Designs in Glass
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DESIGNS IN GLASS BY TWENTY-SEVEN CONTEMPORARY ARTISTS • STEUBEN . I TWENTY-SE VE N CONTE:\I POHAH Y ARTI ST S THE C OLLE C TIO N O F DE S IG r s I N G LA SS BY TW EN T Y - SEVEN C O N T EM POR A R Y A RTI S T S • S T EUBEN G L ASS I Nc . NE W Y O R K C IT Y C OPYl\ I G H T BY S T EU B EN GLA SS I NC. JA NUA l\Y 1940 c 0 N T E N T s Foreword . SA \l A. L E w 1so 1-1 N Preface tHANK J E WE TT '> l ATll ER, Jn. Nature of the Collecl ion . J o 11 N \I . GATES Numbt·r T l IOMAS BENTON C ll HISTIAN BEH.AHD . 2 MUlHll EAD BONE :J J EAN COCTEAU 'I- J OllN STEUA HT CURRY •• SA LVADOR DA LI (> G IORG IO DE C HllU CO 7 AND 11E DEHAIN s HAOUL D Uf<'Y !I EH!C G ILL 10 DUNCAN G HA NT 11 .! Oll N G HEGOl\Y 12 .! EAL II GO 1 :1 PETEH ll UHD I I MOISE KISLING I ii LEON KROLL . I(> MAHI E LA URENCIN 17 f<'EH NA 'D LEGEH I S ARIST IDE MA LLLO L H> PAUL M.ANS llL P 20 ll ENIH MATISSE 2 1 !SA M U 'OGUClll . 22 G EOHG IA O'KEEf<'FE 2:J .! OSE •!AH IA SEHT 21 PAVEL T C ll E LI T C ll EW . 2a IDN EY WA G H 2(> G HANT WOOD 2'1 THE EDITION OF THESE PIE CES I S LIMITED • S TE U BEN WILL MAKE S I X PIECES FROM EAC H OF THESE TWENTY- SEVEN DESIGNS OF WHICH ONE WILL BE RETAINED BY S TEUBEN FOR ITS PERMANENT COLLECTION THE REMAINING FIVE ARE THUS AVAILABLE FO R SA LE F 0 R E w 0 R D SA!li A . LEWISOHN This is a most important enterprise. To connect the creative artist with every-day living is a diff icull lash. Whal a chasm there appears lo be between the two and how perplexing lo bring lhem together. To use the designs of important artists of today in transforming glassware into OBJETS o' ART is lo lake an important step in solving this problem, and no one who sees this exhibition can but be impressed with the interest ing result. Artists and artisans have combined lo create a unique product. iVIy congratulations go lo the organizers of this exhibition. p R E F A c E FR ANK J E W E TT M A TH E R , JR. Director and Curator , J\1useum of 1-1i sloric A rl Princelon University A work of art may be thought of as a fo rm which has found a fi t ma teri al or as a ma teri al which has fo und a fit form. Thus a J\ I ichelangelo conceives the sta tue a pre-existing in th"! ma rbl e. It was this kind of a thought LhaL came Lo the guiding spirits of Lh e histori c Corning Glass \\forks wh en they p roduced a glass of extra ordinary hardness and transparency. IL was a very fin e materi al whi ch seemed Lo ask fo r form s more orn a le than the skillfu l glass blowers co uld supply. Accordingly upwa rd of a score of distinguished artists were asked to decorate and in some cases Lo design pieces of the new glas . The choice of artists was most ca tholic. I t comprised invelerale academi cians and surrea lists, cubist and celebrators of the American scene ; sculptors, pain ters, and an etcher. F rom contributors so vari ously disposed one would expec t dis cord a nt res ults. One find s on Lh e contrary a surprising harmony. Matisse and Pa ul Manshi p even enhance each other, while M a ri e Laurencin li ves comforta bly with Grant Wood, and the professionally fri vo lous Haoul Dufy fraternizes with the professionall y seri ous Thomas Benton. Now this unexpec ted ha rm ony is largely due Lo the pressure of the materi al upon the artistic form , and here limiting conditions were wisely imposed . All pi ece were to be blown . This excluded elaborate shapes in favor of shapes broadl y globular, cylin drica l or coni ca l. Next, such facil e methods as enameling and etching were ba rred . Every thing was Lo be cul in the glass, itself. The cutting could vary from a mere scratch. a technique cha rmingly illustrated in the p lates by Berard a nd Noguchi, Lo deep intagli o. J\ losL of the con tributors have chosen t his laLLer technique as traditional a nd ri cher. By a n optical reversa l of actua l relations this culling in depth is seen as a relief, which accord ing to the hand li ng of the edges a nd the surfacing may seem high (.