional paintings”. Other then the Jeff Koons Handbook, which was published in middle of 1992, the publication with the most comprehensive inclusion of Koons career is Rainer Crone, ed. Jeff Koons: Highlights of 25 Years. New York: C&M Arts, 2004. This book merely identifies the highlights of Koons career through visual illustrations and generic information.

series has continued to the present day. Each series has common themes and visual similarities. When comparing examples of artwork from the two periods I have established, I will refer primarily to “Banality “ and “Made In Heaven” for the early period and Puppy and “Celebration” for the second period.

Opening concurrently at three galleries in New York, Chicago, and Cologne, he produced the critically successful “Banality” series from 1988.5 As Linda

Weintraub wrote about Koons’s artwork in a 1996 publication, “Kitsch is captivating.” 6 The show incorporated small hand-painted porcelain and ceramic sculptures of animals, children, and flowers. Examples of this subject matter can be seen in such works’ as Michael Jackson and Bubbles (Figure 5), or Wild Boy and

Puppy (Figure 6), both from 1988. Koons’ pieces from “Banality” are outlandish. In a

New York Times review, Michael Brennson described the gallery show as “a cross between F.A.O. Schwartz, Bloomingdales, and Graceland.”7 “Banality” was well received by critics.8 The pieces from the show are often described as “kitsch,” a term made famous by Clement Greenberg in his essay “Avant-Garde and Kitsch.”9

With the emergence of Postmodernism and Pop Art, the distinction between kitsch and avant-garde became less clear. Koons treads on this blurred line to bring the

5 Michael Brennson, “Shifting Image and Scale,” New York Times, December 2, 1988, 22. The exhibition opened at the Sonnabend Gallery in New York, NY in November 1988, Max Hetzler in Cologne, Germany in October 1988, and Donald Young Gallery in Chicago Illinois in December 1988. 6 Linda Weintraub, ed., Art on the Edge and Over. (New York: Art Insights Inc., 1996) 202. 7 Michael Brennson, “Shifting Image and Scale,” New York Times, December 2, 1988, 22. 8 Critical revies of ‘Banality’ can be seen in Roberta Smith article, “Rituals of Consumption.” Art in America 76, 5 (May 1988): 164-170, Susan Lee, “Greed is not Just for Profit." Forbes, (18 April 1988): 65-7, Brennson, “Shifting Image”, and David McCracken, “Cuteness with an Edge in Jeff Koons Work,” I 16 (December 1988): 75 and Diederichsen, Diedrich. “I’ll Buy That.” Parkett, no. 19 (1989): 70 77 9 Clement Greenberg, “Avant-Garde and Kitsch,” Partisan Review 6 (Fall 1939): 34-49.

traditionally lower class ‘tchotchkas’ or knick knack objects from “Banality” into the realm of fine art as one of his earliest attempts obtain response from mass culture.

The production of these trinket-like objects was a subtle foreshadowing of the charmingly jaunty themes Koons explored in the second phase of his career.

Despite the negative overtones in the title “Banality,” Koons was able to tap into familiarity and humor. Koons next series of work was not as widely praised as

“Banality,” and is a direct contribution to the development of the 1990-1992 transition period. A show titled “Made in Heaven” premiered to mixed reviews in

1990 at the Venice Biennale. His inspiration for the exhibition came to him while flipping through European magazines. Koons spotted the Hungarian born adult film star and Italian Parliament member Ilona Staller, also known as La Cicciolina (which loosely translates as ‘cuddles’ in Italian). He flew to Rome to watch her perform and propose a collaborative film project. The film was never completed, but the images and scenes became the foundation for “Made in Heaven.” Koons was enthralled by the fantasy-based, European style of pornography. He decided to model an entire show on the aesthetic.10 “Made in Heaven” consists of multiple sexually explicit paintings, hung adjacent to wood, marble, and Murano glass sculptures. Many of the works feature Staller and the artist himself. The sculptures are relatively small, however the paintings are large. The majority of the works depict the two figures engaging in a variety of sexual activities.

Juxtaposed with the overtly sexual images are similarly small sculptural scenes of flowers, cherubs, and animals. The combination of sexuality and kitsch

10 Thomas Kellein, ed. Pictures Jeff Koons: 1980-2002. (New York: Distributed Art Publishers, Inc., 2002), 25.

encourages Koons’ assertion that the works are not pornography but high art with messages similar to his earlier work. Koons fervidly defended “Made in Heaven”, “I was attacked by a lot of people who said that it was pornography. It was never pornography, though it was just the opposite, a philosophical type of work. It was a continuation of ‘Banality.’”11 In 1969, Susan Sontag argued that sexually explicit images are only pornographic when the characters remain broad. Real life and specific characters prevent our fantasies from coming to fruition; therefore, it could be said, Koons’ art does not function as pornography per se, but rather as art with sexually charged imagery.12 Nonetheless, the imagery is so strong in the works from this series it is difficult to think of anything other then pornography. It takes concerted effort on the part of the viewer to look past the shock of the works exhibited in order to find more profound meaning. Excluding the overt sexuality, topics in “Made in Heaven” echo those in many of Koons’ other series, particularly

“Banality.” In theory, by removing the object or image from its original setting,

Koons has deprived the said object of its once inherent function. This play on presentation remains an important theme throughout Koons’ career.

The New York premiere of “Made in Heaven” at the Sonnabend Gallery in

1991 caused an even greater stir. Koons included works with more intense, graphic imagery. Ileana Sonnabend felt compelled to post a warning outside the door to the show. Furthermore, relentlessly negative reviews appeared.13 In The New York

Times, art critic Michael Kimmelman declared Koons’ was attempting “one last,

11 Kellein, 26. 12 Susan Sontag,“The Pornographic Imagination” Styles of Radical Will. (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giraux, 1969). 53-54. 13 Calvin Tompkins, “The Turn Around Artist,” New Yorker, April 23, 2007, 62.

pathetic gasp of the sort of self-promoting hype and sensationalism that characterized the worst of the decade.” Kimmelman went on to assert the similarities of the show to photographs one would see in the adult magazine

Hustler.14

In light of the negativity surrounding “Made in Heaven,” a romantic relationship between Staller and Koons developed outside of their professional ties.

They were married in 1991 around the same time “Made in Heaven” premiered in

New York. The couple soon had a son named Ludwig. Divorce followed quickly after, as well as a long and expensive international custody battle that lasted through the 1990s. Unfortunately for Koons’, his misfortune did not cease there.

