Florida International University FIU Digital Commons

Frost Art Museum Catalogs Frost Art Museum

10-21-1988 William Tucker The Art Museum at Florida International University Frost Art Museum The Patricia and Phillip Frost Art Museum

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/frostcatalogs

Recommended Citation Frost Art Museum, The Art Museum at Florida International University, "William Tucker" (1988). Frost Art Museum Catalogs. 59. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/frostcatalogs/59

This work is brought to you for free and open access by the Frost Art Museum at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Frost Art Museum Catalogs by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Gaia, 1985 bronze

87" x 55" x 50" Edition of 3 Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

William Tucker

October 21 - November 16, 1988

Essay by Dore Ashton

Organized by Dahlia Morgan for

1J[Ju® &[[� D¥U0Il®®0Il 0UiJ AT FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

University Park Miami, Florida 33199 (305) 554-2890 Ackrwwledgements

The Art Museum at Florida International University is pro­ exhibition. ud to have this William Tucker exhibition. Mr. organized First and foremost I would like to thank the Lannan Foun­ Tucker's twenty-five year contribution to art on both sides dation for their most generous grant. Their enlightened ofthe Atlantic is distinguished by a vigorous evolution that leadership and support made an exhibition and publica­ is both of his times and a beacon to other artists working tion of this scope possible. In addition, the National En­ in the plastic arts. His work has both a unique physical dowment for the Arts in Washington, D.C., and the Florida presence and very strong conceptual underpinnings that Arts Council in Tallahassee have recognized the will engage our audience on multiple levels. This exhibi­ significance ofthis exhibition by much needed grants. Their tion was conceived as part of our ongoing mission to in­ support has been essential to organizing the exhibition and troduce prominent individual artists to our growing South to publishing this extensive catalogue. I would also like to Florida community. acknowledge the contribution ofour Student Government Our small staff has been forthcoming with a tremendous Association, and the Office of Academic Affairs who of­ amount of effort. Particularly I would like to thank Mr. fered crucial support to The Museum. William Humphreys, Museum Coordinator, who par­ This exhibition, however; would not have happened without ticipated in every aspect ofthe organization, planning, and the cooperation of the David McKee Gallery in New York publication ofthe catalogue and notices for this exhibition; and other museums and private individuals who are listed as well as Ms. Linda Cole, who handled the details involv­ as Lenders to the Exhibition. ed with correspondence, shipping, and publications sur­ rounding the show; and Ms. Karen Goodson, who dealt efficiently with the financial aspects and records of this Dahlia Morgan, Director

Special Ackrwwledgements Florida International University

Modesto A. Maidique Adam Herbert President Vice President, North Miami Campus Judith Stiehm Doris Sadoff Provost and Vice President, Assistant Vice President for Ad­ Academic Affairs ministrative Affairs Richard]. Correnti Walter Strong Vice President, Student Affairs Vice President, University Relations and Development Paul Gallagher Vice President, Business and William Maguire Finance Chairman, Visual Arts Department

Art Museum Staff

Dahlia Morgan Karen Goodson Director Administrative Assistant William B. Humphreys Curator/Coordinator of University Collections Lendors to the Exhibition

Arkansas Art Center, Liule Rock, AK Edward R. Broida Trost, Los Angeles, CA Dorothy Ellron, New York, NY Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami, FL David McKee Gallery, New York, NY Metropolitan Museum ofArt, New York, NY William Tucker, New York, NY and various otherprivate collections, anonymously

Untitled, 1984, charcoal on paper, 45" x 30", Private collection, New York Portrait ofK, 1975, wood 6'9" x 10'12" x 10", Collection: Edward R. Broida Trust, Los Angeles William Tucker and The Mind's Desire by Dore Ashton

A few years ago, in a preface to a William Tucker exhibi­ case, they launched themselves with immense energy in tion in Rome, a fellow artist, Carlo Battaglia, used as an a host ofdirections, discovering moment by moment how epigraph a resounding quotation from Lucretius: many alternatives there could be to the old master's vision.