\ laillo l" s vase). or low (Benton"s pla lc). What the observer actua ll y secs is a lra nslucenL cameo in grays again st a background transparent, but variously so, being fu ll of rcnccli ons or even iridescences. Now the sim ples t course is simply Lo decorate one side of t he vase trea ting it as if it were opaque. !\los t of t he artists who have joined in Lhi experiment have fo ll owed thi s conservative way. The results vary from single classica l fi gures in what one may call the Wedgwood trad iti on lo el a borate a nd fairl y pi ctoria l designs uch as those of C hirico a nd P cler .1 lurd. Along either lin e excell ent resul ts and some less excell ent have been achieved . T his. however, is Lo treat the decoration of ho ll ow glass a two-dimensiona l. Two a udacious spirits, Dufy a nd '.\la nship. ha ve not been con tented with this simplifi cation of the problem . Sin ce t he vase is l1·i dimcn ional a nd tra nspa rent, they decoral c most of Lh e surface, usin g the transparency ins tead of ignoring it. What this means practi ca ll y is that features on the further side a rc seen well behi nd t he pa rt of the decora tion neares t lhe eye, in curious re1·ersals. fo reshorlenings. and more or less veiled. IL is a fo rm of dccorali on lha t cha nges infinitely as the vase is turned or the level of the eye is ra ised or lowered. I Jere we seem Lo find possibi lities of design which a rc proper lo glass only. IL seems Lo me that Manship of a ll the con tributors has mos t fu ll y realized that he was dea li ng wilh a new problem and must find a new id iom in order Lo solve it, and whi le I by no means deprecate olher more conventiona l methods, I am read y Lo guess that the l1i sLoria 11 of intaglio design in transparent glass i likely Lo awa rd pi oneer honors Lo Mr. Manship. It bas seemed better lo describe tbe special technical problems in volved in tbis interesting experiment than to express my personal preferences. In general, while there are a few bad lapses which the spectator must find for himself, from glass idiom the general excellence of the work is gratifying, indeed surprising, since the distinguished contributors are after all novices as designers for glass. Finall y I take my hat olf to the ex traordinary craftsmen who can cut glass so that twenty different styles may easily be distinguished. They should be encouraged to sign with the artist, as at all times the reprod uctive engraver has set his "sculpsit" on the same line with the artist's "invenit". The obvious interest of this exhibition as an exten sion of activities generally utili tarian needs no emphasis. It is symp tomatic of much that is goin g on to make America as good to look at as it is good to live in. THE NA T U RE OF THE CO LLE CT IO JOH N M. GATES Direclor Steuben Glass Three years ago I met Henri l\fatisse in P aris. I had with me several photographs of large engraved pieces whi ch we were then showin g al the Paris Exposition, and, lo my delight, I fo und that he was keenl y interes ted in them. I later look one of the pi eces lo show to him so that he might see the obj ec t itself. He then told me that he would like lo make a design fo r Steuben, to be engraved in crystal. Greatly enco uraged by Matisse's interes t, and confident that crystal could be the medium of high artistic ex pression, I then set about with Steuben's liberal and whole-h earted backing to gather the greatest contemporary artists in E urope and in America into a sin gle group for the purpose of prov in g that conviction. For three years I sought out these artists and enlisted their interes t and their geniu toward the creation of thi unique collection.