Not only did critics berate him fro “Made in Heaven,” Sonnabend had difficulties selling the works. Koons wasn’t invited to biennials, and he had only one more New

York solo gallery show in the 1990s. Both his career and personal life were in shambles.

As previously mentioned, in 1992 Koons significantly changed his style of artwork. But what caused this change in the artist and his work? I suggest that

Koons began producing his new style of artwork in 1992 as a reaction to the state of the art market and American economic situation, as well as his own career and personal troubles. Koons’ success in this second phase of his career has stemmed from the popularity of his large-scale sculptures from “Celebration” and his topiary assemblages Puppy and Split Rocker. For the purposes of my argument I will

14 Michael Kimmelman, “Art in Review,” New York Times, November 29,1991.

concentrate the rest of my thesis on these sculptures rather than his paintings since the former have already received a significant amount of attention.

The sexually explicit nature of “Made in Heaven” repulsed many viewers. By starring in the artwork himself, critics thought Koons’ was trying to achieving further notoriety. 15 An usually longtime supporter of Koons, critic Arthur Danto wrote about his reservations with “Made in Heaven” claiming that the artist had lost touch with any concept of morality and reality.16 Koons defended his work claiming that the images removed guilt and shame, and since he and Stellar were lawfully married Koons considered the presentation of their sex to be an emotional and moral triumph.17 Nonetheless, Koons was devastated and embarrassed by the harsh reviews. He spoke as though he had let his fans down. Referencing his feelings about the failure of the show, he said in an interview, “I’m always very upset if somebody doesn’t like my work, because I never want to lose anyone. I feel like I’ve failed if I do that.” 18 This comment emphasizes Koons longing for acceptance and success.

During this time Koons was also beset by significant legal problems. In 1990, a California photographer named Art Rogers filed a lawsuit against Koons and the

Sonnabend Gallery. Koons used a copyrighted image of Rogers’s for the sculpture entitled String of Puppies from 1988. Koons countered by defending the rights of artists, and argued that his use of the image was a form of social criticism. Koons

15 Calvin Tompkins, The Lives of Artists (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2008), 194. 16 Arthur Danto, Unnatural Wonder: Essays from the Gap between Art and Life. New York: Douglas and McIntyre Ltd., 2005, 301. 17 Anne Strauss, curator of Modern and Contemporary Sculpture , lecture, “Jeff Koons on the Roof,” as a part of the ‘Sunday at the Met’ lecture series in the Grace Rainey Rogers Auditorium at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, May 18, 2008 at 3pm. 18 Tompkins, The Lives of Artists, 195.

sought to identify appropriation as a form parody and not plagiarism.19 In early

April of 1992 however, the judged ruled against Koons, stating that the two scenes were “substantially similar” and that he had ultimately “copied” Rogers’ original image.20 In the legal sense, Koons was seen as a plagiarist, seriously damaging his credibility to the artworld.21 Jerry Saltz described his state of being during this difficult time: “To get a sense of how that felt to Koons, consider that he once mused about being burned at the stake.”22

Shortly after the premier of “Made in Heaven” a major change in Koons artwork appeared. From this point on, Koons removed images of himself from his art, stopped addressing advertisement and commodities, and changed his overall tone.23 He adjusted his topics to essentially focus entirely on more whimsical subject matters and objects. Additionally, it is at this point in his career that he modified the scale of his sculptures.

In 1992. the German city of Kassel was gearing up for “Documenta IX.” Koons was not in the show, and in an effort to redeem himself from recent failures, he created Puppy. The piece was installed in the nearby city of Arolsen, about forty minutes outside Kassel. Due to its unusual size, subject, and material the work

19 Robin Cembalest, “The Case of the Purloined Puppy Photo,” ArtNews 91 (May 1992): 35. 20 For more information see Cardamone, Art Rogers versus Jeff Koons/Sonnabend Gallery, Inc. US Court of Appeals Second Circuit, 91-7396, April 2, 1992, 19. 21 Brian Wallis, “We Don’t Need Another Hero: Aspects of the Critical Reception of the Work of Jeff Koons,” in Jeff Koons ed. Fronia W. Simpson. (San Francisco: Interprint, 1992), 27. 22 Jerry Saltz, “When the Low Went Very High,” New York Magazine, December 6, 2009. 23 To more easily visual the change in Jeff Koons artwork post 1992, see the following monographs, Rainer Crone and Alexandra von Stosch, Jeff Koons: Highlights of 25 Years, C&M Arts, New York, 2004, Franceso Bonami, Jeff Koons, Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago, 2008, (conversation between Jeff Koons and Lynne Warren), Katerina Gregos, Jeff Koons: A Millennium Celebration, Deste Foundation Center for Contemporary Art, Athens,1999, (text by Jeffrey Deitch), and Eckard Schneider, Jeff Koons, Kunsthaus Bregenz, Bregenz, 2001, (text by Alison Gingeras).

demanded attention. Puppy received much praise from both the public and the cognoscenti, creating as much, if not more buzz than “Documenta IX.” 24 The sculpture can be described as a giant topiary of a dog. It stands at forty-three feet and has a large steel substructure covered with approximately seventy thousand multi-colored flowers. The subject is a sitting, West Highland Terrier. A direct inspiration for Puppy is not evident, although Koons has a history of depicting terriers as in his much smaller 1991 sculpture Yorkshire Terriers, White Terrier

(Figure 9).

An immediate hit, the piece was recreated in 1995 in the Sydney Harbor at the Museum of Contemporary art. It was purchased by the Solomon R. Guggenheim

Foundation in 1997 and installed in front of the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. In

2000-2001 an additional unique version of Puppy was reconstructed in Rockefeller

Center in New York City for a temporary exhibit. A similar steel structure was used for each installation, yet new flowers and plants were employed. The difference in flowers produced slight visual modifications in color and shape between each sculpture, although the overall visual representation of the work remained unchanged. A few years later, in 2002, Puppy was purchased by collector Peter

Brant and installed outside of the Brant Foundation in Greenwich, Connecticut.25

For Koons, Puppy freed him from the negative response to “Made in Heaven.”