Because, the all matter meant to do throughout body Tucker's own discoveries at first took the direction, as An­ so must rise, and courses each limb, pushed, through drew Forge wrote in 1972 of"an unbroken meditation on so that with the mind's desire follow. it, may the nature of modern sculpture." That meditation had the Nature of II, V. (On Things 266-268) taken him back to the early modern experiments with This wise recourse to a tradition is still apposite. Lucretius disembodiment-the first vanguard in Russia and France understood a sequence that is not only in the nature of that eschewed palpable mass-as well as to the unique things, but even more, is a fairly constant description of modern master, Brancusi, who had never abandoned it. certain artistic temperaments. William Tucker's for in­ Tucker experimented with reduction in the modern tradi­ stance. During his more than twenty-five years ofintense tion, working at times with clearlinearprinciples that moved work, Tucker has again and again probed the wellsprings toward geometry. Even in his early, seemingly geometric of his drive to make things, allowing for that surge of ris­ works-steel structures ofrectilinear or triangular sections, ing matter that is the bodily source ofinspiration, and ex­ or sometimes curvilinear derivatives ofthe circle-Tucker amining that mysterious function called by Lucretius "the demonstrated a strong tendency to dispute the very nature " mind's desire. In the course of his inquiry (for all good ofgeometry as a group ofexternally fixed relations in space. sculpture is always an inquiry into the nature of things) In those earlier pieces in steel or fiberglass, Tucker had Tucker has often discovered aspects ofsculpture that have already begun to inquire more deeply into the perplexities fallen into desuetude. He has had the temerity to resur­ ofperception. He had begun to suspect that the sprawling rect them. floor pieces that so preoccupied the new generation were little better than reliefs, and reliefs more In the beginning Tucker was almost scientific in his ex­ belonged perhaps to the domain of than 1970 Tucker periments. He made and challenged hypotheses. He re­ painting sculpture. By was a richer of his art which he jected received ideas. He pushed his insights to extremes. formulating philosophy would state in 1975 with he realize He always knew, though, that sculpture, unlike painting, prophetic clarity. (Did how the words he wrote would his own as had some strangely homologous relation to the human bodi­ shape destiny a sculptor?) In that singular statement Tucker took the ly presence. Both the sculptural object and the one who He defined in a tradition­ creates it, or contemplates it, in some measure share a plunge: sculpture long-hallowed the free-standing object in space, subject to gravity and space; stand within it physically, although never quite men­ revealed by light. tally. (The fact is that Tucker has been everywhere in space: he has circled it, looked down into it, from within pressed up IT Tucker had the courage to revive a traditional view of it, defined it as in some and as unac­ sternly geometric ways, the nature ofsculpture, he was never to be a dupe oftradi­ in others. In the broadest countably, formlessly shifting tionalism. Like the masters he studied closely-Brancusi, sense he has been an of investigator perception.) Matisse, Picasso, and their forebear, Rodin-Tucker held Tucker's earliest exhibited works reflect a special moment in delicate balance an active intelligence and prescient in­ in British art history-a moment when the air was riven with tuition. They would never permit him to rest comfortably impatient exclamations. Something happened in Britian in a given form. Tradition was not the rigid concept that ofthe 1960s that has still not found satisfying explanation. incited rebellion in so many modernists, but rather Tucker and his fellow artists emerging from the art schools represented that part of human memory that transcend­ in the early 1960s were fired with an implacable desire ed time and place. Tradition provided the thread ofcom­ to blaze new trails. Their obstreporous rejections were wide­ munication that held the promise of meaning. Yielding, ly noted and they were promptly labeled "the new genera­ Tucker could draw upon the wealth ofsculptural tradition tion." I suppose they were definable as "new" whenjux­ without fear ofcontamination. In this I think he distinguish­ taposed with the "old" which was, of course, the single ed himself from so many others of his generation who mighty figure ofthe one 20th century British sculptor who became victims of their own rebellion; traditionalists, in had attained international acclaim: Henry Moore. In any fact, ofit. Tucker's mind's desire was not only to draw upon the im­ and circumference nowhere, and Borges to compose one agery residing in centuries of sculptural practice, but to of his wittiest essays, "Pascal's Fearful Sphere," on that draw upon his entire personal culture. This included the baffling notion. works of literature and he had known, as moving poetry Not long after he completed The Rim, Tucker felt a crav­ we see in the earliest in this exhibition, Portrait sculpture ing for that other experience endemic to the history ofhis "K". The piece is of weathered timbers; of composed art: the experience ofmass; offorms amassed through the members ofsome other lost structure blackened by time, building up ofpalpable volumes. As