Trinity University Digital Commons @ Trinity

Art and Art History Faculty Research Art and Art History Department

2013 Barnett ewN man's “Sense of Space”: A Noncontextualist Account of Its Perception and Meaning Michael Schreyach Trinity University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/art_faculty Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons

Repository Citation Schreyach, M. (2013). Barnett eN wman's “Sense of Space”: A Noncontextualist Account of Its Perception and Meaning. Common Knowledge, 19(2), 351-379. doi:10.1215/0961754X-2073367

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Art and Art History Department at Digital Commons @ Trinity. It has been accepted for inclusion in Art and Art History Faculty Research by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Trinity. For more information, please contact [email protected].

ARTICLES

BARNETT NEWMAN’S “SENSE OF SPACE”

A Noncontextualist Account of Its Perception and Meaning

Michael Schreyach

Dorothy Seckler: How would you define your sense of space?

Barnett Newman: . . . Is space where the orifices are in the faces of people talking to each other, or is it not [also] between the glance of their eyes as they respond to each other? Anyone standing in front of my paint- ings must feel the vertical domelike vaults encompass him [in order] to awaken an awareness of his being alive in the sensation of complete space. This is the opposite of creating an environment. . . . This is the only real sensation of space.1

Some of the titles that Barnett Newman gave to his paintings are deceptively sim- ple: Here and Now, Right Here, Not There — Here. Straightforwardly, they seem to announce that the content of his work — its meaning — is available to anyone, to any viewer, who feels him- or herself positioned, in space and time, while behold-

The author wishes to thank Claude Cernuschi, David York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990), 249 – 50, hereafter cited as Raskin, Aron Vinegar, Todd Cronan, Charles Palermo, BN:SWI. Harry Cooper, and the editors of Common Knowledge. The essay is dedicated to the memory of Charles Harrison.

1. Barnett Newman, “ ‘Frontiers of Space’: Interview with Dorothy Gees Seckler” (1962), in Barnett Newman: Selected Writings and Interviews, ed. John P. O’Neill (New

Common Knowledge 19:2 DOI 10.1215/0961754X-2073367­ © 2013 by Duke University Press

351 facing his works: Moment works: his facing present, the in located, ofbeing experience felt viewer’s ofthe aspect this suggest that titles chose often Newman 2004 Press, CT: Yale University Haven, Raisonné Colsman- Heidi 2 34 [ ( 102 4 BN:SWI 3 116 Garde Art: Interview with Andrew Hudson” ( Hudson” Andrew with Interview Art: Garde BN:SWI 5 in 1962 BNF . . . . ]); ]);

BN:SWI Common Knowledge 352 Newman, “The Case for ‘Exporting’ Nation’s­ Avant- ‘Exporting’ for Case “The Newman, Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio” ( Antonio” de Emile with “Interview Newman, See Richard Shiff, Carol C. Mancusi- C. Carol Shiff, Richard See Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” in in Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, ]). ]); ]); Right Here Right

[ 81 The Moment I( Moment The BNF ]); ]); (New York: Barnett Newman Foundation; New New Foundation; Newman York: Barnett (New , , 306 273, 272 273, Now I( Now ,

307 113 ( . Freyberger, ­Freyberger, strove to create. to strove he that of painting other. “totality” each to Together, the bound constituted they ing Newman’s art. ing ignate “the real problem real of apainting.” “the ignate there” was integrally related of Newman’s to scale sense integrally was there” of being of “sense a sense place, place. That and time present at a particular being of afeeling them wouldgive one of that space, sensation atangible paintings his human scale is by content.” by is scale human achieve you way can only the and counts, that scale It’s counts. human that scale one’s others and of oneself determines experience atively and how cre outlike what it is it finding outlines, qualitative its determining mode precise the case each in interpreting Additionally, ship. relation assumed (or works the not work) does establish to technically painting individual about how each accounts specific are of beholding. Lacking structure generalize to of scholars tendency the is though, surprising, is What beholder. and painting engagementbetween reciprocal component of this ethical the in strongly believed Newman that noacknowledgment). surprise It as comes aviewer’s by of act (as viewer)consummated achieved if be but must apassive to canvas the by conveyed (as not automatically is if given of apainting totality The sionately on. insisted he pas so that and realize to intendedthem artist the that experiences perceptual the realize of art works of how particular accounts more developing precise in remains challenge asignificant processes, technical his investigates and artists, ofgeneration on a younger influence his explores ideas, of his interpretations of Newman’s art. meaning the of interpreting ( Version) I(Second Be and ]); 1954 1965 . 1962 [ [ BNF While contemporary scholarship on Newman continues to offer valuable valuable offer to continues on Newman scholarship contemporary While BNF ( 1946 [ BNF

Barnett Newman: A Catalogue A Catalogue Newman: Barnett 65

96 ]); ]); [ ( II Now and ]) BNF

82 o There Not The Moment II Moment The and ]) 5

7 This totality is not is apprehend to simple either or interpret. to totality This ]); ]); 2 ), hereafter BNF ), hereafter The artist often spoke of his desire to establish for viewers of for viewers establish to desire of his spoke often artist The Be I ( Be 6 — Ungaro, and and ­Ungaro, This undertaking will surely be galvanized by the recent the by galvanized be surely will undertaking This 1970 Here 1967 1949 1966 4 [ For Newman, space, (human) scale, and content and were scale, (human) space, For Newman, 1970 ( [ [ BNF 1962 BNF BNF ), in in ), ), ), .

Influence Newman Effect” ( Effect” Newman Influence ( tion” - Exhibi on Newman “Barnett Temkin, includes which man 2002 in ofArt Museum Philadelphia at the exhibition retrospective Newman 6 Laterality,” in Ho, Reconsidering Ho, Newman Barnett in Laterality,” 1990 Press, MIT MA: bridge, (Cam Model as Painting Bois, in Newman” “Perceiving See work. ofNewman’s effects and look the describe to ing Yve- 2002 of Art, Museum Philadelphia (Philadelphia: Newman nett ed., Ho, Melissa in assembled are tive retrospec ofthe occasion the on asymposium from essays and “On Two Paintings by Barnett Newman [ Newman Barnett by Two “On and Paintings of agroup facing of account aclose offered recently has and . Much recent scholarship was stimulated by the the by stimulated was scholarship recent Much (Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, of Art, Museum Philadelphia (Philadelphia: Galaxy Alain Bois’s work stands as a model for those attempt those for amodel as stands Bois’s work ­Alain ). Although I am critical of aspects of his account, account, ofhis ofaspects critical Iam ). Although 3 “Size doesn’t “It’s “Size count,” he explained. 18 –75 ],” ],” ), and Richard Shiff, “Whiteout: The Not- The “Whiteout: Shiff, Richard ), and October

108 Barnett New Barnett Temkin, Ann . See ( , a term he used to des to he used , aterm — 2004 76 of that relationship that of –111 is an important part part important an is ), ), ): ): 186 ). A group of scholarly of scholarly ). A group 3 –34 –211 Reconsidering Bar . Mark Godfrey Godfrey . Mark about this this about ; “Newman’s “Newman’s ; Abraham , 29 2002 –45

— ), ), ------;

­

and in light of additional items from his oeuvre. his from items of light additional in and materials, and history Newman’s exhibition from details with canvases of actual interpretations and descriptions supplement to their wishing for those ence point refer and resource authoritative an raisonné, of Newman’spublication catalogue Level’ Highest the on Intuition ‘Involved Newman: ofBarnett Paintings Mancusi- by analyses technical breaking ( “To Oneself” Create Shiff, BN:SWI 7 1999 Yale University, diss., [PhD Newman” Work Late of Barnett the in Difference and ity - (“Serial dissertation her throughout does Rich K. Sarah October Holocaust,” of the Memory Stations Newman’s (“Barnett paintings Newman’s his paintings appear to the beholder that the artist anticipated. artist the beholder the to that appear paintings his to how or first, instead, we attend should means: other by intentions his educe to attempts impeded some respects in has of interpretation ground normative the as defer to Newman’s to and statements privilege to awhole. as tendency The mean paintings what his and after he was claimed what Newman between amatch ing find by guided been has much interpretation and art, of his meaning about the mean. about what artworks claims making in relevant methodologically what is one of determining importantly, more and of but context) also, regardless experience to intendedaviewer artist an or what some context, in viewer’s experiences (a of art particular interpretation the in of what is interest between problem oneHere, not the of is deciding only encounters. such from result that experiences in found be to is meaning that work or else artist’s an encounter individuals which in contexts contingent the through produced is meaning that come Some have readers believe to standing. under historical art establishing in of intentionality value heuristic doubtto the of who come readers have part on the skepticism met be with will intention of his amatter is of Newman’s art meaning the that convey. to intended My assertion Newman that meanings the one’s route en conveying to responses constrain and one’s solicit attention paintings the which by or modes ways the acknowledge to addressed being in viewer’s participation the include effects intended about their more be precise we can that ited Newman’s by paintings solic experiences perceptual the clarifying descriptively by it primarily is that 8 been for some time a tendency to focus on the viewer viewer the on focus to atendency time some for been has there where history, art of field the in pervasive is . . See Shiff, Mancusi- Shiff, See The problem is not limited to Newman’s case but case Newman’s to limited not is problem The In Newman’s case, scholars have ample access to the artist’s own views views own artist’s the to ample have access scholars Newman’s case, In I address, of modes pictorial of Newman’s intentional Iwrite When — . The catalog includes a substantive essay by by essay asubstantive includes catalog . The about what Newman wanted us to perceive. to us wanted about what Newman ” ( 116 –42 Ungaro, and Colsman- and ­Ungaro, ). 2 – 115 ]).

108 ), as well as ground as well ), as [ 2004 Ungaro, “The “The ­Ungaro, Freyberger, ­Freyberger, ]: ]: 35 and the the and –50 ), as as ), - [“Intention/Identity/Interpretation,” chaired by Todd by chaired [“Intention/Identity/Interpretation,” 2010 atheld the been have issues these to dedicated panels (Recent tion. inten authorial than rather context and ofidentity matter a becomes artwork ofthe meaning the that say to is Which work. the encounters she heor that it is when or where and is individual that who is matter to begins also what rience, expe particular individual’s the in found is meaning view, of point this from because, And viewer. or reader the for creates painting or a text of experiences kinds what but mean to painting or text some intended artist or author the what not is matter to seems What shift). this rating of essay crucial Barthes’s ofRoland (one thinks author the of expense at the of meaning, source the as beholder or 1967 7 Indeed, it might be argued argued it be might Indeed, — , “The Death of the Author,” as partly inaugu partly Author,” as of the Death , “The the viewer’s willingness viewer’s willingness the College Art Association annual meeting meeting annual Association Art College 8 It may very well well very It may - - - -

- - - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 353 9 abeholder. to appear paintings his ways particular the through them educing by but repeatedly) so Ido (although statements and writings his citing by just not intentions Newman’s about something say to attempting I am ment, 2004 Press, University ton [Princeton,History of NJ:End the to Prince 1967 Signifier: 1986 Studies, meneutical tence Meaning, Hermeneutics Sen 2: Theory Against Knapp, Steven and Michaels Benn Walter see organizers, these by adopted orientation general For the Palermo]. by aresponse with Cronan by chaired Sees?,” Who Cares [“Who Conference Art College ern 2010 the and Palermo] Charles and Cronan as they had been established in the history ofpainting. history the in established been had they as practices ofrepresentational content and nature the gating - investi well as it meant and world, the represent paintings how about presuppositions cultural powerful suspending meant so doing For world. Newman, the perceive we how about presuppositions theoretical suspect, but powerful, by generated was thought he which attitude, “scientific” or Merleau- For representation. and ofperception understanding our governing conceptions conventional the negate and resist to ways, own their in attempted, both that note would I influence, for claims any making Without tion. Merleau- rice . Common Knowledge 354 Newman ( Newman Ponty, doing so meant bracketing our “natural” “natural” our bracketing meant so ­Ponty, doing Ponty ( ­Ponty 1905 any particular context). particular any us about tell artworks outwhat finding away from (and consequently artworks form of primary evidence available to ground interpretation. ground to available evidence of primary form compelling the most constitute themselves the works artworks, of specificity the acknowledges that perspective historical From art are. an they that paintings point a general do illustrate to will lock” mere tokens as presented often are works Their ings. paint individual to commensurate thoroughness and adepth with acknowledged Pollock), of not Jackson is always especially (one contemporaries thinks of his tory toward belief in in belief toward tory his art in of scholarship drift general the stemming approach wouldmean this interpretation. for framework determining the as or intellectual) political, biographical, cultural, (whether social, on context overreliance frequent the help may correct address rial testimony. ornot, not simply, artist’s on the and aviewer address question in paintings of how the analysis and examination do), of how they account but the Ithink (indeed, interviews and writings his in he articulated that of content or meaning kinds the convey address Newman’s of modes pictorial that case out the be to turn –70 1908 ) and the phenomenologist Mau phenomenologist the ) and Moreover, such a phenomenological approach to describing modes of modes picto Moreover, aphenomenological approach describing to such The Shape of the the of Shape The Michaels, ], and ], esp. 1 ], esp. –61 [Berkeley, CA: Center for Her for Center CA: [Berkeley, ) were of the same genera same ofthe ) were –18 9 .) In the present argu present the .) In The complexity of perceiving Newman’s works, as well as that that as well as Newman’s works, of perceiving complexity The context Southeast 11 as the final authority for telling us anything about anything us fortelling authority final the as ------Sylvester” [ Sylvester” David with “Interview (Newman, aware” ofbeing sense his to relation his in sublime is or be can man “that meant Newman which by lofty,” and heroic “man as roughly of title the over Panofsky Erwin with exchange famous his as language, even or ofculture constraints any over artist ofthe power creative the asserted regularly and context, 11 versity Press, 1993 Press, versity ism Expressionist Painting,” in American AbstractExpression Abstract in ofExperience Concept The Insensitivity: and “Disorder Harrison, Charles by informed deeply is 10 In his reply to Newman, Panofsky rehearsed the rules of of rules the rehearsed Panofsky Newman, to reply his In 216 News Art Panofsky],” Erwin to [Replies 1961 September and April between place took which exchange, the (For painting. Newman’s for caption the in a“u”) with word of the a misuse was thought he what across coming after artists ofmodern education classical News of Art editor the to a letter confidence Newman error, of atypographical . . makes clear. The title translates translates title The clear. makes Sublimis Heroicus Vir - Uni Liverpool (Liverpool: Thistlewood David , ed. –20 Newman himself often questioned the authority of authority the questioned often himself Newman My orientation to the specificity of intended effects effects intended of specificity the to orientation My , see Newman and Panofsky, “Letters to the Editor Editor the to “Letters Panofsky, and Newman , see .) Even though the misspelling had been the result result the been had misspelling the .) though Even — rather than as the irreducibly unique unique irreducibly the as than rather 1965 — responded by correcting Panofsky’s Latin. Latin. Panofsky’s correcting by responded ], in BN:SWI ], in they do so should rest on a close on aclose rest doshould so they ), ), 111 — –28 any “Newman” or “Pol “Newman” any . , 258 10 complaining about the the about complaining Methodologically, Methodologically, ). Panofsky had written written had ). Panofsky

— with characteristic characteristic with [ 1961 sublimus ], in BN:SWI ], in (spelled - - - - - , means space “horizontal,” the and most one of painting, significant most his considerbe to whatto many regard with but particularly general ofin space sense artist’s the of apprehending work “vertical” insistently most his that the primordial convention of paintings is that they are made to be beheld). be to made are they that is of convention paintings primordial the that Fried Michael with agree (I a painting and beholder the of a painting between establish to intends artist an that relationships certain are there that I assume address. Newman’s mode of pictorial behind intentionality the nent of discerning compo a necessary is perceived is painting the way for the a viewer. Accounting how phenomenological terms, in broadly need determine, to ( Wild deny the artist’s right to create poetic language.” poetic create to right artist’s the deny to “attempt[ing] for Panofsky blasted he of aman’s skull,” sublimus vertex that noting mus subli that arguing Panofsky, debate to continued so and style to grammar from criticism ofhis basis the changing by disingenuously so did he thought Newman typo, torial edi ofan basis the on painter the criticizing for Newman to apologized essentially Panofsky Although sky. the in or summit a mountain on as such space,” in position vated ele an occupying phenomena or objects “concrete to sublimus Panofsky, to According cally. - metaphori used be also could title) Newman’s in word (the former the while literally, only used be should latter sublimis concerning usage projections. and responses indeterminate undermine radically to functions The Wild and subjectivity, ranted neither for open- occasion the is artwork The 1950 Newman in in Newman viewer the from distinct object painting the by viewer for the created dynamics kinesthetic and complex visual the Instead, field. that into enter to imaginatively expectation a viewer’s customary it resists fieldas a phenomenon extension, pictorial lateral of of the notions tional of “sense space.”his painting and meeting or facing another person for the first time, an important important an time, first for the person another or facing meeting and painting a seeing between analogy an drew often (Newman “facingness.” refer as to will was a legitimate alternate spelling for sublimis for spelling alternate alegitimate was ( paintings of three account here aclose is what Ioffer Accordingly, Because Because BNF 1950 —

[ combined with the palpable sensation of the work’s integrity as an an as work’s of the palpable integrity sensation the with combined 40 The Wild — BNF Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir ) The Wild what kind of value it is meant to have or to hold. First, though, we we though, or ithave hold. to of meant value is First, what kind —

in an effort to describe how, perceptually, Newman conveys conveys how, Newman describe to perceptually, effort an in 48 12 and sublimus and ]), ]), could mean “the lofty crown crown lofty “the mean could Investigating the mode of pictorial address established by by established address mode of pictorial the Investigating — ( Sublimis Heroicus Vir achieves a high degree of independence from conven of from independence degree a high achieves one of a series of narrow paintings he made in he made in paintings ofone narrow of a series properly applies applies properly , noting that the the that , noting — . Ultimately, my aim is to interpret what that what that interpret to is my aim . Ultimately, establishes a mode of pictorial address that I I that address amode of pictorial establishes — can illuminate substantially the dynamics dynamics the substantially illuminate can . While While . - - - ­ended nor “experience” for unwar 1950 12 Critical Inquiry History,” Fried’s Art Michael on Remarks Painting: in ity “Authentic Pippin, Robert see of Fried’s project, stakes Press, ofChicago University 1860s the (Chicago: in Painting of cago Press, 1980 Press, cago ofChi University (Chicago: Diderot Age the of in Beholder and Painting Theatricality: and Absorption see works, his Among exemplary. Fried’s is work relationships, of such 13 well. as .com www.google on search image abasic with found be can www.kawamura- online at www.moma.org ( at www.moma.org online available are article this in discussed of Newman works delijk.nl ( delijk.nl I Onement . .

In terms of its emphasis on the ontological specificity specificity ontological the on emphasis ofits terms In Color images of this painting and all of the other other of the all and painting ofthis images Color [ 1996 BNF Cathedra ); www.centrepompidou.fr ( ); www.centrepompidou.fr ). For a helpful elucidation of the philosophical philosophical ofthe elucidation ). For a helpful

47

31 appears to to appears The Wild Untitled 2, 2, Untitled ]), and uemdcc.p ( ­museum.dic.co.jp , no. 3 , no. Manet’s Modernism, or, Face The Modernism, Manet’s ) and , Who’s Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue III Blue and Yellow Red, of Afraid Who’s ( 2005 The Wild The 1950 ): ): 575 — , and and , –98 , The The Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir Anna’s Light Anna’s 13 . - - - Jericho

); www.ste ). They ). They ); ); - - ,

Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 355 15 n. n. height to width is about 12 about is width to height Wild The Untitled 3, 1950 3, Untitled 3 14 and and 6 in. [ in.

6 . . 24 Common Knowledge 356

in. [ in. The Wild The Untitled 1, 1950 Untitled are discussion under works The Untitled 4, 1950 4, Untitled is exception The below). BNF BNF was given to the painting much later, in 1962 in later, much painting the to given was

39

( 42 ]; ]; 1950 ]; ]; Untitled 2 Untitled : the artist explained that he had “never been involved in size for its own sake.” own for its size in he “never involved had been that explained artist the eighteen wide nearly feet and Sublimis Heroicus to Vir specifically referring works may be inferred from comments he made in he in made comments from inferred be may works view. apenetrating to accessible imaginatively and expanse ahorizontal as viewer orientedthe to space phorical or ( body viewer’s standing the to parallel upright plane ( either “field”understood of apictorial notions conventional their to abandon asked are viewers canvases), vertical narrow five other the (and extent alesser to TheWild when confronting man’s First, strategy. of New consequences at two least are There extension. or horizontal of lateral notions minimal most but the all compromised that aformat create to dimension vertical its maximized Newman group. the by shared disparities dimensional the most exaggerates The Wild but eight wide high, feet a half and inch over an just tallest. Their ratios of height to width range from 6 from range of height ratios width to Their tallest. to shortest height, to from according canvases orders the Newman’s death) that after Hess Thomas by ascheme(suggested to according numerically listed are In In Newman’s Verticality other. and of self relationship the and evidence”) (or “self- individuality including concerns, primary some of his for understanding implications their evaluate to and address of Newman’s own my mode of pictorial eight height. feet in nearly to three from range canvases but the inches, six than wider is works the Heroicus for Vir As he respond. or she may which to subject it if were as another painting the encountering autonomy asubject, and as of viewer’s integrity sense the to thatcontributes of “fittingness” impression an convey to meant is works, vertical 1950 2, Untitled returning.) worth be it will which to relation Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus he made Vir as year same the that recalled suddenly He then 56 Untitled 5, 1950 5, Untitled ): ):

3 1950 95

3 - in. [ in. 3 Newman’s motivation for vertically elongating the format of these six six of these format the elongating for vertically Newman’s motivation / , 8 1950 , Newman made a series of six paintings of unusual dimensions. None of dimensions. of unusual paintings of six aseries made , Newman :

1

3 Sublimis BNF , less than that of the preced ofthe that than , less

1 - 5 : : / 48

41 8 77 in. [ in.

3 ]; ];

3

Untitled 4 Untitled 5 , it offers an occasion to consider competing interpretations to to interpretations competing consider to occasion an , it offers

3 BNF - - 1 , whose ratio of ratio , whose 1 / / 14 8 2 in. [ in.

in. [ in. In Newman’s catalogue raisonné, the untitled paintings paintings untitled the raisonné, Newman’s catalogue In 48 ]. The title title ]. The , BNF 1950 BNF : 36

(see (see

40 — : 43 74

3 ]; ]; ]; ]; - asked Newman about the large size of his works, works, of his size large about the Newman asked

are approximately 6 approximately are ofworks sequence whole ofthe ratios The painting. ing Garde Art,” 271 Art,” Garde 16 simultaneously. paintings of the more or two on worked Newman that ofcourse, possible, . Newman, “The Case for ‘Exporting’ Nation’s Avant- ‘Exporting’ for Case “The Newman, — 1 . ) as the lateral dimensions of an of an dimensions lateral the ) as which measures eight feet high eight high feet measures which : 1 : 1966 , 1 10 to an extreme of 64 extreme an to : 1 2 , . When an interviewer, interviewer, an . When ) as a fictional or meta afictional ) as 19 : 1 , another of the thin thin of the , another , 12 : 1 , 22 : 1 , and 64 , and : 1 : . 1 15 . It is . It is At At 16 - - ­

­ lem “overcome” be to ( aprob was of measurements, amatter of Size, place. feelings and of space sense related aperson’s to yet integrally dimensions independent of physical doxically said of the thin vertical works: vertical thin of the said Newman As of space. sensation “tangible” the alike viewer and artist to convey was not one was of size explained, Newman issue, central The canvases). narrow other (as his as well TheWild painted had he also bition are intended to be seen from a short distance.” ashort from seen be to intended are bition exhi this in pictures large The a distance. from pictures look to attendency large a is “There read simply: which wall, the to anote of instructions tacked Newman one- second his during of space experience an such from themselves would restrain viewers that Concerned kind. of aspatial experience an facilitating even perhaps artwork, the and a viewer fillthe visual field, diminishing the distance conventionally maintained between to tends area a sizable surface with painting A large possibility. negate that even or to seem obviate would at first that format a dimensional using of space, sense domelike a tangible, of creating consisted have to seems test That scale. handling self- his he passed works, vertical the painting in that, claimed Newman Visual andKinestheticStretch inTheWild them. between relationships of the investigation an sanctions that ideas and ofset terms yieldsa explanation suggestive yet indefinite once”), Newman’s characteristically “at occurs that (a feeling a felt ofas thing space declaration instantaneous the to of a“space dome”), horizons” (the of space “four asense to scale, from Drifting painting [ one- narrow very the .Idid aspects its all in of scale In going in all four directions.” four all in going dome of 180 aspatial in alive and “full feel to viewers he wanted that space so that it is felt at once. ( felt it at once. is that so space the declare to dome.” “space .Itry it the calling by of idea space my described Ihave why is That horizons. four all involves of space feeling the .[and] of space sense artist’s the on depends end the in a painting of scale .The afelt thing. is scale and oneof scale, is issue The done. show took place between April April between place took show 17 all six, of Newman’s narrow canvases. narrow ofNewman’s six, all included . 1950 Newman, “Statement” ( “Statement” Newman, — but instead one of scale, that significant quality Newman considered para considered Newman quality significant that one of scale, but instead , to test myself to see if I were really able to handle the problem problem the able handle to really Iwere if see to myself test , to as well as five, and possibly possibly and five, as well as Sublimis Heroicus Vir The Wild The ]. I think it holds up as well as any big one I have ever ever oneIhave big any as well it holdsup as ]. Ithink 272 1951 23 ). The establishment of scale, on the other hand, would would hand, other on the of scale, ). establishment The ), in BN:SWI ), in 272 and May May and 18 ) Vir Heroicus Heroicus Vir like apainting with But compared man show at the Betty Parsons Gallery in 1951 in Gallery Parsons show Betty at the ­man 12 , , 1951 178 . The . The , and , and — 18 ­and- how large or small something something or small how large . Newman, “ Newman, ­a- 17 ­half- Newman later explained later explained Newman inch ­inch ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 250 ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers degrees degrees test for for ­test - - - , .

Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 357 no. no. 19

. Common Knowledge 358 4 T. B. H. [Thomas B. Hess], “Newman,” “Newman,” Hess], B. T. [Thomas H. B. ( 1951 ): ): 47 . it? Could it become a work of art and not athing?” and it aworkit? become Could of art assert time same at the and “overcome format he asked, the painting, the Could of totality.” anew kind into shape the “transform to was he explained, format, shaped oddly an work to who chose with artist an confronting earlier. issue The years twenty he nearly made had works narrow the to jumped again thought tres concerning his triangular “shaped works” Jericho “shaped works” triangular his concerning 1969 astatement he in made from gleaned be can unity, ment of mere formal narrowness. canvas’s literal of the the felt compression by fortified is thatonly and integrity an “ground,”“figure” “field,” and “band” of interdependence between asense or instead ment, forging ele of independence each visual the reduces procedure zip.The of the length the blue- over the of patches cadmium he applied irregular since them, integrate intendedto obviously field. and band so,Even Newman between sometimes and leave build- aslight tape ing of mask layers over or between of paint applications multiple quently, artist’s the gray- over the tapings supplementary or with freehand either red, with theband in filled removed, Newman was tape the After margins). tacking the over (including portion slate blue masked over the agrayish painted then length, TheWild making In paintings. of his elements linear out the mask to tape of using of Newman’s technique result the at range, close visible clearly are or stripe band central of the edges The bottom. side on either quarter- by bracketed Sublimis help us estimate it. The first shows the art critic E. C. Goossen and an unidenti an and Goossen C. E. critic art the shows first it.The help estimate us well- consider two be, should distance The Wild from a “short distance” of Newman’s 1951 direction the follows a viewer for amoment, that Assume, term? Newman’s of the in sense atotality, become at all.” nothing by surrounded “a line red painting the called Hess Thomas that appear Wild scale). or achieved it established thought, (even Newman as if, experience aspatial such with incommensurate judged be initially might of TheWild stretch vertical thin ( 1969 The significance of this whole, which for Newman exceeded the achieve exceeded for whole, Newman which this of significance The simultaneously assert and overcome its format to overcome format its and assert simultaneously How TheWild does of The dimension vertical of the Newman’s did exaggeration extreme So

— [ BNF close standing those field of visual the fills of which expanse the 19 —

112 Actually, the painting is a one- is painting the Actually, of TheWild case the in as ]). Discussing the meaning of those later works, Newman’s later works, of those meaning the ]). Discussing Art News Art up along tape edges, even after the strips are removed, removed, are strips the after even edges, tape ­up along

50 , . As evidence of what Newman thought this this thought of what Newman evidence . As 194 20 inch strips of blue- strips ­inch . , the artist first taped the surface along its along its surface the taped first artist , the known documentary photographs that can can that photographs documentary ­known . Newman, “ Newman, — it produces distinct tactile limits limits tactile distinct it produces Chartres ( ­inch- 1968 exhibition note and stands at stands note and exhibition 20 and Jericho and thick, cadmium- ­thick, –69 gray running from top to top to from running ­gray [ BNF gray borders along along borders ­gray ” (

111 1969 ]) and Char ]) and ), in BN:SWI ), in ­blue. Fre red band ­red band — the the ------,

no more than twelve inches away. inches twelve no more than Cathedra of front in Miller, Dorothy possibly a woman, and Newman shows image The at Juley Peter by Newman’s studio. A. after soon taken for aphotograph pose the he imitated that paintings his and viewers between intimacy about the suggested photograph what to this positively so responded Newman that Temkin suggests my estimate is three or four feet away feet or four three is estimate my painting the to closer even stands Goossen while ahead, straight looks and close illustrations used in this essay. essay. this in used illustrations the of both reproduce to permission for as well as graph, photo the in identity Goossen’s me to confirming for Foundation, Newman Barnett ofthe director Freyberger, 21 an with wouldcoincide viewer’s eyes the point, vantage at From it frontally. this Vermont, College, 1958 in at Bennington exhibition at Newman’s retrospective Sublimis front Heroicus of Vir in posing fied woman 1958. The Barnett Newman Foundation, New York. Photo: Matthias Tarnay Figure 1. . Goossen arranged the show. I thank Heidi Colsman- Heidi show. Ithank the arranged Goossen Consider an adult viewer standing a foot away from The Wild aaway foot from standing adult viewer an Consider Viewers infront of VirHeroicusSublimisatBennington College, Vermont, ( 1958 [ BNF

51 ]). Both look at the surface obliquely yet this time stand stand time obliquely yet this surface look at]). the Both 22 — and looks at the surface obliquely. Ann obliquely. Ann surface at the looks and - ­ (“Newman’s Laterality,” 42 Laterality,” (“Newman’s Voice The to close ing stand studio, husband’s her in Newman Annalee showing Juley by photographs additional in seen ofthose as well as poses, of the character staged the to attention draws Bois 22 ( 1950 . See Temkin, “Barnett Newman on Exhibition,” 41 Exhibition,” on Newman “Barnett Temkin, See (fig. 1 (fig. [ BNF

). 38 21 ]) while looking sidelong at their surfaces surfaces at their sidelong looking while ]) The woman stands stands woman The ( 1950 and looking and looking –44 [ BNF ).

37 — The Name II Name The and ])

- . Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 359 London: Routledge, 1962 Routledge, London: Perception of nomenology Merleau- (see Maurice upward than rather situation, physical our to laterally and outward acutely more extends directionality bodily our Simply, tasks. motor our to respect with field of that functionality of the Merleau- as field, horizontal 23 in a limited angle out from the left and right (about 180 right and left the from out angle alimited in see we that world visual the of aspect that describes field”

. Common Knowledge 360 Our habitual association of peripheral vision with the the with vision ofperipheral association habitual Our and left, but peripheral left, and of us). front in scene broad spatial the ing organiz (suited to vision work of peripheral the heightening concomitantly and close)up details fine for discerning suited particularly is eyes, our within cones of retinal area densest centered on the that, vision of our (the aspect vision foveal concentrated diminishing viewer’s for attention, the competes stretch vertical This viewpoint. below her above and frontal both extension physical its canvas: ment or changes in brightness. in ment or changes move about as phenomena, such information apprehension of the to coarser yields detail of fine perception foveal our which in zones focus, central below our resist to required be band’s edges), central the along she will handling paint Newman’s or the tape, by left ridges (such the as features surface in variations minute inspecting while area that to her focus limit to However, viewer’s wants scrutiny. the aviewer if height the of individuals in variation canvas of edge the bottom the from feet up five and four between painting, center of the above the just area position New York). in a Art such of Modern Given Museum at the installed currently is in 1951 Parsons floor Betty at lery was hung (as it gal say, the from eight between, inches vary might which wall, on the hanging lookto down it or bending canvas top lookofto neck atthe the the arching by head position one’s changing or else back stepping without seen be cannot edges Those ward. or down upward eyes his he if rolls even upper nor lower canvas, the of edge the neither perceive he can point, vantage his from that, aware become will viewer The itself. presents consequence perceptual however,achieved, interesting an is balance delicate this Once eyes. below above their and extension its perceive to encouraged as well as on, straight painting, lookat to closely the induced are Viewers address. mode of of its pictorial one is result effect This equilibrium. in separated), be strictly cannot (though they peripheral the and foveal the vision, of our ofaspect tendencies each holds the that for a mode of viewing calls ing We usually associate peripheral vision with the horizontal dimension, right right dimension, horizontal the with vision peripheral associate We usually , trans. Colin Smith [ Smith Colin , trans. ], ], — 303 Ponty suggests, is the result result the is suggests, ­Ponty but allowing for some leeway in curatorial practices, as well as some some as well as practices, curatorial for some leeway in but allowing

– 4 — , esp. n. 1 n. , esp. movements that would, of course, disrupt the equilibrium estab equilibrium the disrupt of would, course, movements that The Phe ­Ponty, The — ). The “visual “visual ). The is a term that also properly applies to the zones above and above and zones the to properly applies also that aterm is 1945 willfully almost — ; repr. adjusting, of course, for the position of the artwork artwork of the position for the of course, adjusting, - 23

The Wild The to regard With 1950 Press, Riverside MA: [Cambridge, World Visual the of tion World,” Percep The in Visual the and Field Visual “The J. Gibson, (see James of clarity gradient peripheral to tral cen a possesses but it defined, sharply not are cone visual oval this within vaguely see we what and clearly see we (about 150 ward down and upward angle limited amore in and degrees), — ], ], 29 it is this midlevel zone that will attract attract will that zone midlevel it this is — ). the most conspicuous feature of the of the feature conspicuous most the degrees). The boundaries between what what between boundaries The degrees). ) and one and a half feet (as feet it ahalf one and ) and , it is as if the paint the if , it as is ------( Newman Barnett book his for notes interview typescript Hess’s Thomas in that reveals research Shiff’s of birds. freedom the with ofwildness association Newman’s from Wild The that out pointed incisively has Shiff painting. ofthe title the claim: ofthis support tangential in itself lends that ofevidence piece another peripheral the and foveal vision ofour aspects hold two to seems painting the [quoted by Richard Shiff, “To Create Oneself,” “To Oneself,” Create Shiff, Richard by [quoted 1968 Art, ofAmerican Archives Papers, Hess (Thomas ofbirds’ ‘wildness the by thology implied destination. implied edges’ framing viewer’s over the head the point as vanishing the reestablish to if as rise, they convergence as of acceleratedtheir sense an to access onlooker the gives together, close Newman so edges two between so doing and upward, far so painting the extending In experience. beholder’s the in visual counting stop or made to neutralized are they remote, much that so so limits vertical its ders view. frontal on the focused are they since former of the operations the disrupting totally by vision peripheral and foveal between lished 24 sense intensified an in correlate kinesthetic its has stretch visual this addition, In viewer. over the vaults and upward vertically it as of extends space feeling trated aconcen creates that stretch visual alongitudinal produces painting Rather, the 180 in or encompassment by enclosure characterized is that experience not generate does amode of spatial TheWild that contention is of TheWild effect perceptual the as describe curve that would sweep under the viewer’s standpoint.) the under wouldsweep that curve a by not is undercut canvas of the front in point vantage its holding body of the groundedness the that say to is which lower range, the one in acorresponding by mirrored is arc not this (Significantly, space. or her posterior to over him vaulting before range viewer’s up abovevisual the continue to however indeterminately, sensed, is that arc an form to wall the away from peeling viewer, if head ofas the over the curves painting the at upper range, its that, impression for the accounts and the like. Such information can be useful for classifi for useful be can information Such like. the and navigation, ofaerial manner its wingspan, shape, wing bird’s the concerning discriminations finer increasingly make to watcher the leading bird, the about information coarser to one’s attention draw to suited best is vision of aspect peripheral The glance. watcher’s the in erally periph caught are they say to is which flight, in glimpsed often are Birds drawn. famously was Newman which to activity an bird-watching, in vision foveal and peripheral by played role the consider to interesting it is then so, If 1969 . The Wild ofThe description My - orni to “drawn was Newman that ), he records The Wild Newman’s own statements pertain to part of what I have been trying to trying of whatbeen Ihave part to pertain statements Newman’s own ’s extreme visual ascent, combined with its severe narrowness, ren narrowness, severe its with combined ascent, visual ’s extreme 25 — The sensation of this reorientation of perspective partly partly of perspective reorientation of this sensation The in equilibrium. There is There equilibrium. in includes the claim that that claim the includes — may derive as a title a title as derive may the idea of freedom” offreedom” idea the 106 — n 58 the the ]). ]). - - , but they do not match exactly. My My do not exactly. match , but they