Reviews for the work were almost entirely positive. Referring to whether any

24 For multiple critical reviews of Puppy from 1992 see Roberta Smith, “How Much Is That Doggy in the Courtyard.” The New York Times, 5 (July 1992): 27, James Hall, “They Call It Puppy Love.” The Guardian London, no. 9 (October 1992): 4-5, and Jutta Kother. “Puppy Logic.” Artforum 31, no. 1 (September 1992): 90.

viewer of Puppy would enjoy the work, Peter Schjeldahl announced in The New

Yorker, “I cannot imagine that it’s reasonably possible not to.”26 Not only did the art world love Puppy, but also the general public, which can be seen in the piece’s installation in public setting all over the world. Along with Schjeldahl, many other important art critics were drawn to Puppy. For example, in a 2000 review of the installation in New York, Roberta Smith describes both her and the public’s attraction to dog,

What they found was a shocking simplicity, accessibility and pleasure. Puppy was intensely lovable, triggering a laugh-out-loud delight that expanded your sense of the human capacity for joy. It was a familiar, sentimental cliché revived with extravagant purity, not with the enduring materials like marble of bronze but with nature at its most colorful and fragile. The flowery semblance of fur made Puppy almost living flesh, like us.27

Acknowledging the success of Puppy, Koons embarked on a massive project entitled “Celebration.” Conceptualized shortly after Puppy debuted, planning and production began on the series in 1993. The show was to be unveiled at the

Guggenheim Soho in the late nineties, but unfortunately, due to production costs and timing issues, the show was postponed and later cancelled. 28

26 Peter Schjedahl, “The Blooming Beast; Rockefeller Center gets a new ‘Puppy,’” New Yorker, July 3, 2000, 74. 27 Roberta Smith, “Public Art, Eyesore to Eye Candy,” New York Times, August 24, 2008. 28 Although the project was realized in the early nineties, many of the works were never completed until the next decade. The excitement still stemming from the triumph of Puppy, aroused curiosity in Koons’ new project, but his exit from Sonnabend and cancellation of the Guggenheim show revived feelings doubt for Koons. See David Rimanelli, “Jeff Koons: a studio visit; it’s my party,” ArtForum 35, 10 (Summer 1997): 115.

Likely inspired by the loss of custody of his child, the numerous paintings and sculptures of “Celebration” concentrate on child-themed objects. Toys, balloons, animals, and flowers make blatant appearances in the series. The sixteen oil on canvas paintings depict a singular playful item set on what looks like crumpled up mylar wrapping paper. The highly reflective effect of the background in addition to the use of bright colors makes for extremely eye-popping paintings. An example is

Boy with Pony, from 1995-2007 (Figure 10).

Echoing the reflective nature of the paintings, Koons manufactured more than twenty large stainless steel sculptures for the project (with the exception of Cat on a Clothesline and Bowl with Eggs, which are made of polyethylene plastic).

Drawing from the success of the grand scale of Puppy, the sculptures in “Celebration” are massive. The most recognized piece from this series is the ten foot tall Balloon

Dog, 1994-2000 (Figure 11). The subject matter is that of a balloon twisted into a daschund dog shape, similar to what a clown would make at a kids party. Each sculpture consists of a playful item blown up on an immense scale. The tallest work from “Celebration” is Coloring Book, 1995-2005 (Figure 12) at approximately nineteen feet high. The scale, bright color, and super shiny reflectivity of these pieces demand attention. These large sculptures are now iconic. However, the artist’s paintings from “Celebration” failed to inspire critics. This is apparent in numerous lackluster reviews on the paintings. In 2008, Peter Schjedahl called the paintings “insensible” and “mediocre.”29 Calvin Tompkins admitted in the New

29 Peter Schjedahl, “Fun House,” New Yorker, (June 9, 2008): 130-131.

Yorker, “I tend to agree with the critics who say that Koons’ best work is in three dimensions.”30

Koons continued on his quest to charm his viewers with a return to large- scale topiary sculptures. Eight years after Puppy premiered and the same year it debuted at Rockefeller Center, Split-Rocker, another large flowering sculpture, was placed in the courtyard of the Palais des Papes in Avignon, France. Although not as big as Puppy, Split-Rocker is still massive at thirty-seven feet tall. The concept for the piece derives from an earlier work from 1999, Split-Rocker (Orange/Red). This work candidly expresses childhood nostalgia. In an interview from 2001 Koons stated, “Childhood’s important to me, and it’s when I first came into contact with art.

This happened when I was around four or five.” 31 Furthermore, in many additional interviews, Koons often talks about his happy childhood and its influence on his practice.32

In the original piece, Split-Rocker (Orange/Red) from 1999, Koons took two of his son’s toy rockers, a pony and a dinosaur, cut them in half and connected the clashing heads. In the Avignon Split-Rocker Koons replicates the original shape of the bonded heads, but on a large scale and with blooming flowers. Koons described his inspiration for the piece, “Where I grew up, in York, Pennsylvania, there was a house that was in the shape of a shoe where the manager of a shoe factory lived.

That always intrigued me and so I had an interest in making something that was like

30 Tompkins, “Turnaround Artist”, 63. In a 1999 review of “EasyFun” Roberta Smith Echoed Tompkins sentiments calling Koons paintings ‘routine’ and absent of his typical sensational qualities. See Roberta Smith, “Art Review; Jeff Koons – ‘Easyfun’.” New York Times (December 17,1999). 31 Lisa Dennison, Robert Rosenblum, and Craig Houser, Jeff Koons: Easyfun-Ethereal. (New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 2001), 18. 32 Anouchka Roggeman, “Jeff Koons, ” Modern Painters (June 2006): 69.

a shelter. Split-Rocker has its natural skylight because of the way the two profiles go together.”33 The work’s origins in a memory from Koon’s childhood add to the naïve charm of the sculpture. In addition to the nostalgic familiarity of the two animal figures, the most fascinating feature of Split-Rocker is the negative space between the two heads of the dinosaur and pony.

As previously mentioned, and owing to their hefty dimensions, what I am labeling Koons’ second period works, appealed to the general public due to their familiarity and their spectacular qualities. Because of their sheer size, Koons

“Celebration” sculptures convey entertainment values. Typically, substantial size inspires a sense of awe and wonderment. This is particularly the case when standard sized object are increased to more than one hundred times their normal volume.

The most considerable difference between Koons’ early works and later large-scale sculptures (other than size) is their location. Since many of the works of

“Celebration” are too large to fit into museum or gallery doors, they are often placed in either public outdoor spaces, or on private properties. The site specific and often non-art related locations change their role from his previous works to public monuments. The sheer size (and in the case of Puppy and Split-Rocker, medium) of these sculptures force them to remain outside gallery walls, and their function transforms when shown in a public setting. Its large scale, durable materials, and intention to be placed in an outdoor public location characterize public sculpture.