early as 1972 he had other associations that Tucker seized and suggesting upon spoken of"evoking the spectator's'body-experience" but made his own. In this with its piece, carefully disarrayed at that time he was thinking of the function of inhabiting. and its thrust into Tucker triangular spaces diagonal infinity, A decade later he was fully prepared to accept the spec­ his more than he it He felt way through, thought through. tator's experience as one of bodily association. The ver­ allowed the element of free association that has marked tical object, governed by gravity, is the analogue of man his work ever since to enter into and he declared, play, part­ himself, and is experienced not only psychologically, but the title, that this was no mere formal construc­ " ly through physiologically as "free standing. Tucker's wide culture tion. Even if the viewer had no of who "K" inkling was, and intellectual curiosity stood him in good stead. The great he knew that this with its boun­ certainly presence rough tradition offree-standing sculpture has no temporal boun­ daries, its and volumes, its stabili­ swelling declining uneasy daries and an overwhelming record ofbrilliant strategies ty, had some reference to the functions of psychological of renewal. In a perfectly natural step toward encounter, I think, that the word Kafka, to which sculpture. though, Tucker bought some clay-a small step toward an enormous K refers, is ofthe and a element part sculpture, significant shift in attention. From constructing to modeling and car­ if we think of Tucker's oeuvre as a meditation. The long ving requires a total re-orientation, and, in Tucker's case, year came The further a theme following Trap, exploring a courageous stance. Not that this was a total iolte-face. of immense not the anxiety suggested only by irregular, Many of the formal thoughts that had accrued in earlier toothed interior, but in the perspective that in­ slithering works were perfectly adaptable in the different approaches sists on at and the kind of hinting instability psychological Tucker now explored. uneasiness that K could describe so well. The epitome, perhaps, ofthis mood is found in the rocking motion ofthe But Tucker as the first spectator ofwhat he shaped was fac­ same as his sculpture called Fear-a portrait ofemotional turmoil which ed with the problems public. Long usage gives a that is difficult to break. The victims so often describe as a vise-like situation. language power language of modern sculpture had for so long been a language of Allusions to fear and aggression-the iron-maiden associa­ virtuality, lightness and defiance ofgravity that it required tions with the toothed appendages in several works from authentic effort to rearrange its syntax. Problems that 1975-9 -give way in the magnificent piece begun in 1979 sculptors had long contemplated had been hidden for that I believe cleared the path for Tucker's subsequent almost a century. To reveal them Tucker had to accept the moves. The Rim was constructed first in wood and only later principle ofuncertainty; the kinds ofunforseen experiences rendered in steel. Perhaps the living vitality ofwood con­ that the very act of modelling brings to the artist. tributed to the success ofthe image which, although found­ Since the is much included in Tucker's con­ ed on the eternal sign ofthe circle, has little to do with the spectator very of I here for a moment to of endless repeatability of it. On the contrary, The Rim of­ cept sculpture, digress speak another era when the was also taken into account. fers stunning paradoxes. By dividing its circular structure, spectator the an­ Tucker has already disturbed its inherent stability. Fur­ During Renaissance the astounding discoveries of cient Greek led to a kind of culture in ther, in the staggered sequence ofthe irregular extrusions, sculptures general which the citizens of Florence, for instance, were called he has made a new thing that both pierces space and to the merits ofeven the of describes it. The great tympanum the rim encloses is upon judge greatest sculptors. were no more flexible than the diaphanous, virtual, but is very much there as a plane. This They public today. They their artists to stick to their established grand, original image has other dimensions, beyond the fully expected styles. It is doubtful that the citizens would have of measurable geometric formula. Its protruding members approved Rondanini Pieta, or the that suggest the ticking-offoftime. The implicit roll ofany wheel Michelangelo's impulse motivated it. Yet, he was, in his own time, "divine," as engages the mind in the conundrums of mobility versus they called him, and his were ac­ stability; ephemeral versus eternal. It is not hard to imagine contemporaries automatically corded lesser stature. this sculpture as an incitement to the kind ofpuzzling that led Pascal to talk of a circle whose center is everywhere One ofthem, Giambologna-a Flemish artist who had been The Trap, 1976, steel, 55" x 120", Collection of the Artist, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York drawn to Florence probably because of its remarkable, ly associating. As the spectator regards the richly and flourishing sculptural activity-was appreciated but not un­ sometimes roughly modeled surfaces, he not only feels, duly, and still today is mentioned in art history texts with through empathy, the nature ofthe sculptural movement, slighting disdain. Yet Giambologna undertook a