“ a top and a bottom” ( a bottom” and a top have paintings my “All point: the on Newman quotes he 196 Newman,” (“Perceiving bottom” and oftop ity - a “nonreversibil imply figure, human standing ofthe try symme the mirror to seen are they as especially zips, tical 26 points. these 25 bird- in bear to brought are that perception ofvisual modes the Wild The viewing in experienced address of pictorial mode the between correspondence a phenomenological is there of birds, freedom “vertical” the in interest sonal of associations connotative the to then, addition, In preening. and feeding, nesting, of manners structure, color, bodily bird’s shape, the ing study as such viewing, detailed more upon depend that ofbird- aspects those it supplements and cation, ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 249 ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers . . I thank Charles Palermo for helping me to formulate formulate to me helping for Palermo Charles I thank Onement I ofOnement apropos notes, Bois ­watching. degrees (a ­ “space degrees 26 24 198 ; original citation in Newman, Newman, in citation ; original ). The Wild The dome”). dome”). with Newman’s per Newman’s with , that Newman’s ver Newman’s , that - - watching ­watching ), and ), and and and - - - - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 361 27 (Cran Expressionism Abstract to Approach ACognitive lent”: Equiva the but Illustration an “Not book his in idea allel as a whole” ( awhole” as field visual the within dynamics “varying discern to tial” poten “innate an have viewers realms,” lower the in than gravity- ofour reaches upper the in differently “counts activity visual since that arguing criticism), for out singles Krauss that mentioning, bears it approach, fields (an visual upright of account his in ogy Press, son Pollock’s Abstractions Jack in Dynamics Visual his In Cernuschi. Claude and Rohn Matthew include mine from different ways in cality 1993 Unconscious The Optical Krauss, See vertical). (the transcendent and ordered the to horizontal) (the wild and disordered the from trajectory conceptualized retrospectively a fulfilling as work lock’s Pol- see to tendency the against arguing Pollock, Jackson of sublimation putative Greenberg’s Clement criticizes and sublimation with verticality equates Krauss term. ofthe theorization Krauss’s Rosalind with common in tle

. Common Knowledge 362 The Wild The of “verticality” the for claims My ), ), 1984 242 –320 - psychol ofgestalt approach the adopts ), Rohn 3 –4 . Other scholars who have focused on verti on focused have who scholars . Other ). Cernuschi elaborates a somewhat par asomewhat elaborates ). Cernuschi for interpreting the values associated with it). with associated values the for interpreting (and, of space indeed, afeeling conveys Sublimis Heroicus how Vir for determining afoundation sets TheWild in function kinesthetic, and visual aspects, how both hold to it Understanding upright. serves that body human of the structure cular posture with associated sensations kinesthetic the intensified are too so stretched, increasingly is a viewer’s vision As feeling. bodily of kind acertain and sensation visual of both aprogression narrate to understood be thus height and can width between disparity of increasing dimensions to vases can of sequence narrow of the progression The body’s upright posture. of the laterally extending and viewer’s body the to parallel upright plane of an suggestion on depends the of which conceptualization field pictorial the abeholder’s that it demands recognition ing from The Wild from ing tradition Western pictorial of the crutches” or fictive world (which is tantamount to saying that he wanted to give thepaint give to that wanted he saying to tantamount worldis or fictive (which space imaginary an into projection viewer’s unchecked the resisted that painting to the viewer as a horizontal expanse and accessible to penetrating view. penetrating to accessible and expanse ahorizontal as viewer the to oriented is that space of apictorial consideration obsolete any makes dimension, of The Wild verticality extreme the Second, body. of the plane or mesial, midline, the to relation in exist to understood be can thus that field pictorial alongitudinal vision, of foveal point focal customary below the above and space the into vertically extending upright plane ofter an (Oxford: Oxford University Press, Press, University Oxford (Oxford: (Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Research UMI MI: Arbor, (Ann Thus, the verticality of verticality the Thus, influenced perceptual world world perceptual ­influenced , Newman have lit have performs two important functions. First, First, functions. important two performs The Wild — ------in his quest to rid painting of the “props and “props and of the painting rid to quest his in bury, NJ: Associated University Presses, Presses, University Associated NJ: bury, is exponentially higher than in Newman’s other works. other Newman’s in than higher exponentially is Wild ofThe case Press, ofChicago University Fried, ( Stella” Olitski, Noland, Painters: ican Amer “Three Fried, Michael See itself.” eyesight to tance of resis degree measurable almost an offers that medium a density, specific a certain with a medium of entering Cathedra is example (Fried’s Newman by canvases at large looking in that gestion 28 ( structure” that to attach spectators associations the from and experience ied ofembod structure the from emerges “Meaning explains: He view. under artwork the by stimulated are that tions opera mental attendant their and adjustments of physical kinds the to attending by discerned be reliably can ings paint ofabstract meaning cognitive the that argues chi Cernus viewers. to meaning conveys painting abstract how explain to science ofcognitive concepts the utilizes .

My analysis here shares something with Fried’s sug with something shares here My analysis (Chicago: Reviews and Essays Objecthood: and Art , combined with its attenuated lateral lateral attenuated its with , combined — — 27 can also be instantiated as amat as instantiated be also can was looking for a way to make a a make for to away looking was , that “measurable degree of resistance” ofresistance” degree “measurable , that 89 — ). with the skeletal and mus and skeletal the with 1998 ), “We have the sensation sensation the ), “We have — ), ), the conventional conventional the 213 1965 –65 1997 , at ), reprinted in ), where he he ), where 232 28 Judg . In the the . In ------question. The claim depends for its fittingness upon the reciprocity of artwork artwork of the reciprocity upon fittingness for its depends claim The question. work of in the structure intentional the or acknowledges a beholder recognizes how concerns claim Rather, the object. amaterial as painting of the facts brute about not is just claim this of stretch: feeling a kinesthetic elicits simultaneously it while dimension, the vertical in field, visual of the of anamorphosis a kind Sublimis Heroicus Vir by for aviewer created is space that as specifically of of Newman’s space, sense dynamics kinesthetic and visual the to viewer definitively relates for a fixes The Wild that address torial mode of pic the contention that for the evidence as stands other. pairing The each to relation in canvases of the interpretation guide to meant choice was rial how on notto negative) did Newman’s catch curato show (predominantly the beheld in a certain way: a way that, moreover, is entirely entirely is moreover, that, a way way: a certain in beheld is or, better, frames of regard —a painting ter face- of adramatic middle the into walked room the ing Sublimis Heroicus Vir opposite directly center wall, gallery’s on the history that through and in established tions conven the to responsive and a history, with of artifacts 144 of just top- five by intervals The Wild exhibited first Newman When “Fittingness” and“Facingness” inUntitled2,1950 other. each facing subjects or even entities discrete as viewer and painting of both positions the maintained that address for abeholder’s projections). amode He of pictorial created subjective stimulus merely a being prevented its that a coherenceintegrity and object, an as ing, apainting as accepted is Wild ofThe perception aviewer’s about making Iam points the verify to essary nec not is ofevidence kind this But Newman. paintings: the of viewer first of the testimony the on I rely part, In nature. of a textual evidence or material source umentary doc to reference by convincing, entirely made always not if accomplished, usually is endeavor the contexts, different in and time over meanings of those interpretations ing chang the track to else or paintings, of his meanings the were thought contemporaries Newman’s what reconstruct to is scholarship of such aim the as Insofar scholarship. context- facilitate to little does nomenology phe adecontextualized from proceeds here proposing 29 suggestive was pairing the .

The criticism might be made that the account I am I am account the that made be might criticism The — square inches, that Ann Temkin has called its “inverse.” its called Temkin has Ann that inches, square that is, from a general perspective that that perspective ageneral from is, that 144 (or any other painting). Once it Once painting). other (or any — ­to- -square- that is, as belonging to a set aset to belonging as is, that bands ­bottom the condition of its being being ofits condition the oriented, art historical historical art ­oriented, — foot expanse of brilliant red, punctuated at various at various punctuated red, of brilliant expanse ­foot were they complements orwere opposites? they — — the object object the in 1951 in and the thin vertical canvas, with an area area an with canvas, vertical thin the and 29 - - - - - , it was the only painting installed installed painting only , it the was creates creates TheWild . Perceptually, 30 work. the beholds aviewer time every discerned, potentially instance of Newman’s curatorial logic in “ in logic curatorial ofNewman’s instance relation that Instead, encounters. of those contexts historical the investigating by determined be to primarily, even or only, not is experience perceptual viewers’ the and address of pictorial mode intentional Newman’s between relation the Thus, another. not and way it one making intentionally artist’s the of result the relation ofthat meaning the precisely, ter, Rosalind Krauss, Yve- Krauss, ter, Rosalind 362 modernism Buchloh, Temkin, . Temkin, –67 . Art Since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Post Antimodernism, Modernism, 1900: Since Art , vol. 2 , vol. Barnett Newman Barnett off between the lat the between ­off (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2004 Hudson, and York: Thames (New . Visitors enter Visitors . — 30 Alain Bois, and Benjamin H. D. H. Benjamin and Bois, ­Alain Although Although reviews of reviews , 42 . Bois discusses this this discusses . Bois — - - - - 1951 is discerned, or or discerned, is ,” in Hal Fos ,” Hal in — and more more and ), ), - -

Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 363 account of Newman twice: first in 1984 first twice: ofNewman account his published (Crowther own. my with contrasts wise other Newman to approach whose Crowther, Paul of 31 149 History [in 52 Journal Art Oxford Sublime,” the and man iterability about argument alarger in Newman of account his situates Crowther version, revised his In sublimity. about ideas Newman’s with compared sions ver respective their how showing Kant, Immanuel and Burke Edmund by offered sublime of the versions tinct is, about a sign’s capacity to be recognized as recognized be to asign’s capacity about is, pendent of any particular context. That recognition, recognition, That context. particular ofany pendent . –59 Common Knowledge 364 The Language of Twentieth- of Language The –63 My use of the term reciprocity term ofthe use My ] and then, in revised form, thirteen years later later years thirteen form, revised in then, ] and (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1997 Press, CT: Yale University Haven, (New ]). Crowther clarifies philosophically the dis the philosophically clarifies Crowther ]). support to seems it rather view; a brackets border that adecorative as frame the seeing our suspends utterly that fits Thepainting “fittingness.” of its content means by its 1950 2, Untitled Instead, generates canvas. supporting of its flatness the and image of the coincidence virtual content the to pictorial avoided reducing tively instinc Newman differently, Put alone. image of the perception visual the to content work identical ofthe be to the taking done from preventto so a viewer have he may that consider Second, apainting. and aviewer between maintained traditionally distance the diminishes that aprojection wall, the out from tion alternatives. considerone to of those helpful it be may address, of pictorial modes for Newman’s condition alternative the is relationship of this character the Since response. a proper with address honor that will viewer the that possibility for the allows mode way, of its address that but rather acertain it in experience to of of viewer. the for itfaces and especially made frame object as painting image, as work of the aspects other. two onHow the do these construction, cal object’s the physi and one hand, on the image, surface the between relationship the to attention calls and aspect aboxlike painting the gives frame deep, the eye- an it. At surrounds that Pollock, Jackson by structed con frame, simple wooden work the of is the part integral An area. ing’s surface of tomato- veil brushed A visibly edge. right of the length entire the to parallel runs whole, of which the width the about one- band, black matte impenetrable of an consists painting the wide, 1951 in Parsons at Betty shown and viewer. and in order to draw attention to its relatively exaggerated projec exaggerated 1950 relatively 2, its to Untitled attention order draw to in Untitled 2, 1950 2, 2 Untitled (fig. Consider the possibility, first, that Newman accentuated the physical depth depth the physical accentuated that Newman first, possibility, the Consider 31 Century Art: A Conceptual AConceptual Art: ­Century It is not that the painting merely determines or causes the beholder the or causes merely determines painting the It not is that has an affinity with that that with affinity an has [“Barnett New [“Barnett 7 , no. 2 , no. a sign inde asign ( — ) is scaled quite differently than TheWild than differently quite scaled ) is 1984 — that that fits the 1950the 2, Untitled fits meaning? its to contribute . Measuring four feet high by just over five inches inches over five just by high feet four . Measuring ), ), ): ): ­ - - - - — soup red fills the other two- the other ­soup fills red or perhaps to hold to or perhaps Sublimis Heroicus Vir To understand paintings. ofindividual effects perceptual the ignoring often first, theory on depends (self-) and intelligibility, cognition, ofhuman condition tal fundamen the be to ofreciprocity principle this reveals ( consciousness” human nizing “orga in Crowther, to according role, akey plays world, and body between reciprocity basic the in originating this assertion. this ( authentically” read be to order in theory ofaesthetic amatrix on depends painting] [The . . . propositions. theoretical of Newman’s knowledge going reflection. Crowther’s approach to Newman’s art art to Newman’s approach Crowther’s ­reflection. , for instance, Crowther says we need “a thorough need we says Crowther instance, , for — into its frame in a manner amanner in frame its into the image within it. The it.The within image the catching three inches inches three ­catching 9 thirds of the paint of the ­thirds ). The aesthetic object object aesthetic ). The 158 ). I disagree with with ). I disagree . It, too, was was too, . It, — painting painting third ­third ------