33 Gunnar Kvaran, Retrospective, Oslo: Litografia AS, 2004.

Historically, public sculpture was typically used for commemorative or decorative reasons. In the 1960’s with the development of minimalism, public sculpture was revitalized, yet it was not often understood by the public, or appreciated by critics. The existence of public sculpture was based on old monuments placed in communal spaces.34 Slowly public sculpture developed into site-specific spaces generating more attention. This was most likely due to their changing functions. In the 60’s public sculpture began to be used for artistic and cultural purposes rather than commemorative. Eventually, critics such as Rosalind

Krauss started to recognize this new public art.35 Koons’ large sculptures are distinctive because they incorporate the new intellectual and aesthetic ideals of contemporary public sculpture, yet on the other hand break old barriers with new vigor and differing subject matter. Some famous more traditional public sculpture examples are Richard Serra’s Tilted Arc from 1989, (Figure 13) and Tony

Rosenthal’s Alamo from 1967 (Figure 14).36 These two works, both made of steel and installed in New York City, reveal a muted finish with dark industrial-like colors.

Additionally, they are abstract, void of any content. Their contours disclose a focus on geometric shape rather then the organic. In comparison, Koons’ sculptures, with their bright colors, reflective appearance and unique subject matter, can be seen as idiosyncratic.

34 Senie Harriet, Contemporary Public Sculpture: Tradition, Transformation, and Controversy (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 19, 93-97. 35 Rosalind Krauss, “Sculpture in the Expanded Field.” October 8 (Spring 1979): 32-33. 36 For examples of contemporary public art in New York see the Public Art Fund Website, www.publicartfund.org

By using toys, animals and other childish objects in his sculptures, Koons was not only continuing with his history of appropriating objects, but he was also projecting his feelings about the loss of his son to his ex-wife. The large size of the sculptures accentuated the subject matter, establishing childhood themes as the primary message to be received by the viewer. The monumentality of the sculptures along with their colorful reflections instills a sense of awe in the viewer.

It can be seen as an attempt to remember a child’s sense of amazement and relentless optimism.37 In a nutshell Koons used the subject and size of his large- scale post-1992 sculptures to display his love for his child. The second period of

Koons’ work was forged in an attempt to rescue himself from the despair he felt from his troubled personal life.

Continuing through the nineties and into the next century with “Celebration”

Koons’ artwork epitomized the essence of light hearted merriment. He has attributed much of “Celebration” to his son Ludwig,

My son was born in October 1992. Immediately I became interested in a lot of images I came across, the packaging of toys, a playful rabbit – things that I enjoyed again…Then he was abducted, and my ex-wife kidnapped him. So the work fell into an arena where I felt that I wanted my son to feel how much I was thinking of him. So there were pieces like Balloon Dog.38

37 Francesco Bonami, ed., Jeff Koons (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008), 82-84. 38 Kellein, 28.

Arthur Danto considers Balloon Dog a masterpiece and further described it, and other works in the “Celebration” series, as monuments to childhood and laughter.39

The associations of Koons’ personal quandary as a father and the subject matter of his artwork in the nineties are extremely likely. By using toys, animals and other childish objects in his sculptures, Koons was projecting his feelings about the loss of his son. The large size accentuated the subject matter of the artwork, establishing childhood themes as the primary message to be received. As a child, the world seems huge. The sensation can be felt when viewing one of Koons large sculptures.

The monumentality of the sculptures along with their colorful reflections instills a sense of awe in the viewer. Perhaps he considered these works to be a form of family therapy. In a nutshell, Koons used the subject and size of his large-scale post

1992 sculptures to display his love for his child.

In the past, Koons has said many different things, but he has always asserted the importance of connecting with the viewer. Even before his troubles of the early nineties Koons was aware of the connection between his art and the viewer. In a conversation with critics Brooks Adams and Karen Marta in 1988, Koons stated his desire to satisfy all viewers,

My work will use everything that it can to communicate. It will use any trick; it’ll do anything – absolutely anything – to communicate and win the viewer over. Even the most unsophisticated people are not threatened by it; they aren’t threatened that this is something they have no understanding of…The work wants to meet the needs of the people. It tries to bring down all the barriers that block people from their culture that shield and hide them. It tells them to embrace the

39 Arthur Danto, Unnatural Wonder: Essays from the Gap between Art and Life. New York: Douglas and McIntyre Ltd., 2005, 300-301.

moment instead of always feeling that they’re being indulged by things they do not participate in. It tells them to believe in something and to eject their will….And it’s about embracing guilt and shame and moving forward instead of letting this negative society always thwart us – always a more negative society, always more negative.40

In this conversation, and particularly the last sentence, Koons’ describes the inspiration for the second period of his artwork.

Considering their placement often outside the walls of a gallery, a reason for

Koons enlarging his artwork was to expose his creations to a wider audience. The installation of these works in public places, such as Rockefeller Center and the Palais des Papes, allowed a more diverse group, and certainly a higher number of viewers the opportunity to experience Koons’ art.. The placement of artwork in a communal location provides much wider exposure to the general public. Alluding to his decision to pump up his sculptures to their considerable size, Koons further emphasized his aspiration to influence the public in 2000,

I’m not making things big to make them big…these images and these objects are defining themselves that this is the size they want to be. They’re archetypes. And archetypes are bigger than any one individual. An archetype is something which helps everyone survive.41

He declares that the purpose of the large size of his sculptures is to help the

American society endure. In this quotation, Koons is asserting the importance of his

40 Jeff Koons, “From Full Fathom Five,” Parkett 19 (1989): 44-47. 41 Rosenthal, 233. During his May 18, 2008 lecture at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Koons also commented on the term ‘archetype’ in terms of a historical precedence and connection with scale. He pointed out that scale forces a look back history and how things have presented themselves in the past.

sculptures on the continuation of life. It is a great example of Koons hyping his artwork. Here, he discussed his work in such a grand intellectual manner in order to elevate its importance within society. To me, Koons comments on his work seem genuine. However, they are worded cryptically or in such a way that they seem overly dramatic and complicated. Nonetheless, the quotations cited above support my notion that Koons’ overtly pleasing sculptures of 1992 and those made afterward were a reaction against his troubled first few years of the nineties. He has frequently stated that the size amplification of his post-1992 sculptures was necessary to gain attention. In addition, he has repeatedly divulged that their conception originated from the artist's desire to insert joviality into the minds of the viewers.

An important aspect when considering the comments of Jeff Koons is his persona. Since 1992 the artist has made a concerted effort to speak about his work and place himself further into the public eye. This is an attempt, I would argue, to sell himself and his artwork to the public, create buzz, mainstream popularity surrounding his career, and establish himself as a celebrity. Koons has a background as a salesman going as far back to the first year he moved to New York,

1977. Immediately he gained employment at the Museum of Modern Art in membership sales. He was tremendously successful at his job at the museum. He increased new memberships, encouraged members to renew, and also increased member donations. As a sales technique to gain donations, Koons adorned himself with sequins and wore a thin mustache to draw attention toward him. By utilizing this method of marketing himself and adopting an eccentric persona with the

accompanying costume he changed the mundane act of donating money into a more enthusiastic experience.