sculptural but he enters the activity by moving, scanning, visually problem apparently for its own sake. In the Accademia in organizing his visceral first impressions. The first adjec­ Florence his full-scale terra-cotta maquette (with bits of tive that struck many that saw the Gymnast series in an im­ " straw still showing) for three figures spiralling upward in portant exhibition in 1987 was "powerful. The great force great vertical thrusts, stands some fifteen feet high, with which the sculptures met the ground and sprung up breathtaking in the evidence of an accomplished artist's from it, and the feeling ofmonumentality, bespoke Tucker's will to surpass himself; to penetrate and tame a space in shaping power. which a giant, Michelangelo, had left so little room. This *** maquette is far more affectingthan the finished piece known as "The Rape of the Sabines." The curious thing is that I don't know ifTucker set out to portray the gods and titans Giambologna had not titled it. That remained for an art as such, or if the naming of them helped to shape them. historian. For him, it quite evidently was a need to tackle (But doesn't everything one has ever known or lived help?) a problem-three active human figures in a narrow vertical I do know that I immediately thought of these single and space. singular figures as chthonic. Such gods are near, and from the earth in and rise from it with titanic I mention this only because I think it is important to take (chthonos Greek) effort. These unlike others on into account the ambition ofa sculptor to surpass himself prodigious sculptures any the contemporary horizon into force the fallen and fashion a corporal thing that can literally embody his brought ofsolid revived them feelings. Although Tucker instinctively selected figures long powers sculpture, them, brought up out ofa remote past. In their cumbersome call familiar to him (such as the truncated triangle, and the might they our of of These diagonal extension against a vertical axis) for his new tur­ upon capacity memory, analogy. lumpy accretions ofmatter, invested with life the hand ning, the mere fact that he was adding matter to an armature by shaping ofthe who has fashioned them from the inside out modified the entire enterprise. The first few works in the sculptor and from the are to us, while Guardian group already suggested Tucker's desire to ground up, uncannily present yet definition. repossess mass and define its contours through irregular defying precise and subtle gradations of light. All the edges in the seem­ IfTucker calls them Gaia or Ourarws we know them to be ingly emphatic figures in space are carefully softened, car­ in the realm of legend where, of all characteristics, the rying the eye around. Profiles are made ambiguous by the capacity for metamorphosis is pre-eminent. And metamor­ insistence ofsurface modulation that carries with it shadow. phosis occurs in many ways in these works. First there are Guardian IIlurches into real space only to be confronted the associations evoked by a slight detail such as a fold here with an invisible wall. A plane, like an open palm profer­ or a bend there, a bump or a slight hollow, a shift from a red to ward off disaster, presses up against that wall and vertical to a diagonal axis taking place deep within the bulk, indicates to the spectator that resistance is a part of the the hulk of the presence. I must call it a presence rather sculptural meaning, the other part being the invisible tradi­ than a form because in these gods, Tucker has made total tional quadrature of sculpture in-the-round. use ofthe essentially circuitous vision in which, with each It is in the character ofsculpture in-the-round to reveal itself step, the overall contour changes, and no two sightings (for only in a circuit. That is, the spectator can only experience they are as mysterious as sightings from the crow's nest the whole while circumnavigating. Each aspect opens out of a wandering ship) are ever alike. One step back and to another, and the various axes are sensed only as the eye everything changes. (One ofTucker's most moving earlier and body move. In order to make an immediate impact, sculptures in timber was called "Howe of the Hanged " the sculptor must make decisions about major and minor Man, an obvious allusion to Cezanne who had observ­ forms. He must struggle to attain some first general shape ed, as he sat day after day before the same outdoor motif, that will enunciate the character ofthe work from all its view­ that with one slight turn of his head everything changed.) ing points. In the Gymnast sculptures, which followed, As the spectator circles these solid beings he assimilates Tucker sought in each case a dominant action, such as lean­ many disturbing shapes that in sum recall human attitudes. ing, stretching, arching, bending. These were not represen­ Ouranos at times feels like a great foot cleaving to the earth, tations ofthe human figure making certain gestures. Rather, but at other times is like the twist of a titan's body. Gaia Tucker made use of the nature of the imagination which is at once amorphous and top-heavy, and alifting body that is forever allegorizing, or, as the psychologists call it, free- speaks of firm, well-shaped flesh and bodily torsion.