cerned flatness on sis 32 allows simultaneously coherent painting whole, the amanifestly into support and to fitboth of being a sense whole, or cohesion ofdelivers the integrity the reinforces that aframe within viewer the to faced is surface its because painting, the say: to is That or abstract. view, illusionistic whether a spectacular framing theconvention of challenges decisively Newman it, With fitting. this palpable in is support and of complementarity, image intrinsic or the reinforcement, mutual um’s specificity (particularly as it coincides with the flat the with coincides as it (particularly um’s specificity self- the in Greenberg, Clement by lifetime Newman’s during rigorously most expressed concern, modernist the by than of “facingness” . It might be useful to consider Newman’s empha Newman’s consider to useful be It might for — consolidates artwork and subject. By combining image and and image By combining subject. and 1950 2, Untitled artwork consolidates a viewer. a as driven more by his desire to create the effect effect the create to desire his by more driven as — Untitled 2, 1950 2, con is Untitled as far as at least, 32 - medi the of investigation ­reflexive - - - vania State University Press, 2008 Press, University State vania Pennsyl Park: 1920s the (University in Miró Joan Ecstasy: Fixed Palermo, Charles see ofMiró, work the in tality” “fron to it ofhow relates explanation an for and point this of origin the for Both surface). painting the of ness Adam Baker Houston. Photo: The Menil Collection, cm (48x5-1/8in.). canvas, 121.9x13 1950, 1950.Oilon Newman, Figure 2. Barnett Untitled 2, itself ), ), 244 n 6.

- - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 365 33 cago: University of Chicago Press, 1989 Press, ofChicago University cago: (Chi Skepticism Literary and Cavell Stanley in thought ofCavell’s explication Fischer’s Michael to indebted more even is but Cavell ofStanley work the from broadly they nonetheless proclaim generally our attunement with with attunement our generally proclaim nonetheless they basis, acontingent on made always are decisions these Although them. with relationships our and ofothers edge - knowl our regarding decisions make to responsibility our it is that of accepting moment positive the as describe Cavell and he which acknowledgment, against of violence ( themselves express to ers ofoth capacity the doubt to temptation” or possibility, human a“disturbing into lapses who one as pain) in are people other if know really can we whether questions who aperson (for example, skeptic” minds “other the examines

. Common Knowledge 366 My understanding of acknowledgment derives derives ofacknowledgment understanding My rounding the viewer, almost ‘dyeing’ him with the relentless hue.” relentless the with ‘dyeing’ him viewer, almost the rounding sur canvas, the front of in thespace .fills red of sea intense vast “the that of 1963 it in wrote Kaprow color. and scale Allan embracing on its been has ing tion as a subject who may choose to acknowledge it. acknowledge to who choose may a subject as tion posi his andfortify to him) before thepainting of fittingness the by matched or mirrored as fit own his autonomy discovers (he his recognize to a viewer become involved become Sublimis Heroicus of Vir viewers suggest, oped, [who] become[s] implicated in the irradiating surface.” [who] irradiating the become[s] in implicated . spectator the by occupied area the into threshold painting’s of the expansion 1969 in Alloway Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus of Vir expanse lateral absorbing visually it) the faced called has Shiff Richard 1951 the At The Dynamicsof SpatialExperienceinVirHeroicus Sublimis apt.) are attire it personal to as relates term of the connotations (The “fit.” of bodily posture, of the or tightening of shortening sion or containment, confronting confronting in then or elongation, stretch avertical feels aviewer paintings, narrow of the The Wild perceiving in If correlate. thetic akines has consolidation this that observe to itother. important is Additionally, himself finds viewer the which to (or its value for depends its Newman’s in terminology, address of experience.” kind sensory wholeof color, the aura enveloped awonderfully it in and becomes you become one to of close Newman’s paintings you “when stand that remarked Sublimis Heroicus Vir had Murray, have may Robert artist the As these descriptions, with their emphasis on being surrounded or envel surrounded on being emphasis their with descriptions, these As 61 ). That avoidance is a kind akind is avoidance ). That (as (as of TheWild narrowness” defiant show, Parsons materially “the she may feel a converse feeling: one of bodily cohe 1950 one 2, of bodily Untitled feeling: a feel converse she may 37 . called that experience an “ an experience that called 34 ). There, Fischer ). Fischer There, Since that time, the emphasis in accounts of the latter paint latter of the accounts in emphasis the time, that Since - - — Reconsidering Barnett Newman Barnett Reconsidering 37 International 36 30 (New York: Charles Scribner, 1969 Scribner, York: Charles (New We We What Say? Mean Must Cavell, in ofLove” ance Avoid “The and Acknowledging” and “Knowing essays 2008 Press, MIT MA: (Cambridge, Vegas Las from Learning On aMonument: IAm in Minds,” Other and Sheds, Decorated Ducks, “Of discussion egar’s Vin Aron from deal a great learned also I have others. 35 34 be to himself discovers indeed, . . –33 . . Art News Art “Impurity,” Kaprow, Allan Art Art Newman,” Barnett on “Notes Alloway, Lawrence Robert Murray, “Remembering Newman,” in Ho, in Newman,” “Remembering Murray, Robert Shiff, “To Create Oneself,” 86 “To Oneself,” Create Shiff, , , by far the most proportionally extreme extreme proportionally most the far , by 52 –55

13, 13, . ‘advancing space’ effect, a kind of akind space’ effect, ‘advancing no. no. 6 ( 1969 33 36 This mode of pictorial mode of pictorial This Newman’s close friend, ): ): 35 , 16 –39 . scale . ), ), , at 38 ), ), in its color its (the in 238 49 in mind as he as mind in ) on the extent extent ) on the . See also the the also –92. See –353 61 . 35 — Lawrence Lawrence , no. 9 , no. . facing an an facing ( 1963 ): ------

( 40 1975 Press, York: York New University 39 to allow the expanse of vermilion to sink in (in the Air Air the (in in sink to ofvermilion expanse the allow to enough just eye the “catch they bands: the by control its and space ofindeterminate effect the concerning own my to dissimilar not observation an made Goossen C. E. edge). right literal its is, (that canvas ofthe limit the ceive per to dramatically, position head her moving without unable, be will but brown), of maroon strip (the zip a third as well as white), abrilliant other the ofred, tone a lighter zips (one two those perceive firmly will she canvas, of the edge right the toward obliquely looks then and edge left the from zips second and first the between painting the it may be, nonetheless has structure. has nonetheless it be, may however fullness to open that, experience of a perceptual sense our securing gaze, Yve- as cases, all in But plane. picture the to relative of her angle vision on the and stands viewer the on where depending surface, canvas the across play out perceived differently be color makes the fullness”). the makes color of colors but because full are they not because full are “My canvases explained, (Newman thesurface. front in of space the “empty” fill and permeate to seems of red enfolded). be to A halation meaning: word’s on the is stress etymological 38 ally. later spreads that acontinuum would imply that effect an canvas, of the edges right and left the beyond color to extend appear to the not does cause fullness more of the zips in their field of vision. field of their in zips more of the or obliquely, will frontally either at it looking and surface the from distance at ashort when standing viewers, that so bands the arranging carefully by effect Yet this avoided precisely Newman of placelessness. asense induce might painting the anonoriented and ceive space, would per a viewer relief, visual attenuated with a painting into geneity. Staring homo overall an in resulting or differentiated, modulated of being its sense any field of the overwhelm would broad area the zips, the absence? Without of their effect the would be What placement breadth. its lateral helps demarcate their and expanse. red amorphous of an impression the into dissolve otherwise what might yellow. structure adarkened edge, bands The right the along finally, and of red; light another brown; one of dark athicker then white; of crisp followed astripe by surface; of the rest the of tone alighter than is of that red astripe is edge left the from feet Afew surface. the across intervals placed at irregular and inches about one three to from width in ranging stripes, 1970 . . . Newman, “ Newman, For Judd’s precise description, see “Barnett Newman” Newman” “Barnett see description, For Judd’s precise For instance, if a viewer positions herself closely to to closely herself positions aviewer if For instance, 39 Donald Judd: Complete Writings, 1959 Writings, Complete Judd: Donald ), in Rather, the viewer’s chromatic experience is secured by five top- five by secured is experience viewer’s chromatic Rather, the The vertical length of the bands measures Newman’s colored in fieldheight, measures bands of the length vertical The ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 249. ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers Alain Bois has pointed out, the bands constantly “solicit” our our “solicit” constantly bands the out, pointed has Bois ­Alain 38 Yet, as Donald Judd perceptively pointed out, this Yet, this out, pointed Judd Donald as perceptively ), ), 200 — –2 degrees or lesser greater to 41 . – (New 75 (New 40 The possibilities of what can or cannot or cannot of what can possibilities The - cord 41 1990 Press, University bridge Cam (Cambridge: Record ACritical Expressionism: Abstract News Newman,” ofB. Line Philosophic “The Goossen, See fully).” it more see to order in at light, particularly directly, at anything look to never trained are pilots Force, Newman intended to convey. Central to his account is is account his to Central convey. to intended Newman hethinks understanding” and ofreception modalities to response affective of his description admirable an offers ( ground a against afigure as securely them fixing from us preventing perception,” ofour spread lateral the by “denied ultimately is zips the by performed modulations of the “singularity” the that point the makes . Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir ) and 212 ) and Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 203 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, ( 1958 ), reprinted in David and Cecile Shapiro, eds., eds., Shapiro, Cecile and David in ), reprinted Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir to regard (with — perceive one or perceive , by keying it to the “modes and and “modes the it to keying , by ­to- ), ), bottom ­bottom 332 –35, (with regard to Con to regard (with 212 at 334 at - - - ). Peter de Bolla Bolla de ). Peter . ). Bois Bois ). Art Art - - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 367 42 Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir Newman’s Barnett “Serenity: his See experience.” acommunal inhabiting space, a shared to of belonging of community, of “a sense apprehension our encourages painting the that idea the 38 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001 Press, University Harvard MA: (Cambridge, –39 . Common Knowledge 368 Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 199 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, . solicited to perceive.” we are time each [what is] each differently construct “preconsciously Bois, to ing categories. those between oscillation an is there Instead, ground. is other the and deep green- blue- midnight of the values close relatively The ground. and figure between indeterminacy one: the another by matched is that uncertainty aperceptual creates know and measure what we can what weand see between band’s the discrepancy by The edge. right canvas of the division symmetrical exact power of the the weakens band darker of the displacement” dued lateral by the magnetic draw of the painting’s laterality. painting’s of the draw magnetic the by but not canceled, parried, is zip of a singular stretch the as just zips, vertical the by checked is canvas of the expanse horizontal the across ofview, spread vision the field as such.”fieldas pictorial the canvas, of the expanse lateral [is] the we [can] grasp that certitude factual only “the that perceptually.” proposes Bois [the painting] controlling ever of [our] “renounce[s]thepossibility which expanse, chromatic of its fluctuation sheer the by compounded is indeterminacy This canvas. the we scan as attention solicit our continually zips its because opposition” figure/ground fundamental the readjusting and of adjusting process the in “constantly we are that argues likewise Sublimis way.” Heroicus of Vir definite case the any in In crystallizing from consciousness prevent to this time same at one,the and a .conscious . to activity perceptual preconscious from our shift to us urging fieldby perceptual of the experience perceptual our ground and figure of fluctuation endless of the However, unconvinced gaze. our Iam solicit simultaneously that zips by (or held perhaps together) but punctuated is attention our demands that expanse mis perception.” our to attribute falsely we might that of assurance kind any against attack a“radical is production To ambiguity. Newman’s Bois, artistic essential an by marked be to he takes that acondition perception, of embodied condition afundamental address they , I take my cue from Bois’s emphasis on the bluntly factual nature of a lateral of alateral nature factual Bois’s bluntly from on the cue my emphasis , Itake Since neither figure nor ground is given to us absolutely,to given accord is ground we must, nor neither figure Since Bois argues that the content of Newman’s paintings derives from the way way the from derives content of the Newman’s paintings that argues Bois In accounting for the dynamics of spatial experience in in experience of spatial dynamics for the accounting In black field impede a viewer’s confident assertion that one is figure figure that is one viewer’s field­black impede a assertion confident 44 . Art Matters ,” Art in 43 This is a strategy to “emphasize the intentional nature nature intentional the “emphasize to a strategy is This ), ), — 23 42 –55 that this oscillation supposedly inaugurates. In my my In inaugurates. supposedly oscillation this that For instance, in Abraham in For instance, ,

43 44 203 Newman,” “Perceiving from are paragraph this applies to many of Newman’s works. of Newman’s many to applies Abraham about specifically 34 Laterality,” “Newman’s See ofperceiving.” process the in us “catches thus and vision” peripheral her or his to appeal to beholder the “forc[es] . .