Although he brought in approximately three million dollars a year (by his own count) for the museum, Koons needed a bigger salary to finance the costs of his artwork.42 He left the museum to work on Wall Street, where he sold mutual funds and commodities. During this time he sharpened his business and advertising skills.

Koons praised his former profession in a statement he made in The Jeff Koons

Handbook, “Salesmen are today’s great communicators. They are out there pushing cars, real estate, advertising. That is where the real morality is played out in society today.”43 These sales positions both on Wall Street and at the museum provided

Koons with important and specific capabilities that he utilized later. I do not believe that the Koons persona is a total act. I do believe, however, that he has used his marketing skills to create a persona. Although theatrical, his persona and comments on his art relate to the work he produces.

The placement of Koons’ large sculptures in public places has allowed more of the population to be exposed to Koons career. The sculptures of “Celebration” have been displayed all over the world: for example, Puppy, Tulips, from 1995-2004

(Figure 15) in Beijing at the U. S. Embassy, and Balloon Flower (Red), 1995-1999

(Figure 16) displayed at 7 World Trade Center in New York. Koons knows that large scale sculpture placed outside will be visible to everyone. The reflective nature, scale, and bright colors make his artwork practically impossible to ignore by any

42 Koons and Rosenblum, 10. 43 Koons and Rosenblum, 12.

passerby. Koons used his knowledge of self-promotion to have his works accessible to the public, therefore adding to his celebrity.

Koons has also been able to successfully insert himself into mainstream culture in other genres. One of his more iconic sculptures Rabbit, 1986 (Figure 17) was inflated under Koons's supervision to great proportions and included in the world famous New York City Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade (Figure 18). The sixteen meter long balloon is a copy of one of Koons’ most popular works originating from his 1986-7 “Statuary” series. Owing to the amazing response of the crowd to the balloon in the parade, Rabbit has since made appearances in some of

Koons’ other more recent international exhibitions.44 By inserting his sculpture into a widely seen parade, Koons's art found success within the art world. This is a prime example of his ability to walk the line between pop culture celebrity and fine artist.

As proof, in 2006 Jeff Koons was positioned at number ten on “The Power

100” on Art Review magazine’s list of the most powerful people in the art world.45

Two years later, in September of 2008, Esquire magazine named Koons number thirty-three on their list of “The Seventy-Five of the Most Influential People of the

21st Century.”46 The inclusion of Koons on both lists illustrates his ability to break the barriers between the contemporary art world and popular culture. These notable tidbits are the result of Koons ability to attract both critics and the masses.

44 See Sarah Milroy, “Jeff Koons explains his Nuit Blanche Rabbit Balloon,” The Globe and Mail, (October 2, 2009), http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/jeff-koons-explains-his-nuit- blanche-rabbit-balloon/article1309880/. 45 Ossian, Ward, “The Power 100: 2006,” Art Review 16 (November 2006): 59. 46 “The Seventy-Five of the Most Influential People of the 21st Century.” Esquire Magazine, (September 2008). http://www.esquire.com/features/most-influential-21st-century-1008.

It wasn’t until the second phase of his career that Koons was recognized as a serious player both in the art world and in popular culture

Furthermore, Koons efforts to establish himself outside of the art world have been most apparent in recent years. In 2008, Koons won an acting gig in the

Academy Award winning film Milk where he played a small role as a state assemblyman. In a 1998 interview with David Bowie, the musician and actor described Koons’ artwork as euphoric and conveying “a feeling of swimmy happiness, smiley and gulp-celebrity.”47

Koons has also found immense success in the secondary market. His works have and continue to sell at astounding prices. On November 14, 2007, Hanging

Heart, 1994-2006 (Figure 19), was sold at Sotheby’s for $23.6 million, setting a record for the most expensive work of art by a living artist.48 Based on his insertion into popular culture through mediums other then fine art, I believe that his self- made celebrity has facilitated his success in the secondary market. Even with the occasional negative review, his persona or the seemingly simplicity of his work has nevertheless allowed him to become a big name.

The huge childish sculptures from the second phase of Jeff Koons’ career have received a number superlatives from both art critics and the public. His artwork sells for upwards of twenty million dollars to some of the wealthiest international collectors and is exhibited at renowned museums. After two and a half

47 Bowie, 30. 48 For more information on the financial details of Koons sales see Thomas, Kelly Devine. “The Ten Most Expensive Living Artists: Tracking the highest prices paid for contemporary artworks.” ARTnews 103, 5 (May 2004): 118-123 and Thomas, Kelly Devine. “The Selling of Jeff Koons,” ARTnews 104, no. 5 (May 2005): 114-121.

years of instability, the production of Koons’ topiary and other large scale sculptures in late 1992 and after, plus the verification from the artist that the sculptures were intended for the public, support my assertion that these works were conceived from a tumultuous period from 1990-1992. The sculptures’ large size and kitschy childhood oriented subject matter combine for an overtly pleasing sight. In short, the change in Koons artistic style in the early nineties arrived out of the need for elation and a career boost. After a terrible critical and public reception of the “Made in Heaven” series, legal difficulties over the custody of his son Ludwig, his career was in shambles. Fortunately, Koons found a way out of this morass with Puppy and the “Celebration” works.

Bibliography

Ames, E. Kenly. “Beyond Rogers v. Koons: A Fair Use Standard for Appropriation.” Columbia Law Review 93, 6 (October 1993) 1473-1526.

Arden, John Boghosian. America’s Meltdown: The Lowest-Common-Denominator Society. Westport, Ct.: Praeger Publishers, 2003.

Armstrong, Richard, et al. 1989 Biennial Exhibition. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art and W.W. Norton and Company: 1989.

Barron, Stephanie and Zelevansky Lynn. Jasper Johns to Jeff Koons: Four Decades of Art from the Broad Collections. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2001.

Baudrillard, Jean. Trans. Sheila Faria Glaser. Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994.

Baume, Nicholas. Christo and Jeanne-Claude to Jeff Koons: John Kaldor Art Projects and Collection. Sydney: Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney, 1995.

Beyer, Lucie. “Review, Max Hetzler, Cologne.” Flash Art 132 (Feb.-Mar. 1987):111.

Bois, Yves-Alain, et al… Endgame: reference and simulation in recent painting and sculpture. Boston, Mass.: Institute of Contemporary Art; Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1986.

