Gladys Nilsson and Jim Nutt
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GLADYS NILSSON WORKS ON PAPER JIM NUTT March 9 - April 13, 1996 University Art GaJJery StaJJer Center for the Arts State University of New York at Stony Brook ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Me.I Pekarslcy, Oepanrnent of Art. for bis assiSlaoCe with this exhibitioo, and to Lynda Hartigan, Curator of Painting and Sculpcurc at the National Museum of American An in Washington, D.C., for contributing her insigbtful catalogue essay. I also want to thank the Phyllis Kind Gallery in Chicago, Ulinois and Vaugbn Kurtz, for their coopera tion and assistance in getting the exhibition from Chicago to Stony Brook. Special thanks are also extended to members of the Staller Center for the Arts staff: Ming Chen, Albert Fong, Vera Phillip-Evans, Lisa Kozlowski, and Alexander Trillo, Gallery Assistants; Erica Fredriben, Aleksandra llcanowicz, Viktoria Paranyuk, Jennifer Rea, and Michelle Wacker, Gallery Interns; Patrick Kelly, Production Manager, Liz Silver, Technical Dmctor, and the Technical Crew, Staller Center, for exhibition lighting; and Mary Balduf, Gallery Secretary. Most of all, I wish to thank Gladys Nilsson and Jim Nutt for sharing their work with the Stony Brook com munity. Rhonda Cooper Director Photo credits: 0 William H. Bengtson, cover pbocos and ~es 3 (top), S, 6, and 7 0 Jonas Dovydenas page 3 (bottom) Cover: (top) GLADYS NILSSON Me - Myself & I. 1995 Mixed media and watercolor on paper, 12 x 18" (bottom) JIM NUTT I RememhttWbep, 1986 Colored pencil on brown paper, 12~ x 14" © 1996 University An Gallery, Staller Center for the Ans, State University of New York at Stony Brook GLADYS NILSSON AND JIM NUTT: WORKS ON PAPER In 1961 Gladys Nilsson and Jim on paper primarily wi1h dmwing. Both Nuu married while s1uden1s a1 1he stereotypes are ana1hema 10 this anist. School of lhe Art lnslilule of Chicago. whose ' repenoire of ma1erials has 1bey firsl came to regional and national included acrylics. Plexiglas. and canvas prominence. if not notoriety. as mem but whose passion for walcrcolor and bers of the Hairy Who. Be1ween 1966 paper has lalcen precedence since 1962. and 1969 1his infonnal group of six Moreover. Nilsson "cra,·es in1imacy, a young Chicago painiers siaged four col priva1e momenl. wi1h a small piece of labor:llive. exubemnlly theatrical exhi paper,'' again a preference 1ha1 know bilions in Chicago, San Fmncisco, and ingly runs counlcr 10 1hc modern equa Washing1on. D.C. Individual in1erests tion between ambilious painiing and and slyles nolwithsrnnding. ihe works of monumental scale.1 all six anisis alluded 10 popular sources Asscning thut small surfaces have ranging from 1hc comics 10 commercial afforded her "grcnicr lcnming dis1ance," advenising. They nlso favored dis1or- Nilsson has consis1cn1ly sci challenges 1ion. sirong brigh1 color. wordplay, and for herself. Drawing preliminarily in a fascina1ion wi1h surface and graphic pencil or with a brush. limiiing her quaJities. These characteristics identi palette in tone or color. working fied lhe Hairy Who as delinea1ors of with papers of varying punning imagery lhal allernated surfaces and sizes, orienting lhc shecl horizontally belween the shocking and lhe playfully or veni humorous. cally-these are among 1he ways in Allhough Nilsson and Nun may which she has avoided falling inlo easy fore\'er be wed art hisiorically as mem pa11ems. Cenain consinnts. however, bers of the Hairy Who, 1hey have each have also assumed significance. Nilsson crea1ed a subs1antial body of work inde "waiches her borders," wheiher in pendent of this shon-lived group, of favoring a rec1angle's sense of framing trends in coniemporary art 1hn1 have or in folding. creasing. and 1enring each come and gone. and. yes. of each 01her. piece of paper from a larger shcc1 10 Yel !heir assoc achieve a pan.icular Gladys. Nils.son in1ion by marriage and size and edge. The Syner Qjk, l967 1heir pairing in this. 1heir firs! two-per conccpl of border also penains 10 her Watercolor on paper, 13 x SM son exhibition in some twenty years. use of zones of color 10 shif1 ac1ion and Lent by Oaude Null inevitably invites comparison of their mood within a work. Compositionally, cffons. Nilsson proceeds from fronl 10 back lay Working al home in separate stu ing in the bigger primary figures firsl, dios. both ncknowlcdge each olher as the smaller ancillary figures Inter. sources of influence and admiration-in Enveloping a.II of this is her romance 1------' lhe same manner thal !hey acknowledge with uansparenl watercolor. a medium lhe impacl of other anists as diverse as that she considers both "lovely" and Joan Mir6 and Joseph Yoolcum. Humor, "luscious" and tha1 she associa1cs with lhc more nonsensical 1he bener, is one lhc modernist achievements of Emil ofthis couple's strongcs1 points ofcom Nolde. Paul Klee. and patibility. anisiically and personally. Georgia 0' Keefe. Their