Quotations from Bois here and in the remainder of of remainder the in and here Bois from Quotations In a subsequent essay, Bois argues that this laterality laterality this that argues Bois essay, a subsequent In — and the indeterminacy at the heart of heart at the indeterminacy the and ( 1949 but implies that the point point the that implies but and 36 and [ black band and the the and band ­black BNF Vir Heroicus Subli Heroicus Vir , where Bois writes writes Bois , where

23 ]) the “sub ]) the , Bois Bois , –4 . - - - 1986 In canvas. the attacking case, extreme the in even, and painting, to defeat the attempting address, mode of its pictorial acknowledge to refusing is lapsed, have indeed beholders lapse, might which into failure The material. overliteral its scale of art’s primacy ontological for the is struggle The her dounimpeded. so letting to palpable resistance the coloredpainting’s fieldand the in herself lose to tion viewer’s tempta the between of astruggle midst the in achieved is of space, sense of place, sense she apprehends of complete a“sensation resulting space.” This purely on the basis of what it is, or is not” ( not” is or it is, of what basis the on purely but purposes other or political for not of art, history the in vandalized often most the perhaps ofbeing tinction dis grim the “bears work Newman’s that notes Temkin Cathedra on time 1997 November in returned at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam in April 1986 April in Amsterdam in Museum Stedelijk at the him to restoring him, attract zips how by the struck be will viewer tious A conscien process. of color this in alone. Yeteffects intervenes astage second amorphous potentially the in oroneself lose to areverie into drift to tempted be might One viewerto resist. the for difficult is extent, chromatic and size physical sheer painting’s it into the by color, by rounded or it, subsumed by absorbed sur of being sense The painting. the when beholding viewpoint optical and tion posi of bodily sense his maintain to a viewer challenges radically Newman First, limis Sub Heroicus of Vir only, perception the purposes for explanatory though divide, 46 45 Sublimis Heroicus Vir dome of 180 spatial a in alive and “full placed, feeling as experience may viewer the that a verticality TheWild to regard with Idescribed that stretch kinesthetic and visual the ences experi field, he visual his in bands thefive on one of or to fixes attends viewer the when finally, and objects.) Third disparate two balances that adevice designate scale that recall of Newman’s to scale: relates sense equilibrium The artwork. the face fit 1950to as 2, subject Untitled the that way consolidates the to relation in one described Ihave the as same the is effect it. (This with dialogue yet in painting the from independent entity, separate an as him constitutes that dispersion of corporeal ing feel kinesthetic corresponding his against and gaze of his dissolution lateral the . . Newman, “ Newman, Gerard Jan van Bladeren knifed Newman’s painting painting Newman’s knifed Bladeren van Jan Gerard into three stages (even if they are interdependent and occur simultaneously). simultaneously). interdependent occur are and (even they if stages three into with aknife. with Yellow, III Blue Red, of Who’s and slashed Afraid , aman A triple movement of perception governs this mutual dynamic. I would dynamic. mutual this movement governs A triple of perception This last is the moment (“felt at once”) when a viewer rightly experiences moment experiences the (“felt is rightly at last when once”) aviewer This ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 250 ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers . These are not isolated instances. Ann Ann instances. isolated not are . These degrees going in all four directions.” four all in going degrees — and repeated his attack, this this attack, his repeated and when, feeling a dome of space declare itself around her, around itself adome ofdeclare space feeling when, — a momentary sense of psychic and bodily integrity integrity bodily and of psychic sense a momentary . Barnett New Barnett . He . He - - bridge University Press, 1987 Press, University bridge (Cambridge: Cam Shakespeare by Plays Six in Knowledge Disowning Cavell, Stanley Other,” in ofthe Stake the and “Othello see ofacknowledgment, avoidance or refusal man egar for discussing this point with me. with point this discussing for egar , 16 ). For the connection between violence and the the and violence between connection ). For the 45 — ), ), can also also can 46 125 against against –42 . I thank Aron Vin Aron . Ithank ------: - - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 369 of knowing, is motivated to establish a more rigorous con rigorous amore establish to motivated is of knowing, ways ordinary with dissatisfied skeptic, the Cavell), lowing (fol- view Fischer’s In text. literary any of knowing validity the to regard with position askeptical adopt to critics general the tendencyconcerning of deconstructionist 48 47 . . Common Knowledge 370 Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 193 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, My point here parallels one made by Michael Fischer Fischer Michael by made one parallels here point My the third person that is characteristic of fiction.” characteristic is that person third the of a ‘You,’to ‘I’ distance an the as immediately, not with and directly, spectator ological continuum binding viewer to painting. ( Light we look at Anna’s When union. compulsory this Newman’s color facilitates of appeal irresistible The maintain. would otherwise aviewer that position ject sub the overwhelm Bois’s is Newman’s theme. canvases second distance this ing whole chunk of color.” of chunk whole whole ofa field, the red as mere vastness the with deal to obliged constantly are ( I Take reciprocally. of Bois’s Onement with engaged be to interpretation subject or entity it if were as another painting the faces viewer the which in exchange, theme of the called mightbe show,to first The others. one holds over the sway Ihope as but, one at time, any operative be may three All paintings. of particular interpretation his govern that artwork to of viewer relationship the concerning themes three are there of Newman, Bois’s In analyses interpreted? been it has of how and address, of Newman’s mode of pictorial implications the are What The Affective Modeof PictorialAddress is “forc[ed]” to do so), is unable to maintain not only his or her physical feeling feeling or her physical his not only “forc[ed]”is do to so), maintain to unable is he or she since it seems, (unwillfully, or her perception of spread his lateral the to beholder, the succumbing which to in degree of One Bois’s the is tions. concerns implica extreme certain harbor to indeed, account, his I understand forceful; of Newman’s Bois’s work is phenomenological painting. analysis and of viewer relationship the characterize confrontation and opposition or union, exchange only “direct address” will bridge. will address” “direct only that gap unbearable an creates entity aseparate as painting of the sheer existence the other, if as the and subject the between for abonding adesire underwrites scenario this by implied relationship dialogic of the intensity the Iread Bois, As address. moment of direct Bois’s on this what motivates insistence pondering (not “we” “each to other,” intimacy in “You”). to but “I” worth It be lacking may curiously if even is it equals, be oneto conversational of at first seems painting one’s as body” indivisible own as become fieldhas that of the colorof respiration of internal asort as “function 1968 1948 [ [ The third theme is somewhat like the inverse of the second. Instead of Instead second. of the inverse the somewhat like is theme third The BNF BNF

107 14 ]). Bois understands the painting to be “an attempt to address the the address to attempt “an be to painting the ]). understands Bois ]), Bois claims, “we cannot even attempt to focus on anything but on anything focus to attempt even cannot “we ]), claims, Bois . 49 Even the slight modulations in the color of the in modulations slight Even the — - 48 phrasing that seems to suggest apsychophysi suggest to seems that phrasing Thus, it may not be surprising that overcom that it not surprising may be Thus, Fischer, Fischer, See doubt. in ends certainty for quest skeptical the and hold, to it fails secured, be it can which in oflife forms ordinary the within established not is connection this since But consciousness. immediate in objects to nection 50 49 . . Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 213 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 212 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, Stanley Cavell and Literary Skepticism Literary and Cavell Stanley 50 47 The relationship of viewer to to of viewer relationship The . . Anna’s Light Anna’s , esp. 31 , esp. –32 - - - - .

can only feel others,” he said, “if you have some sense of your own being.” own of you your others,” feel some have “if sense he only said, can you think “I relationships: of mutual terms in implications their understand to viewers their ask Newman by paintings best the life).man’s and Arguably, art for New of Bois’s acknowledgment respect obvious full in criticism this I make (although of Newman’s spirit enterprise the negates painting and viewer between punched. get tance ourselves from it.” from ourselves tance dis to try we time each blast instantaneous its reaffirming base, its leaving ever ‘moves’ without body. .[I]t walking shadow our or the master a doghis follows Light lives. The model of viewer on offer here does not seem to be the same as the one the as same the not here be to seem does on model offer of The viewer lives. face.” it ‘here as we experience existence[;] its acknowledge to whole of yet forced violent the and color, ocean never able survey to vibrating the Sublimis Heroicus Vir as such a painting at Looking confrontation. and danger by distinguished ment asituation to yields of acknowledg characteristic exchange beneficial mutually The presence. ening threat vaguely and anonymous an by of haunted it, front in forth and back pacing us has Bois of reciprocity, on terms painting the of it). facing enslave to Instead (even “master,” its as if, stalker one entitled is chromatic power of this affective is a lurking severity to the encounter of painting and viewer. and of painting encounter the to severity alurking is there existence,” of “affirmation an is of a“Here Iam” place, that asense viewers for his Newman’s intent establish to with sympathizes explicitly Bois though or well- integrity, of or personal her sense his (the placement) viewer’s literal but also painting before the positioned of being Sublimis Heroicus Vir Newman’s by canvases. induced aggression affective an conjures Bois time, same at But, the of relationships. dimension ethical the faces one and is where of being security one the feels of scale: sense not place, mentionhis to and space of Newman’ssense experiencing of result beneficial the recognize does Bois relationships. mutual understanding in step first the is of self Recognition assigned. culturally as type identity, or her personality her constructed from distinguished as self, individual of her aware specific aviewer make paintings at at blow.” its dodge cannot one is red overwhelming: engulfing “The metaphor of fisticuffs: 53 52 51 . . . ( Yellow, III Blue Who’s Red, of and Afraid Bois, “Newman’s Laterality,” 42 Laterality,” “Newman’s Bois, Bois, “Perceiving Newman,” 212 Newman,” “Perceiving Bois, Bois, “ Bois, , Bois writes: “The colored field seems to move with us, to follow our gaze as as gaze followto our us, with coloredto field “The move seems writes: , Bois 53 In my view, the implication in Bois’s in of violent account confrontation implication view, my the In 56 We will feel present, it seems, even when even it seems, present, feel We will Newman’s large paintings make us submit, after we have fought for our we fought have for our after submit, us make paintings Newman’s large “force[s] [us] to relinquish our mastery over the visual field.” visual over the mastery “force[s] our [us] relinquish to 1951 ,” ,” 362 –67 , at 365 52 . A viewer, apparently, cannot help but surrender to the the to help A viewer, but apparently, surrender cannot . . , we are, according to Bois, “solicited by “solicited by Bois, to according , we are, 1967 being, in facing the artwork. Even artwork. the facing in ­being, –68 — 55 257–58 54 56 [ . . . perhaps especially when especially perhaps BNF Bois, “ Bois, Bois, “ Bois, Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester” ( Sylvester” David with “Interview Newman, .