Bolton, Richards eds. Culture Wars: Documents from Recent Controversies in the Arts, New York: New Press, 1992.

Bonami, Francesco ed. Jeff Koons. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008.

Bowie, David. “Super-Banalism and the Innocent Salesman.” Modern Painters (Spring 1998): 27-34.

Brennson, Michael. Acts of Engagement: Writings on Art, Criticism and Institutions 1992-2002. Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2004.

_____. “Shifting Image and Scale.” New York Times, December 2, 1988, 22.

_____. “Whitney Biennial’s New Look.” New York Times. April10, 1987, c24.

Caley, Shaun. “Review, Sonnabend Gallery.” Flash Art 132 (Feb.-Mar 1987): 104.

Cameron, Dan. “Art and its Double: A New York Retrospective.” Flash Art 134 (May 1987): 57-71.

_____. “Pretty as a Product.” Arts 60, 9 (May 1986): 308-337.

Cameron, Dan, Liza Kirwin and Alan W. Moore. East Village USA. New York: New Museum of Contemporary Art, 2004.

Cembalest, Robin. “The Case of the Purloined Puppy Photo.” ArtNews 91 (May 1992): 35-36.

Collings, Matthew. “Mythologies: Art and the Market.” Artscribe International 57 (Apr-May 1986): 22-26.

Cone, Michele. “Ready Mades on the Couch.” Artscribe International 58 (June-July 1986: 30-33.

Cox, Meg. “Feeling Victimized? Then Strike Back: Become an Artist- Trend Spotters Ooh and Ah When Jeff Koons Puts Basketballs in a Fish Tank.” Wall Street Journal. February 13, 1989, 1.

Crane, Diana. The Transformation of the Avant-Garde: The New York Art World 1940-1985. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987.

Crone, Rainer. Jeff Koons: Highlights of 25 Years. New York: C&M Arts, 2004.

Danoff, Michael. Jeff Koons, Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago. East Greenwich, RI: Meridian Printing, 1988.

Danto, Arthur. Unnatural Wonder: Essays from the Gap between Art and Life. New York: Douglas and McIntyre Ltd., 2005.

Davies, Lizzy. “Koons brings kitsch to Versailles.” Guardian (July 3 2008), http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2008/jul/03/art2.

Deitch, Jeffrey. Everything that’s Interesting is New, the Dakis Joannou Collection. New York: Distributed Art Publishers, 1996.

Dennison Lisa, Robert Rosenblum, and Craig Houser. Jeff Koons: Easyfun-Ethereal. New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 2001.

Diederichsen, Diedrich. “I’ll Buy That.” Parkett, no. 19 (1989): 70-77.

Feldman, Melissa. Face Off: The Portrait in Recent Art. Philadelphia: Institute of Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania, 1994.

Fineberg, Jonathan. Art Since 1940: Strategies of Being. New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 1995.

Finkel, Jori. “At the Ready When Artists Think Big.” New York Times. April 27, 2008, AR33.

Fleishman, Avrom. New Class Culture: How an Emergent Class is Transforming America’s Culture. Wesport, Ct: Praeger Publishers, 2002.

Foster, Hal. Discussions in Contemporary Culture. Seattle: Bay Press, 1987.

_____. The Return of the Real: The Avant-Garde at the End of the Century. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1996.

Foster, Hal, et al. Art Since 1900: Modernism, antimodernism, postmodernism. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2004.

Garrels, Gary. “New Sculpture, Robert Gober, Jeff Koons, Haim Steinbach.” In New Sculpture. Chicago: The Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago, 1986.

Galef, David and Ellen G. Friedman. “From Plagiarism to Appropriation.” PMLA 108, 5 (October 1993): 1174-1175.

Godfrey, Tony. “Review: New York Art Now and Other Exhibitions. London.” The Burlington Magazine 129, 1017 (December 1987): 822-824.

Greenberg, Clement. “Avant-Garde and Kitsch.” Partisan Review 6 (Fall 1939): 34- 49.

Grunenberg, Christoph and Max Hollein eds. A Century of Art and Consumer Culture. Ostfildern-Ruit, Germany: Hate Cantz Publishers, 2002.

Hadden, Peggy. The Artist’s Guide to New Markets: Opportunities to Show and Sell Art Beyond Galleries. New York: Allworth Press, 1998.

Hall, James. “They Call it Puppy Love.” The Guardian 9 (October 1992): 4-5.

Harrison, Sylvia. Pop Art and the Origins of Post-Modernism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Heartney, Eleanor. “An Adieu to Cultural Purity.” Art in America 88, no.10 (October 2000): 146-167.

_____. Postmodernism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Heilbrun, James, and Charles M. Gray. The Economics of Art and Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Hills, Patricia. Art in the USA: Issues and Controversies of the 20th Century. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2000.

Inde, Villis R. Art in the Courtroom. Westport, Connecticut and London: Praeger, 1998.

Indiana, Gary. “Jeff Koons at International With Monument.” Art in America 73, 11 (November 1985): 163-64.

Irvin, Sherri. “Appropriation and Authorship in Contemporary Art.” British Journal of Aesthetics 45, 2 (April 2005): 123.

Jameson, Frederic. Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press, 1991.

Johnson, Ken. “A Panoramic Backdrop for Meaning and Mischief.” New York Times, April 22, 2008, B1, B8.

Kaufman, Jason Edward. “Peter Brant and Stephanie Seymour put their contemporary art collection on show.” Art Newspaper 201 (April 2009).

Kellein, Thomas, ed. Pictures Jeff Koons: 1980-2002. New York: Distributed Art Publishers, Inc., 2002.

Kimmelman, Michael. “Art in Review.” New York Times November 29, 1991, C28.

Koons, Jeff. Jeff Koons: Retrospective. Edited by Marit Woltmann. Oslo, Norway: Astrup Fearnley Museet, 2004.

_____. “From Full Fathom Five.” Parkett 19 (1989): 44-47.

Koons, Jeff and Robert Rosenblum. The Jeff Koons Handbook. New York: Rizzoli, 1992.

Kother, Junna. “Puppy Logic.” Artforum 31, 1 (September 1992): 90.

Krauss, Rosalind. Originality of the Avant-garde and Other Modernist Myths. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1985.

Kuspit, Donald. Idiosyncratic Identities: Artists at the End of the Avant-Garde. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

_____. New Subjectivism: Art in the 80s. New York: Da Capo Press, 1993.

_____. “The Appropriation of Marginal Art in the 1980s.” American Art 5, ½. (Winter-Spring 1991): 132-141.

_____. The Cult of the Avant-Garde Artist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Kurtz, Bruce D. Contemporary Art, 1065-1990. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1992.