· All Untitled, 1984, charcoal on paper, 45" x 30", Private collection, New York Guardian 11,1983, bronze, unique, 74" x 27 1/2" x 57 1/2", Collection: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York ofthe gods in the group are unsettling to the perceiver, and rive at definition. rather, loom in the their yet, they stand,or they permanency One of Tucker's most astute commentators, Norbert manufacture bestows on them. I had the occasion weighty Lynton, has pointed out that two words have long to see them first in the studio and then in a and gallery, tempered Tucker's view: physicality and visibility. was stunned to observe how much each sculpture could Works must be not just perceptible, as are all objects maintain some immutable inner identity. In the dark glade in our existence. They must be actively visible. with grassy ground of the Kroller-Muller Museum in Sculpture, Lynton says, is essentially "an art not for Holland, these gods possessed the wood as brooding, touching" : domineering forces. Their sensitively rounded bases wedd­ I do not mean that there may not be in sculpture ed them to the earth while their mass, emphasized in the an appeal to our sense of touch; I am saying that darkish, greenish patinas, created a somber ambiance both this must be done with our eyes and not at-one with nature and at odds with it. touching with the body and that it is the eyes that the The fact is that these do invoke mental sculptures many sculptor is addressing himself to. In other words, and activities and set us Tucker psychological dreaming. tangibility is the effective illusion of sculpture, just has never avoided extended metaphors. His generation, as the effective illusion of painting is space. particularly in England where such psychoanalytically In the horse is the effective il­ oriented critics as Adrian Stokes and Anton Ehrenzweig series, certainly tangibility lusion. What we see is the touch ofthe had broad contact with young artists, was well versed in everywhere sculptor the hidden functions of the mind's desire. I thought of as he presses on in his instant by instant discovery of new Ehrenzweig's discussion ofthe persistence ofthe dying god relations and new associations. The result of the activity of his hand is what the or what the as an artistic theme when I first saw these sculptures. In spectator sees, rather, "The Hidden Order of Art" he speaks of "gestalt-free sculptor's cunning has made him see--the active tense of his endeavor. structures" and open form, as essential to art, and says that the perennial theme ofthe dying god "gains its catalytic At some point the horse, or what appeared to be more horse power from its capacity to induce the critical shift ofcon­ than elbow or knee, transformed itself for the sculptor. trol to the deepest levels ofthe ego. The creative mind must Tucker was troubling himself about a new piece that in­ identify itselfwith the fate ofthe'dying god' in order to sur­ sistently looked to him like an upside-down horse's head. " render control to the powers ofthe deep. While Ehrenz­ After working the piece for a long time, he arrived at Atreus, is in the service of his weig's argument psycho-analysis, the important precursor to his most recent Daktyl intuition of the importance of the "powers of the deep" sculptures. In Atreus, once again, there is more than a hint was sharpened by his observation ofartists. The death and ofthe Elgin marbles with which all British sculptors are ac­ re-birth cycle, Eros and Thanatos, becomes the metaphor quainted. The form is anthropomorphic--perhaps a torso­ of which can so be in these creativity-one easily recognized -and touches, or as Tucker would say, "grazes" the ground struggling masses ofmatter that finally cohere in ineffability, only fleetingly, unlike Gaia and the other gods. The nature that Tucker called gods. ofstability changes. Here Tucker proposes an equilibrium *** offorces at cross-purposes: force ofgravity pulls down, force of matter struggles up. Strangely enough, many of Tucker's sculptures after the gods' cycle reduced themselves in scale and no In the most recent works ofthe Daktyl series, the tenuous longer sought the identification of real earth and yet, equilibrium is explicitly explored. The long train ofassocia­ were as allusive as ever. When I first saw a plaster tions from the river gods ofthe Parthenon to Michelangelo's model on a working stand in the studio I immediately reclining gods inevitably stir the viewer. I suspect that thought of an ancient Greek horse, perhaps on some Tucker has deliberately invoked these associations. Daktyls pediment high above my sightline. And indeed, the are not only fingers with importantjoints but they are en­ group of scupltures to follow were called horses. But dowed with a mythic origin: they were born when Cronos' they were as ambigious as ever and soon I would see a wife Rhea, in labor, dug her fingers into the earth. Dactyls bended knee, a hunched torso, and other organic are also the "feet" in the lines ofverses called dactylic in variants in their postures. As in the gods, these forms which there are one long and two short accents. (To what can not be absolutely known, but must be fully sensed. lengths does Tucker's associating go? Are the long horizon­ The fact that they hover on the edge of intelligibility is tal axes ofthe Daktyl sculptures with their two rising ends essential. The spectator is arrested by some meant to be dactylic? Does the fact that a "foot" in poetry resemblance and then struggles, as did the artist, to ar- becomes a "finger" in etymology amuse and inspire him?) Fear, 1979-1980, steel, 7'6" x 13", Collection: Dorothy Elkon, New York

