SOME CURRENT PROBLEMS with PAINTING Master of Fine Arts

SOME CURRENT PROBLEMS WITH PAINTING by Andy Patton Department of VisuaI Arts Submitted in partial hrlfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Fine Arts Faculty of Graduate Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario December, 1996 O Andy Patton 1997 National Library Biblioth&que nationale of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wedlinglor, Street 385, Wm WONK1AW OltewaON KlAW Canada Canada The author has granted a nm- L'auteur a accord6 me licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive pennettant a la National hiof Canada to Bibliothkpe nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, preter, distti'buerou copies of his/her thesis by any means venQe des copies de sathtse de and in any form or format, malting qyelque manibe et sous ~uelque this thesis avaiIable to interested fonne que ce soit purrnettre des persons. exemplaires de cette Wse ii la disposition des pefsonnes int&ess&s. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propri6te du copyright in his/her thesis. Neither droit &auteur qui proege sa these. Ni the thesis nor substantial extra& fiom it may be printed or otherwise reproduced with the author's autrement reproduits sans son permission. Abstract and Keywords This essay examines several problems in contemporary painting, beginning with the question of painting's real or imagined centrality within the visual arts. The question then asked is whether or not there is anvthing fundamental which distinguishes painting from the other arts, by looking at the example set in sculpture by Richard Serra.The conclusion reached, in opposition to Serra, is that what distinguishes painting are its conventions, following the work by the critic, Yve-Alain Bois, and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Painting's convention of frontality is examined in some detail, and as well, certain problems which currently mark some of the practice of painting: the fact of painting being a commodity, the notion that painting is dead or dying, and the homelessness of contemporary painting. Kevwords: Sartz, Serra, Greenberg, Bois, Comerton, Wittgenstein, Kosuth, Ayearst, Eckart, Commodity, Conventions, Homelessness, Abstraction, Easel Painting. Acknowledgements I would Like to thank Professor Mark Cheetham, my friend as well as my thesis advisor, who not only guided me through the process of writing and preparing this thesis, but has been (as usual) UnfailingIy generous in his support, his criticism, and his commitment both to my own art work and to contemporary art in general. I would also like to thank Professor Sheila Butler, with whom I had the opportunity to study both the practice of painting and the writings of several contemporary painters. This thesis emerged, in part, from our many discussions. Thanks too are owed to the artists Yam Lau and Sheila Ayearst, who gave permission for their works to be reproduced here. Contents Page Certificate of Examination ii Abstract and keywords iii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents v List of Plates vi Introduction 1 The Centrality of Painting Z Richard Serra and Fundamental Sculpture 3 How Fundamental are the Fundamentals? 4 Frontality and Address 5 The Painting as a Commodity 6 The Homelessness of Contemporary Painting 7 Is Painting Dead? 8 The Lesson of Ferrara Endnotes Bibliography Appendix Vita List of Plates Rate Description Page "The Civil Ordering of Night" (detail: north wall) 89 Andy Patton, 1996, acrylic on wall, painted area 14' tall, each wall 49'6" long. at ArtLab, University of Western Ontario. "The Civil Ordering of Night" (detail: west wall) 90 Andy Patton, 1996, acrylic on wall, painted area 14' tall, each wall 49'6" long. at ArtLab, University of Western Ontario. "Barragon" Andy Patton, 1996, acrylic on concrete, two walls, each painted area 5' x 20'. At loading dock of John Labatts Visual Arts Building, University of Western Ontario. "Blue Folds", Yam Lau, 1996, lacquer on aluminum, 60" x 78". Uccello frescoes in situ, Santa Maria Novella, Florence. 