Kvaran, Gunnar B. Retrospective. Oslo: Litografia AS, 2004.

Lacayo, Richard and Amy Lennard Goehner. “How Does ‘80s Art Look Now?” Time V 165, 12 (March 28, 2005): 58-62.

Lawler, Louise and Douglas Crimp. “Prominence Given, Authority Taken.” Grey Room 4 (Summer 2001): 70-81.

Lee, Felicia R. “Controversial in ’92, Returning in ’09.” New York Times. September 28, 2009. C2.

Lee, Susan. “Greed is not Just for Profit." Forbes, (18 April 1988): 65-70.

London, Herbert. Decade of Denial: A Snapshot of America in the 1990s. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2001.

Lucie-Smith, Edward. American Art Now. Oxford: Phaidon, 1985.

Lyotard, Jean Francois. Trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. The Postmodern Condition: A report on knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984.

McCracken, David. “Cuteness with an Edge in Jeff Koons's Work.” The Chicago Tribune, 16 (December 1988) 75.

McGill, Douglas. “The Lower East Side’s New Artists.” New York Times. June 3, 1986, C13.

McNees, Stephen K. “The 1990-91 Recession in Historical Perspective.” in Public Budgeting and Finance, eds. Robert T. Golembiewski and Jack Rabin. New York and Basel: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 103-126.

Milroy, Sarah. “Jeff Koons explains his Unit Blanche Rabbit Balloon.” The Globe and Mail, (October 2, 2009), http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/jeff- koons-explains-his-nuit-blanche-rabbit-balloon/article1309880/.

Muthesius, Angelika, ed. Jeff Koons. Cologne: Taschen, 1992.

Naumann, Francis M. Marcel Duchamp: The Art of Making Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. Ghent and Amsterdam: Ludion Press, 1999.

Nairne, Sandy, Geoff Dunlop and John Wyver. State of the Art: Ideas and Images in the 1980s. London: Chatto & Windus in collaboration with Channel Four Television Company Limited, 1987.

Norman Rosenthal, et al. Apocalypse: Beauty and Horror in Contemporary Art. New York: Harry H. Abrams Inc., 2000.

Owens, Craig. Beyond Recognition: Representation, Power, and Culture. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford: University of California Press, 1992.

_____. “The Allegorical Impulse: Toward a Theory of Postmodernism.” October 12 (Spring, 1980): 67-86.

_____. “The Allegorical Impulse: Toward a Theory of Postmodernism Part 2.” October 13 (Summer, 1980): 58-80.

Oxoby, Marc. The 1990’s. Wesport, Ct: Greenwood Press, 2003.

Peale, Samantha. “The chores and magic at Jeff Koons, Inc.” Modern Painters (December 2009/January 2010): 56.

Pearlman, Alison. Unpacking the Art of the 1980s. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

Pinchbeck, Daniel, ed. Jeff Koons Andy Warhol Flowers. New York: Gagosian Gallery, 2002.

Pincus-Witten, Robert. “Entries: First Nights.” Arts 61, 5 (January 1987): 44-45.

_____. “The Scene that Turned a Dime.” Arts 60, 8 (April 1986): 20-21.

Politi, Giancarlo. “Luxury and Desire, an Interview with Jeff Koons.” Flash Art 132 (February-March 1987): 71-76.

Power, Kevin. “Review, ‘Art and its Double,’ Barcelona Spain.” Flash Art 132 (February-March 1987): 113.

Raynor, Vivien. “Art: Objects are Subject of ‘Damaged Goods’.” New York Times, July 18, 1986, c21.

Rimanelli, David. “Jeff Koons: a studio visit; it’s my party.” ArtForum 35, 10 (Summer 1997): 112-117.

Robinson,Walter. “The New Capital.” Art in America 73, 4 (April 1985): 207.

Rosenthal, Norman, et al. Apocalypse: Beauty and Horror in Contemporary Art. New York: Harry H Abrams Inc., 2000.

Rubenstein, Meyer Raphael, and Daniel Weiner. “Sites and Sights: Considerations on Walter DeMaria, Jeff Koons, and Tom Butter.” Arts 61, 6 (March 1987): 20-21.

Saltz, Jerry. Beyond Boundaries: New York’s New Art. New York: Alfred Van Der Mark Editions, 1986.

_____. “Not Just Hot Air: Jeff Koons Typifies Event Art. He Also Transcends It.” New York Magazine (July 21, 2008): 58.

_____. “The Dark Side of the Rabbit: Notes on Sculpture by Jeff Koons.” Arts 62, 6 (February 1988): 26-27.

______. “When the Low Went Very High.” New York Magazine, December 6 2009.

Sandler, Irving. Art of the Postmodern Era: From the Late 1960s to the Early 1990s. New York: Harper Collins Publishers Inc., 1996.

Schimmel, Paul. Objectives: The New Sculpture. New York: Rizzoli, 1990.

Schjedahl, Peter. “The Blooming Beast; Rockefeller Center gets a new ‘Puppy.’ New Yorker, July 3 2000, 74.

_____. “Fun House,” New Yorker, June 9, 2008, 130-131.

Schneider, Eckhard. Jeff Koons. Bregenz: Kunsthaus Bregenz, 2001.

Seward, Keith. “Jeff Koons: Frankenstein in Paradise,” Parkett Magazine. 50/51 (December 1997): 69.

Seymour, Stephanie. “Jeff Koons.” Whitewall 7 (Fall 2007): 120-143.

Siegel, Jeanne, ed. Art Talk: The Early Eighties. New York: Da Capo Press, 1988.

Siegel, Jeanne. “Jeff Koons: Unachievable States of Being.” Arts 61 (October 1986): 66-71.

Simpson, Fronia ed. Jeff Koons. San Francisco: Interprint, 1992.

Smith, Elizabeth, Alison Pearlman and Julie Rodrigues Widholm. Life Death Love Hate Pleasure Pain: Selected Works from the Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago, Collection. New York: Distributed Art Publishers, 2002.

Smith, Roberta. “Art Review; Jeff Koons – ‘Easyfun’.” New York Times, December 17, 1999.

_____. “How Much is that Doggy in the Courtyard.” The New York Times, 5 (July 1992): 27.

_____. “Four Young East Villagers at Sonnabend Gallery.” New York Times, October 24, 1986, c30.

_____. “Public Art, Eyesore to Eye Candy.” New York Times, 24 August 24, 2008, AR1.

_____. “Rituals of Consumption.” Art in America 76, 5 (May 1988): 164-170.

Sober, Dean. Warhol/Koons/Hirst: Cult and Culture, Selections from the Vicki and Kent Logan Collection. Aspen: Aspen Art Museum, 2003.