insisience on lhe mastery of 1heir In discussing her wa1ercolors. respective medin is marked. So 100 is Nilsson ciles !heir "quiet gamesman 1heir devotion 10 making personalized. ship," a likely enough allusion 10 lhe assenive inu•gcry thnt c1nphasizes inte subilety with which she orchcs1rn1es for grating fonnal and 1he1na1ic concerns. mal consider:tlions in building her Bo1h savor working on an in1ima1e scale images. For the urlisl, lhe conccpl and wield line und color wilh devilish applies insicad 10 1hc emoiionnl sensibil flair. Continuing in this vein couJd read il)I of the exchanges be1ween her female ily yield u lcng1hy s1udy of similarities and male figures as well as 1he conver and differences in the works of Nilsson sation between n woman's inner and and Nun. As useful, even expecled, an ouier selves thal has more recently exercise as 1his migh1 be. my preference occurred in both her waiercolors and oow is skeiching how they have each collages. Take your choiccHelling lesled themselves in !he works on paper glances. caressing gestures. inviting tha1 they have produced since lhc 1960s. posrures. and mirrored glimpses set the GLADYS NILSSON: ''Subde Dancing" siage for the impression thal "All of my people like each 01her.'' Gladys Nilsson is fi highly inven- 1ive painicr, a foci of anis1ic identi1y tha1 This is altogether fonunale, since can ei1hcr be overlooked, denied, or discerning who is playing wi1h whom. confused by 1hose who perceive waier lel alone why and how. is no small chnl- LJ;_m_Nllutlu'-"L---- •"""= """-= ---L- .:..J!.&.-' color as n traditional. even rninor. medi lege. given the "i1npossible" space and f 1hcljn1trsnhu1s, 1968 urn or by those who ::•ssociate working loosely serial fashion in which these Colored pencil and croyon on pa1>er. 40 • 28W Courtesy Phyllis Kind Oalluy. Chica.ao. II loosely serial fashion in which these characters assume various roles. scale templates placed under the Plexiglas for delineating and adjusting Jaunty costumes, fashionably quirky accessories, and stylish the image prior to painting it in reverse. Done up in harshly oootrasting "doos"-often reminiscent of those sponed by Nilsson herself-provide colors. the painting's semi-nude. semi-perforated female is a ~r. alluring clues. Herc are body builders "posing down" on and off~; Rendered in pencil on 1an kraft paper. her cartoon counterp311 may be there ate women aying on bathing suits or designer elocbes. hoping for quieter, but her stale of discomfiture, not to mention ours, is no less a "pwfcct phyu." How "Leger Faire" can a one-"1lman construction pointcd-<estimony to the anUl's control of line for its graphic intensity. company be? The artist readily acknowledges that her observations of After 1970. when Null shilled to painting on wood, metal. and the day-to-day world trigger the features and adventures of her "peo canvas, comparisons between preparatory drawings and finished ple." She is also quick to point out that what all those little figures are paintings reveal a much higher incidence of spontaneity and manipu doing is often more imponant, or at least more intriguing, than the lation in the latter. After drawing a satisfactory arrangement of fonns, activities of their larger counterpans. he ha s often made a tracing to transfer the image to a prepared canvas. Just as the forms of Nilsson's figures have changed over the The fonns and lines on canvas a.lmost immediately develop different years-from squatly and tubular in the 1960s to limpid and elongated nuances, and while the preparatory drawing remains a point of refer into the I 980s-$o too has her use of color. initially "crude" and direct. ence, a painting's "character" soon takes over as be becomes involved and increasingly subtle and nuanced since the 1970s. Being receptive to with integrating color, pattern, and texture. Unlike the preparatory change has also led her on forays into different media that have helped drawings of many artists, however. Nun's establish major and sul> revitaliz.e her work in wat=olor. The need to at least "play" at making sidiuy fonns with such stnlCtUnl precision and oooceptual confidence art in the midst of major household renovations between I 992 and that they retain an uncanny life of their own. 1993, for example, brought Nilsson to collage, with which she bad firs1 Ultimately, however, such drawings are about a painter's formu experimented during the 1960s. Snippets from her twenty-year stash of lation and resolution of compositional issues before putting brush to Vogue magazines soon found their way onto small sketchbook pages. paint. Between 1973 and 1986 Nun's desire to create images with The absurdit.ics of life that so tickle Nilsson abound in the world of "magnetic attraction" regularly found its fullest expression in drawing fashion, where exaggeration, idealization. and stereotypes ea-exist with as a medium with an integrity and potential equal to those of painting.