93 (Photo by Andy Patton.) "The 401 towards London: View", Sheila Ayearst, 1992 94 oil on canvas, 72" x 96". Some Current Problems with Painting Introduction "Ei7ery illiterate, rlncultured dingbat (rich or not) knows that paintings are mf." -\osep h Kos rl th Since I began to work as an artist in the late 70s, painting has been pronounced dead at least twice, then been declared born again-or at least has Lurched out of the grave. Yve-Ahin Bois obsemes that even if it's not dead, its dying is being perpetually played out:' for painting's detractors, the last two decades must have been Like watching an endless film loop of "Night of the Living Dead." But the obvious question to ask is, why of all the arts, is it only painting that is imagined to be dying? Why should only painting be in need of some act of cultural euthenasia? What's so important about painting relative to other arts? Why is painting imbued with a special status even by its enemies? This thesis is in part an attempt to come to some understanding of this apparent "special statusw-though I should say at the outset that 1 regard it as foolish. But foolish or not, it has become part of painting's condition, part of what perpetuates a sort of stalemate for painting. As long as painting remains content to be supported by this special status, it remains cemented in place, confined by the repetition of conventions long since grown stale, conventions it must unceasingly reiterate. So I'd Like to look briefly at this special status accorded to painting. My other goal is simply to collect my thoughts about what painting is, to sort out at least provisionally what, if anything, it is Jundamentdly. I do this in the hope that this can provide some sort of vision of what might be possible for painting beyond this mere repetition of conventions. You might think of this as a kind of painter's housework, one more periodic dusting-off of the conventions. In beginning my housework, I'U look briefly at the example set by Richard Serra, who took the feather duster to sculpture's conventions, and in so doing, sorted out what sculpture can be that would not be dependent on other languages, other arts. I then go on to look at the question of how fundamental these things are which appear to be fundamental. Finally, I propose certain things that I believe are fundamental to the enterprise of painting at this moment, though none of these should be taken as anything more than provisional conclusions. When 1 wrote on Wanda Koop's paintings several years ago, 1 related how she thought of her paintings as like words which could be brought together to form different sentences, and also that I couldn't see her work that way. I wrote then that "how an artist thinks of her work doesn't have to be accurate; it is only a tool that helps in making the work. Only part description, it is partly an armat~re."~Much the same thing can be said of this: in the end, I'm writing it to dear a space for myself to work in. Yet there's nothing written here that I did not believe at the time 1 wrote it? Perhaps it's only the illusion of truth that can make space for a new kind of work. I don't want to suggest however that what a critic or an art-historian writes is somehow objective where an artist's writing is subjective, that one is closer to the truth than another. I suspect that we read each writing differently: with an art historian's writing we can more convincingly create the illusion of objectivity about the work through a willing suspension of disbelief: that allows us to arrive at the truth of the work. With an artist, we can have a more convincing illusion of subjectivity, or of a writing emerging directly from the material and labour of the artwork. But all interpretation is just that: interpretation. It's not the material thing; and there's always a gap between words and things. The artwork is something never-to-be-settled-something that is obviously not simply interpretation, but it's not the thing either. It biurs and wobbles somewhere in between and is never fixed and never has a position that can be known. About the artwork, we can never have knowledge: but the illusion that we can draws us forward. I. The Centrality of Painting If painting were dead, or dying, at this moment it nonetheless would seem to be flourishing. Ignorant of its demise, painters continue to paint and exhibit:' To speak just of Toronto: in the early 805, Joanne Tod, Will Gorlitz, Oliver GirLing, Andy Fabo, and a host of others were seen as constituting a return to painting. After that period, when painting was once again alleged to have died, there was another outburst of vigour. The big extravaganza exhibition of 1994-the latest in a series of huge artist-initiated shows that announce to Toronto what's current in art this year-was "The Mud Show: An Exhibition of Contemporary ~aintin~."'Pnin t ing Disorders-- which to many observers including myself has been the most interesting and most focused of the many collectives which has sprung up here in the last decade-is, as their name suggests, a group of painters6. The recent "Perspectives" exhibition at the AGO, which annually introduces younger artists to a broad public, was made up this year entirely of painters: Eric Glavin, Steven Shearer, Angela Leach, and Cora Cluett.

Load more