In any case, the tension and torsion in Daktyllllare as much I imagine that Tucker's long preoccupation with Brancusi, the result of a complex idea as of sensuous technique. and his pilgrimage to Tirgu Jiu has had a profound influence Tucker suggests the reclining god, but there is something on his current activities. In that faraway place, so far from not at all at rest, or, if at rest, certainly resting only on a the British Museum, Tucker found an inspiring schema. miniscule invisible point beneath its rounded flanks. Again, Each of Brancusi's sculptures in that park stand free and as in the early Arc and Fear, there is a hint ofrocking, but can be grasped in their solitary tangible illusion. Yet each the grand curve ofthis figure dominates and calms. There belongs to another order that Brancusi dreamed, in which are many points of view from which a solid, blocky inner each is unto each in spacial continuum. I see Tucker's works structure can be inferred--an inner geometry that belies in a similar fictive continuum. Now he makes these mass­ the outer ambiguity produced by the quiver, the peripteries ed single forms, these bodily things in which his early idea that emanate from the irregular profiles, ofopen form is opposed to what we so carelessly call a clos­

*** ed form. But there is paradox here: In these single pieces, DaktylllI, 1986-1988, bronze, 24" x 32" x 22 If2", Edition of 6, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Tucker enabled himselfto be wholly absorbed in the core References: ofthe thing, the heart ofthe matter from which his "mind's Carlo Battaglia: "Recent Sculptures of William Tucker" desire" follows. His centered attention is a powerful func­ L'Isola, Rome, 1984 tion here. Yet, even though the flanks ofhis new creatures Andrew "William Tucker's 1970-73" breathe slowly and heave themselves up with troglodytic Forge, Sculpture 1973 deliberateness into free space, they send their energies from Serpentine Gallery, London, one to the other in a kind ofuniverse of a becoming, long William Tucker, "The Condition ofSculpture" Hayward tale of unlike other. epic implications, any Gallery, 1975 Dore Ashton is a critic, independeant curator, pro­ Anton Ehrenzweig, The Hidden Order of Art, U. of Cal. fessor of Art at The Union in New History Cooper Press, 1967 York, her books include American Art Since 1945 and About Rothko. Norbert Lynton, "William Tucker's Sculptures" Arts Council of Great Britain, 1977 The Rim, 1981, steel, 14' in diameter, collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami Atreus, 1987, bronze, 46%" x 43" x 23", Edition of 4, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York photo credit: Edwin Avril William Tucker, 1988 Interoiew with William Tucker by Dahlia Morgan and William B. Humphreys August 15, 1988