Sontag, Susan. “The Pornographic Imagination” Styles of Radical Will. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giraux, 1969. 53-54.

Spalding, Julian. The Eclipse of Art: Tackling the Crisis in Art Today. Munich, Berlin, London and New York: Prestel, 2003.

Stammer, Susan. “Jeff Koons Has a ‘Ta-Da’ Moment in Chicago.” NPR, March 15, 2009. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92873040.

Stieglitz, Joseph E. The Roaring Nineties. New York and London: W.W Norton & Company, 2003.

Stiles, Kristine. “Material Culture and Everyday Life: Introduction.” in Theories and documents of contemporary Art: A Sourcebook of Artists’ Writings. Kristine Stiles and Peter Selz eds. (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1996), 282-295.

Storey, John. Cultural Consumption and Everyday Life. London, Sydney, and Auckland: Arnold and Oxford University Press, 1999.

Storr, Robert. Devil on the Stairs: Looking Back on the Eighties. Philadelphia: Institute of Contemporary Art, University of Pennsylvania. 1991.

_____. On the Edge: Contemporary Art from the Werner and Elaine Dannheisser Collection. New York: Harry N Abrams Inc., 1997.

Sylvester, David. Interviews with American Artists. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001.

Taylor, Brandon. Avant-Garde and After: Rethinking Art Now. New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 1995.

Thomas, Kelly Devine. “The Selling of Jeff Koons,” ARTnews 104, no. 5 (May 2005):114-121.

_____. “The Ten Most Expensive Living Artists: Tracking the highest prices paid for contemporary artworks.” ARTnews 103, 5 (May 2004): 118-123.

Tomkins, Calvin. “A Fool for Art.” New Yorker, November 12, 2007, 64-75.

_____. Post to Neo, The Art World of the 1980’s. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1988.

_____. The Lives of Artists. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2008.

_____. “The Turn Around Artist.” New Yorker, April 23, 2007, 58-67.

Vogel, Carol. “Koons and a Sailor Man in London.” New York Times, July 3, 2009.

_____. “Telltale Art: New to the Block or Shopped Around, Fall Offerings Test the Market’s Strength.” New York Times Nov. 4, 2007, AR1.

Vogelsong, Jennifer. “How is that Art? York County native Jeff Koons has an exhibit at Versailles. But some are puzzled about what makes his work special.” York Daily Record, September 19, 2008, 1A.

Wallis, Brian. Art After Modernism: Rethinking representation. New York: New Museum of Contemporary Art; Boston: D.R. Godine, 1984.

_____. Damaged Good: Desire and the Economy of the Object. New York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art with Conrad Glebe Printing and Publishing, 1986.

_____. “We Don’t Need Another Hero: Aspects of the Critical Reception of the Work of Jeff Koons.” in Jeff Koons ed. Fronia W. Simpson. San Francisco: Interprint, 1992, 27.

Wallis, Brian, Marianne Weems, and Philip Yenawine, eds. Art Matters: How the Culture Wars Changed America. New York and London: New York University Press, 1999.

Ward, Ossian. “The Power 100: 2006.” Art Review 13 (November 2006): 55-132.

Warhol, Andy. The Philosophy of Andy Warhol (From A to B and Back Again). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975.

Weintraub, Linda, Arthur Danto and Thomas Mcevilley. Art on the Edge and Over: Searching for Art’s Meaning in Contemporary Society 1970’s-1990’s. Litchfield, CT: Art Insights, Inc, 1996.

Welshman, John C. “Introduction, Global Nets: Appropriation and Postmodernity.” In Art After Appropriation: Essays on Art in the 1990’s. Amsterdam: G&B Arts International, 2001.

Figure 1:

Jeff Koons. Puppy, 1992. Kassel, Germany. Stainless steel, wood, solid, geotextile fabric, internal irrigation system, live flowering plants 486 x 486 x 256 inches

Figure 2:

Jeff Koons. Split-Rocker, 2000. Stainless steel, soil, geotextile fabric, internal irrigation system and liver flowering plants 441 x 465 x 426 inches

Figure 3:

Jeff Koons. Dr. Dunkenstein, 1985. Framed Nike Poster 45 ½ x 31 ½ inches

Figure 4:

Richard Prince. Untitled (Cowboy), 1983. Photograph 30 x 22 inches

Figure 5:

Jeff Koons. Michael Jackson and Bubbles, 1998. Porcelain 42 x 70 ½ x 32 ½ inches

Figure 6:

Jeff Koons, Wild Boy and Puppy, 1998. Porcelain 38 x 39 ½ x 23 ½ inches

Figure 7:

Jeff Koons. Made in Heaven, 1989. Lithograph billboard 125 x 272 inches

Figure 8:

Jeff Koons. Dirty - Jeff on Top, 1989. Plastic

55 x 71 x 109 inches

Figure 9:

Jeff Koons. White Terrier, 1991. Polychromed wood 20 ½ x 14 x 20

Figure 10:

Jeff Koons. Boy with Pony, 1995-2007. Oil on canvas 136 1/2 x 107 inches

Figure 11:

Jeff Koons. Balloon Dog (Blue). 1994-2000. High chromium stainless steel with transparent color coating 121 x 143 x 45 inches

Figure 12:

Jeff Koons. Coloring Book, 1995-2005. High chromium stainless steel with transparent color coating 222 x 131 ½ x 9 1/8 inches

Figure 13:

Richard Serra, Tilted Arc, 1989. CorTen Steel 1440 x 144 x 2.5 inches

Figure 14:

Tony Rosenthal, Alamo, 1967. Painted CorTen Steel 180 x 180 x 180 inches

Figure 15:

Jeff Koons. Tulips, 1995-2004. High chromium stainless steel with transparent color coating 80 x 180 x 205 inches

Figure 16:

Jeff Koons. Balloon Flower (Red), 1995-1999. High chromium stainless steel with transparent color coating 114 x 132 x 108 inches

Figure 17: Figure 18:

Jeff Koons. Rabbit, 1986-7. Jeff Koons, Rabbit – Macy’s Stainless Steel Thanksgiving Day Balloon, 2007. 41 x 19 x 12 53 /12 x 26 ½ x 18 inches

Figure 19:

Jeff Koons. Hanging Heart (Red/Gold), 1994- 2006. High chromium stainless steel with transparent color coating and yellow brass 106 x 85 x 40 inches