— 106 1951 1951 not there,’ full in our our in not there,’ full 51 ,” ,” ]), Bois reiterates his his reiterates ]), Bois ,” ,” Anna’s Anna’s Concerning 365 366 . . 55 Looking Looking 54 — His His we we - - - - 1965)

, Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 371 58 57 of myself.’ I said: ‘Well, take it easy. I mean, everything is is everything Imean, it easy. take ‘Well, Isaid: of myself.’ aware me made you names, me ‘You called Heble?’ said: trou the ‘What’s I said: And me. abuse to began and eyes his in tears had and upset terribly got apainter, of mine, show,in 1950 first my during incident an remember “I heat: the stand not could who viewer another . . Common Knowledge 372 Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester,” 259 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, Bois, “ Bois, 1951 ,” ,” lives,” 1965 he in toldSylvester David their both it affects of people meaningful is ameeting other, if each see and and people meet that fact the in “There’s thing person: another ametaphysical ing meet with paintings of his impact the when he associated Newman by imagined never existed before.” existed never that of away looking and “embody avision paintings his that he stated which in Sublimis 1957 much in when, as said intentions). Newman artist’s of the of it also (andacknowledgment thus aviewer’s by consummated is and of apainting creation his by inaugurated is that a complex is exchange address Newman’s mode ofrelationship. pictorial painting- of the aspect this designate to here primarily address” of pictorial “mode phrase the used Ihave interpreted. be to experienced be must that quality a is scale theterm; of not defining is merely amatter scale Understanding him? to most mattered that of painting scale,”aspect the “human establish paintings how his of Newman’s offor understanding space sense implications the are What Newman’s Modeof PictorialAddress we trauma. have of relationship, metaphysics painting the painting itself had a life of its own.” of its alife had itself painting the painting this with time somehow first whereas for the making, Iwas that something was painting [Before], the itself. painting the or from of painting, act the from myself moment able Iwas that remove to up until whereas Idid, that thing the with time 1965 in painting of that said ize,” Newman I of Onement creation of his aconsequence partly was suggested, have scholars many productivity, That completed eighteen paintings. of he work; had year productive most his would remain pleted and what was viewer). of the responsibility the (whichis ing of away look also painter) and (that of the avision or have embody paintings the writes, “the man who knifed [ who knifed man “the writes, “Presumably,” Bois provoked attack: to being Bois’s of avandal in that is account times across, could not bear the heat.” the not could bear across, times 366 . Newman told an anecdote about about anecdote an told . Newman When he embarked on the vertical works in 1950 in works vertical on the he embarked When in the pages of the of the pages the in Vir Heroicus Heroicus Vir who disparaged had Getlein, Frank , he criticized , where a friend afriend , where 60 Both sides are necessary for a mode of pictorial address: address: for amode of pictorial necessary are sides Both New Republic . Who’s Afraid .III Who’s Afraid - 59 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, See alright.’” be to going 1945 –47 in in 60 61 . . BN:SWI . Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester,” 256 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, . Newman, “Letter to the Editor, Editor, the to “Letter Newman, Frank Getlein, “Review ofAmerican Paintings, “Review Getlein, Frank 58 57 On this account, instead of Newman’s instead account, this On Instead, the model of a viewer implied model implied of aviewer the Instead, . 59 ” ( , “is that I was confronted for the first first for the confronted Iwas that , “is Newman wrote a letter to the editor editor the to a letter wrote Newman 1957 258 , 211 . ), included in BN:SWI in ), included . 61 Regarding the light cadmium cadmium light the Regarding ], furiously slashing it three it three slashing ], furiously . “What it me made real . “What , Newman had just com just had , Newman New Republic , 209–10 . viewer ­viewer ” ( 1957 . ), ), - - - - elements, and it becomes a narrative art instead of a visual art.” of avisual instead art anarrative itelements, and becomes of of dance akind he creates and of of choreographer space, akind is a painter you it. You see as look at totality it you its it. . Otherwise, would see move and in that apainting doing in concerned constantly was “I totality: achieved thus and painting conventional in found rules compositional of aesthetic systems closed the transcended works his that thought Newman or one of equilibrium, mism of dyna asense either establish to other each against pulling and pushing shapes of were of parts, not meshed composed paintings his Because parts. of relating Untitled 2, 1950 2, Untitled as works portioned pro oddly such for making motivations about his when asked that, Recall man? for me.” come life to thing the made stroke That making. thereno picture was for myself time first for the .Ifelt that surface. the filled Ihad that realized “I he said: axis, central its along he painted that band red 64 63 62 same. the is no longer time first the for seen (or now being object person) the But of course aspectator. onebecomes that see: to onebegins that then only it is which in asense even is There oraborted. ended is been have ormay was relationship the whatever and orforestalled, broken is been have ormay was thing of the grip the whatever back, onesteps if and orout: in here.) either is One relationships human with is comparison relevant (The orless. ormore alittle, out just orpull doesn’t back step one And out. pull to create, to it threatens intimacy the destroy to us, on grip its break to work, the escape to a desire to effect in amounts this do to inclination our And it. We distance means. terms, sitional this we put it at arm’s length: appearance its about worry how it see looks, back, we step compose, Fried suggests, When choreography. or we composing of of circumvention Newman’s nificance sig ultimate the be to what Itake terms own his in Fried expressed Michael parts.” up or develop relating by build you can that “something than felt rather thing,” “a was scale But for him, scale. a human establish to trying himself, testing was Garde Art,” 272 Art,” Garde Lugano Review Lugano Not Composing,” on Notes Some 65 206 . . . . (the essay is not reprinted in Fried’s book of selected ofselected Fried’s book in reprinted not is essay (the Newman, “ Newman, Michael Fried, “Anthony Caro and Kenneth Noland: Noland: Kenneth and Caro “Anthony Fried, Michael Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” 306 Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” 306 Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, 65 Why was avoiding or canceling “picture making” so important to New to important so making” “picture or canceling avoiding was Why Discussing the work of Kenneth Noland and Anthony Caro in 1965 in Caro Anthony Noland and work of Kenneth the Discussing 63 “Picture making” referred to those traditional compositional strategies strategies compositional traditional those to referred making” “Picture ‘The Case for ‘Exporting’ Nation’s Avant- ‘Exporting’ for Case ‘The . is what composing, seeing it in compo it in seeing composing, what is and The Wild and

1 ( 1965 . . ): ): ­ Objecthood and Art in Criticism,” Art My to Introduction “An to note end an in appears cited paragraph the but criticism, art man’s handling of formal problems. offormal man’s handling New in at stake values the considers hesubtly because particular in thinking, own my for important been has 62 , Newman answered that he that answered , Newman — above all all above , 64 n 46 ). Fried’s account of Newman’s painting painting ofNewman’s ). Fried’s account - 64 - - - - , - - Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 373 apolis: University of Minnesota Press, forthcoming). Press, ofMinnesota University apolis: (Minne Modernism Bergson, Matisse, Formalism: Affective Against Cronan, also See section. next the and this in address ofpictorial mode ofNewman’s interpretation the for analysis ofmy implications the fully more understand me helped that conversations for Todd Cronan I thank 67 66 . . Common Knowledge 374 Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” 306 Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” 306 Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, the sublime: loss of selfhood to something bigger and nobler than we are.” nobler bigger and than something to of selfhood loss sublime: the called be to begs that experience but a brief is intense effect the and of ourselves, sense our displaces and “invades zips artist’s “poise” of the bodily the that gested in reciprocity. Scale is this balance between self and other. and self between balance this is Scale reciprocity. in of self- process for any condition the is closedness and of openness simultaneity The us. to closed is that object integral an as separateness its maintaining also might), person while (asattention another I Onement yourself from the experience. the from yourself remove you which in situation acosmetic it becomes of thing, sort that all and eyelashes the examining there stand to have you .If contact. make personality own your and of aperson personality entire the which in reaction It’s atotal at details. looking You start to have don’t really impact. immediate an have you time, first the for aperson see you When of not- meaning the explained Newman that relationships human to analogy an with it was Likewise, new category of experience.” new category theof painting the of reflection that that realized] [I place. And the space, the created that artwork the and viewer the between space the filling back, reflecting painting on the shining light the viewer] color was on the [that the realized “I recounted: Sublimis Heroicus of Vir front glow ared in in bathed aviewer who on seeing Mel Bochner, artist the by offered is position second gaze.) The of the dispersion lateral despite the body cohesion of and the integrity the establish bands the which in produce, one to labored Ihave the to opposite exactly is account (This of a discussion who, Peter in Schjeldahl, critic art the by is provided Newman’s about first howThe work. view to positions thetical, individuals. between (sometimes) obtain that intimacy of those to analogous relationships when it entails “move[s]ing totality” its in apaint Newman’s (not On subject terms, object) regard. the of your you from distances that thing real over the a mask about appearances, a worry cosmetic, is result the terms: compositional in things seeing like is eyelashes Examining To highlight the stakes of this analysis, consider two competing, if not if anti competing, consider two analysis, of this To stakes the highlight is not literally another individual, its totality both solicits aviewer’s solicits both totality its individual, another not is literally , the painting as the subject reflected on the viewer, thewholly a was on reflected subject the as painting , the ­composing: 66 69 . Because Schjeldahl allows himself to identify so so identify to himself allows Schjeldahl Because - . Shiff, “To Create Oneself,” 85 “To Oneself,” Create Shiff, in quoted as Museums, Art University Harvard tape, 15 May University, Harvard Newman, nett 69 .newyorker.com/archive/ Yorker New Abstractions,” Majestic 68 . . discovery or self- ­discovery Mel Bochner, discussion session, symposium on Bar on symposium session, discussion Bochner, Mel Peter Schjeldahl, “Lord Barney: Barnett Newman’s Newman’s Barnett Barney: “Lord Schjeldahl, Peter Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir 2002

creation that is grounded grounded is that ­creation Although a painting like like apainting Although / 67 04 –86 / 15 ; emphasis added. ; emphasis / , April 15 , April 020415 craw_artworld. , , 1992 2002 , audio , , sug , www self self 68 - - - - - ,

responsibility that is entailed whenever one’s entailed is position that subject responsibility the to resistance of willful (object) expression or it avoidance; an evasion is an is (subject) painting viewer and between divide the obliterating as man’s canvases New of seeing illusion, or the dream, The impossible. is access unmediated so really is the other truth: or realization for amore difficult compensate generated to be may for union, or desire a belief, such that Consider pretation. inter after.) alternative But really consideran was of what Newman evaluation critical the to done have much damage claims Newman’s work generally. (These for claimed often experience or transcendent of sublime kinds the produce to power of art the in belief authentic an by a moment such underwritten is that It seem might painting. the amoment with of union experience to it claims ing — Sublimis Heroicus Vir in himself loses Schjeldahl, by resented address of notion pictorial any secure can that of separation sense this it only is other. an And one facing as position his acknowledges thus and painting”) of self the (“the artwork the and viewer the between separation the recognizes Bochner artist, say. to an has As what Bochner identification Schjeldahl’s powerful two. the between no difference up being winds there it, with merging if as of himself, sense his he loses that painting the completely with 70 Idon’t understand. quite something is self the for disdain .the selves other to relation in moves also which of self sense the in involved being of problem our this And separate. also are who others, to connection of his time same at the and individuality, own of his separateness, own of his totality, own of his feeling the me, it did as someone, of giving impact the has painting my that I hope circumstances. contingent present our within from us, by understood, and interpreted be it instead must that and would, person another more than any understanding, our to upnot automatically itself open does painting the that acknowledge necessarily must viewer the position, that separateness quoting on this point: on this quoting statement Newman’sbears own communication. of our possibility the generates that separateness it our is that recognition more demanding of, the avoidance an to, and areaction effect other, in and is self between gap the bridge to her desire 257–58, 71 . . Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester” ( Sylvester” David with “Interview Newman, Stanley Cavell and Literary Skepticism Literary and Cavell Stanley Fischer, Cf. There is another way to interpret the experience of a viewer who, as rep who, of as aviewer experience the interpret to way another is There ellipsis in original. — — is not lost, but rather maintained, while facing another. For, facing while in maintained, but not rather is lost, does it indicate a disdain for autonomy? adisdain itdoes indicate 71 . 1965 , 77 ), . 70 A viewer’s wish for immediacy, for immediacy, Aviewer’s wish — contrasts sharply with with sharply contrasts — the sense of one’s sense the h i behold in who other, and and other, - - - -

Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 375 74 73 72 nal Jour Art Oxford Painting,” Revolution, “Action, (Orton, total” not was failure that that glimpsed painters action .the aclass[,] it as to available be to seem moment, that at did not, proletariat the redefine would which action cal - politi the that fact the for level symbolic at the pensate and the in happened not had that change ofradical ity possibil the about painting was Rosenberg, for painting, [December News Art Painters,” Action American “The Rosenberg, (see terms these in painters” of“action ofagroup cation logically determined at its core, if it even has a core, acore, has it even if core, at its determined logically ideo as self the .regard critics cultural “Many notes: 75 . . . . Common Knowledge 376