• Q • Just some general questions first.. .I noticed that your Q Right, it was to weld and things like that. That's my degree from Oxford is in history. How did you come to background actually so I have personal, first-hand ex­ be interested in art? Was that an early leaning or did perience of that type of education, You mentioned it come later in life? Moore as an influence on your work. Going back fur­ ther, have you been influenced by other sculptors A . I was always interested in drawing, and when I was at throughout the history of art? Oxford I started to take life drawing, at the Ruskin School

ofDrawing, which is part ofthe University. And at that A . Yes. Moore was an inspiration, I think, and has been time, in the middle fifties, the Ruskin School was one probably until fairly recently for practically every British ofthe few places where Americans on the GI Bill after sculptor, just in terms ofbreaking out ofquite a narrow the Korean War could study art. So there were a lot of provincial situation and becoming aware of sculpture very interesting people there. They were much more in an international sense. But in terms of being a real mature in their development as artists and through get­ influence on my work, hardly at all except to start with. ting to know some ofthem I conceived the idea for the As soon as I became aware of the possibilities of con­ first time in my life that it would be possible to be an ar­ structive sculpture, then I was influenced by Picasso, tist. I became very interested in whatever was going on by Brancusi, by Gonzalez, by Marcel Duchamp's in contemporary art. I used to take trips up to London Ready-mades. The idea that sculpture didn't have to frequently. On one of those trips I saw an exhibition of take the figure as its subject matter, that you could ac­ sculpture in Holland Parkwhich was the first time I ever tually take any object in the environment as a starting had looked at sculpture seriously. There was a show of point. And then David Smith very much. But talking Victorian sculpture, and a survey of contemporary about the late 50's, again, I thinkthat I was possibly more British sculpture-Henry Moore and younger artists like influenced, not so much by sculptors, but by the Reg Butler and Lynn Chadwick. I was so impressed by American Abstract Expressionist painters who were be­ the quality ofthe Henry Moore piece there, in relation ing shown in Europe at that time; I was tremendously to the rest ofthe work. The rest of the work seemed to impressed the first time I saw Pollock and Clyfford Still be very accessible. I felt I could do something like that and Motherwell and so forth. without any problem, but the Moore piece seemed to Q. Was it their use of spontaneous gesture that influenc­ be so masterful, it was a challenge, it was an inspiration. ed you? Q • It's interesting that one ofyour first experiences, in terms