14 Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester,” 259 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester,” 257 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, On this point, Shiff, in his study of Brice Marden, Marden, ofBrice study his in Shiff, point, this On 1940 Fred Orton interprets Harold Rosenberg’s identifi Rosenberg’s Harold interprets Orton Fred , no. 2 , no. s. . . . [Although] action painting could not com not could painting action .[Although] s. [ 1952 1991 Abstract- “Abstract- moderator,the three: proffered Motherwell, Robert done at midcentury. being of painting kinds the naming sium of artists and critics held 35 at Studio critics and of artists sium three- a During identity? one’ssocial from self superficial constant one’s feeling a relation to meeting another person.” another one’s meeting to arelation feeling from really, different, “nowas time first for the artwork an of facing “impact” the that thought and thing” particular “a be to very apainting considered Newman Self-­evidence Newman’s of his own “terrible and constant” self. constant” and “terrible own of his works render the “terrible and constant” self of the viewer evident to him- or him- to evident viewer of the self constant” and “terrible renderworks the his that though, implies, also he suggested that name The no proof required. with or manifest, conspicuous, present, actually is which that it connotes usage, Newman’s in but, truths, denote to axiomatic unprovable yet undeniable used himself.” he’s he’s knows “He so achieves: there, of aware artwork the complete that space of sensation the or her placewithin onlooker’s of his sense the by produced is autonomy. of her own her would yield a recognition recognition That paintings his of facing a viewer’s he hoped experience that though, time, same at the tant; usually accompanied them. accompanied usually that anxiety and of struggle stories the with along identities, individual cultivated critics art and artists many conformism, fifties’ to resistance of their part As ture. one’s by imparted cul model of identity areadymade accept to pressure constant ity might seem to be just another artificial construct. artificial another just be to seem might ity individual that much so so determined, culturally tended be to stories the as just ]: ]: ]: ]: 22 3 ). –23 As an alternative approach, Newman concerned himself with the discovery discovery the with himself concerned approach,Newman alternative an As , 48 73 Objectionist.” Newman counterproposed “Self- counterproposed Newman ­Objectionist.” –50 Newman worried about the problem of achieving one’s problem the about under the ofself worried achieving Newman ). Orton notes: “Action “Action notes: ). Orton 74 1930 . . But those identities tended to be group identities, identities, group tended be to identities But those - - - - - s Museum of Modern Art, 2006 Art, ofModern Museum Retrospective Marden Brice in Looking,” of Myself “Force Shiff, ard else’s eye.” Rich someone for image an identity, a social a type, becomes individual Each discourse. social the by established boundaries within only operate It can start. self- then induce, forces those states emotional and of behavior patterns ofthe ‘expression’ an forces, ofsocial a product is individual the If process. the frame and experience all forming self- experientially than rather constructed is self the that thinking to inured We become have essence. an America 76 77 Wittenborn Schultz, 1950 Schultz, Wittenborn York: (New America in Artists Modern ed., Motherwell, ert . . For an edited transcript of the symposium, see Rob see symposium, ofthe transcript edited For an Exhibition of the United States of States United the of Exhibition “From Newman, expression will have been compromised from the the from compromised been have will ­expression 76 ” ( But how to distinguish the authentic authentic the But how distinguish to — 1965 in 1950 in or, self- if Expressionist; Abstract Symbolist; Symbolist; Abstract ­Expressionist; ), in BN:SWI ), in forming, that social institutions filter filter institutions social that ­forming, , the conversation turned to to turned conversation , the 72 75 Relationships are impor are Relationships , ed. Gary Garrels (New York: (New Garrels Gary , ed. ), ), ­evident.” 9 , –22 187 ), ), 34 . . . 77 The term is is term The day sympo ­day Plane Image: A Image: Plane ------­ there might be an even more fundamental condition: more even fundamental an be might there suggested Sylvester David Newman, with interview his other. of In the edgment his. authentically is that both establish their own self- own their establish both Newman’s paintings address, of modes pictorial and scale their Through herself. 78 merely than more mean would things such sharing And separateness. aworld sharing mean would ings] paint of Newman titles are recall, [which, a“now” and a“here” sharing acceptance so. That being of its acceptance at people looking of photograph two the it. Recall to relation in places our establish to us allows and of separateness condition our respects simultaneously space pictorial His for acknowledgment. acondition also is Sylvester, separateness from that some prompting with recognized, Newman Newman step. important an is of others otherness of the acceptance the And themselves. than world other the in entities other are there that fact the in resentment for cause dofind people Obviously, oneself. from presence a separate is which painting, of the otherness of the a sense has also One being. one’s in own of exhilaration sense a certain one’s being, own of valuing Sylvester . there. Iwas sense that in because painting the Imade me when to he relates sense that In he’s of himself. aware he’s so there, he knows that of place: asense man give should painting Newman of “presentness” in modernist art, poignantly suggests that suggests poignantly art, modernist in of “presentness” adiscussion in Palermo, Charles lines, these Along of relationship. constitutive as itself divide once we the embraced have it them, to or expressing nicating of commu others, or world with experience our of sharing prospect the from results Perhaps exhilaration it. the Why? by “exhilarat[ed]” becoming and being” other the and self the between how look to but also painting Newman obliquely at Cathedra looking individual another and himself with time this pose, the restaged soon 1958 in at Newman’s retrospective . Newman, “Interview with David Sylvester,” 257–58 Sylvester,” David with “Interview Newman, I have suggested that the achievement of self is a precondition for acknowl aprecondition is of achievement self the that suggested I have Note that Sylvester emphasizes not just the “otherness of others” but the but the of others” “otherness the not just emphasizes Sylvester Note that : I think that one does get the feeling in front of your paintings paintings of your front in feeling the get onedoes that : Ithink : Yes. : : One thing that I am involved in about painting is that the the that is painting about in involved Iam that thing : One 78 . That picture shows each of us not only how not look to of at only each us shows a picture . That evidence and make evident to each viewer the self self the viewer each to evident make and ­evidence — — sharing even our finitude and our and our finitude our even sharing is a positive step toward “valuing one’s own “valuing toward step apositive is : the image was so important to him that he that him to important so was image : the

with others . — insights with me. with insights 79 the willingness to face a divide a divide face to willingness the . 79 . I thank Mark Schlesinger for sharing this and other other and this sharing for Schlesinger Mark I thank Vir Heroicus Sublimis Heroicus Vir - , taken , taken - -

Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 377 are created through this analysis. this through created are that ofacknowledgment forms particular the delineate to self- beholder- the in obtains that of acknowledgment structure the reveals 81 80 . Palermo, . Palermo, Common Knowledge 378 reflexive analysis, and that a crucial task remaining is is remaining task crucial a that and analysis, ­reflexive It might be suggested that modernism as awhole as modernism that suggested be It might Fixed Ecstasy painting relationship as a resource for its its for aresource as relationship ­painting Mark Rothko, Jackson Pollock, Clyfford Still, and other contemporaries. The The contemporaries. other and Still, Clyfford Pollock, Jackson Rothko, Mark work included by that exhibition Art of Modern a Museum Americans, Fifteen April In achieve. to whatstruggling he was failure professional own his in roots its had pessimism His understood. not had well been works vertical principles. dogmatic ative power in our lives. our power in ative acre deploying therefore and us by for one a new mode, unanticipated call may apainting else excitement Or or our apprehension them. or in toward instance, for them, to of or openness suspicions our people: in other with lives our in we experienced have some mode or form with correspondence of its virtue by us to recognizable mode of acknowledgment, for acertain or calls reveals painting Each same. the is of acknowledgment instance each It not if is as man’s paintings. of New various beholding in occur of modes acknowledgment different course, Newman’s of generally. But, works in evident of acknowledgment structure the by or expressed in given is relationships meaningful of such structure The another. one to of them experience our expressing together, them acknowledging together them to subjected being era of concentrating state power. state ofera concentrating an in possibilities models for human unwitting become artists which through of freedom” image Newman’s a“utopian work that projects argues Lewis Adrian totalitarianism.” and capitalism state end of “the all properly would mean paintings one even of his understand to that replied artist the paintings, of his 1948 in Rosenberg Harold When Conclusion edgment man’s scale sibility of an open society, of an open world, not of a closed institutional world.” world, open of not an society, institutional open of aclosed of an sibility it represent[s]that world open an sense the in painting, open “an was painting his he added that context, another and the other thin thin 1950other 2, on some level, Untitled the that, and thought Newman , 187 — 80 . — might facilitate the end of any social organization that is based on based is that organization social end of any the facilitate might think of it now as a form of life centering on modes of acknowl on modes centering of of it life now aform as think 81 — or rather, in the failure of professionals to recognize recognize to of professionals failure the or rather, in — are we all as 84 — challenged Newman to explain the meaning meaning the explain to Newman challenged I would add that coming to understand New understand to coming Iwouldadd that 84 83 82 (Keele, UK: Keele University Press, 1996 Press, University Keele UK: (Keele, resenting and Imagining America Rep in Conventions,” Cultural American and sionism, to that extent, .[it] pos denote does the extent, that to . . . Newman, “Interview with Emile de Antonio,” 308 Antonio,” de Emile with “Interview Newman, Newman, “ Newman, Adrian Lewis, “Barnett Newman, Abstract Expres Abstract Newman, “Barnett Lewis, Adrian — but would also mean mean also but would 1952 ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 251 ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers , Newman was excluded from excluded from was , Newman , ed. Philip John Davies Davies John Philip , ed. . ), ), 160 –69 . 82 In In . 83 ------

piece of work.” my isolated an toward attitude innocent adirect, possible make can .that exist do public not view. yet from conditions . . .The time at this canvases my ‘small’ of all withdraw to decided have “I that him to wrote and Ossorio Alfonso from contemporary “extremists” in painting. in “extremists” contemporary tled 1,tled 1950 ( tion or or feeling thought behavior in transformation it lead if to is abeneficial to effect, take to is critique But that if out he Newman singled which show, of the review in alengthy in insult the compounded he wouldbecome, that of champion Newman’s not yet Hess, the work Thomas him. wounded rebuff 51 85 space- Inever out set it paint to “that clear,” said, make to want “I Newman important. are it, a place within establish to a viewer allow and space, create paintings his which in ways various the although of space, a sensation of experiencing matter BN:SWI 86 can be seen to criticize our usual evasions of knowing ourselves (and others). ourselves of knowing evasions usual our criticize to seen be can paintings his address, amode to of pictorial respond for how viewers possibilities paintings. not the who failed, had viewers the it put, Simply was address. of modes pictorial paintings’ the not acknowledging ofsequence viewers viewers to whom the criticism is directed, accept its truth. its accept directed, is criticism whom to the viewers paintings of his face the it in achieving in success it achieving in of Newman’s test success The what matters. is which a given response is evaluated. A ‘failure to know’ know’ to A ‘failure evaluated. is response a given which of terms in acategory but response agiven of description a not It is success. its by as failure its by equally denced 87 , no. 2 , no. . . . - evi is ofacknowledgment concept “The notes: Cavell Art News Art Meet,” Extremes US “Where Hess, Thomas Newman, “Letter to Alfonso Ossorio” ( Ossorio” Alfonso to “Letter Newman, — Insofar as Newman’s work is understood as an attempt to transform the the transform to attempt an as Newman’s as work understood is Insofar domes per se. I am, I hope, involved in much more.” in involved Ihope, Iam, se. ­domes per ( , the critique must be acknowledged as valid. To a just valid. as acknowledged more be dois so than must critique the 1952 198 . ): ): BNF 16 –19 ,

39 65 86 –66 Newman may have understood that their failure was acon was failure their that understood have may Newman ) — . paintings vertical thesequence narrow of of first the — — if, that is, it is to lead to authentic communica it lead to is, is authentic to that if, exclusion despite his 1953 85 Soon after, Newman bought Unti back Newman after, Soon ), in in ),

88 263 Acknowledging,” and (“Knowing ablank” not is emptiness Spiritual acoldness. exhaustion, an acallousness, indifference, an aconfusion, something, of presence the is acknowledge’ to A‘failure ablank. thing, ofsome absence an ofignorance, apiece mean just might — . Newman, “ Newman, lies in whether or not we, the or not whether the we, in lies — as the chief theorist of theorist chief the as 88 That “much more” more” “much That ‘Frontiers of Space,’” 250 ofSpace,’” ‘Frontiers — or rather, our or rather, our –64 — 87 - - -

. ).

- Schreyach • Barnett Newman’s “Sense of Space” 379