A . but I think it wasn't the side ofyour art training was to do figure drawing. Did that Partly, really expressionist oftheir it was much more the kind of im­ stand you in good stead later on when your imagery work, physical of it and its a radical kind of changed from more constructive pieces to what you're mediacy abstraction, abstraction. You were confronted with the doing now which is definitely related? just physicali­ ty ofthe painting itself. The pictures weren't ofanything. A . At the time, there didn't seem to be any alternative in The painter who was most influential at that time in terms ofthinking about sculpture, to working from the Europe was inevitably Picasso. But Picasso's pictures figure, there was very little abstract sculpture around were always of something so there was a degree of, and even ifI'd been aware of abstraction in sculpture however large or powerful they might be, there was a to start with I don't think I would have gone straight in degree ofdistance between the painting and the spec­ and started to make abstract sculpture, I thinktimes have tator. That distance was totally collapsed by the ex­ a lot, in art education. I remember when I first changed perience of American painting. came over to North America I was really surprised how students, who were doing courses in sculpture, had Q. What is the relationship, in your work, between your never previously modeled a figure or even a head. It was drawings and your sculpture? Do you use the drawings like their first experience in sculpture to make a to test the edge line or to imagine the shadow and light construction. in relation to the texture, that type of thing? $ it' "-

:�: . . . 'I�.;.·, J

Studyfor Daktyl, 1988, charcoal on paper, 60" x 50", Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York A. I didn't really start drawing seriously for sculpture un­ an ellipse but in any case a much fuller form. So the til the late 70's and I was in a studio where I couldn't drawing began to seem about a kind of planar way of physically make the constructions. It was a clean studio looking and I wanted to get away from that. Just recent­ and I had to make the sculptures in a factory situation ly I've become more relaxed about that again and I've elsewhere. So, in order to plan the sculptures, I started gone back to drawing in the last year or so occasionally

to on to out on and as a of out and work directly the wall, draw the pieces , way working very large pieces, try­ the wall so as to figure out most of the major decisions ing to model directly entire drawings themselves. about the proportions and so forth for the piece.

• ever Q • Is that how you did the drawing for Rim that I just had Q This brings up the question ofmaquettes. Did you sent to me? do them, do you do them now?

A . Yes. Those drawings were literally elevations of the , A . Sometimes. For "The Gods" series I worked from lit­ it's.very frontal sculpture. Also, they began sculpture, tle clay lumps that were really only an inch or two high, to take on a certain amount ofillusionism as well, they I mean, that I could hold in the palm ofmy hand, or ac­ became more than plans, so that there was a degree of tually inside ofmy hand. I was trying to give the feeling involvedjust in order to give them a bit more modeling that the sculpture's relation to the spectator would be reality. And then, I guess in 1980, I got a studio in the same as the sculpture to my hand. You see, I wanted where I could work on the Brooklyn directly pieces that kind ofcomplete, round, enfolding kind offeeling themselves so I didn't need the as an in­ drawings about it. termediate area where I could work out things in ad­

vance of the The then came making sculpture. drawings Q • Right. To be more inquisitive about your working down in scale and became much more concerned with methods, once you have done your little "lump," and like and much the feeling ofwhat the sculpture would be have a sense of what you want to do, do you build an more to do with light and atmosphere. But we're still talk­ armature? ing about a time when the sculpture was basically thought

. in the five or six since ofin terms ofa kind offrontal, planar kind ofconstruc­ A What has really happened years I have with I have become tion. I never made drawings for the wood pieces. The been working directly plaster, freer less bound kind of a kind wood pieces were always made much more directly. The and by any planning, intellectual to a When steel pieces involved a lot ofplanning, so the drawings of approach making sculpture. I were useful in that process. I started, made very solid, wooden armatures, and covered them with layers ofburlap and plaster. And then

• The wood were then? Q pieces improvised built up with plaster ofparis on top ofthat. But as time has gone by, I have used very different kinds ofmaterials A • Much more so. in order to make the armature less rigid, and the shell of the sculpture in plaster eventually provides its own Q • And then you went through a period of having to plan armature. There is little need for an internal ar­ things out because of the nature of the material (with very mature once the shell really starts to build up. And so the steel) and how about now in terms of working in if you just have a shell there, you can make radical plaster, are they more improvised now? changes without worrying about anything inside. I will

A • I did a lot of drawings preparatory to the first plaster start nowadays with something quite fragile inside, like pieces. But after a while I began to feel I was exhausting some wood lath, or even bags filled with styrofoam pieces true possibilities ofexploration ofmodeling, in true draw­ and then put chicken wire over that and then plaster

ings... I deliberately stopped drawing for maybe a cou­ soaked in burlap on top ofthat. And then I build up on ple of years in order not to anticipate what was going top ofthat with a plaster called Structolite which is a slow to happen in the sculpture, The sculptures were becom­ setting plaster that is used by masons for the rough first ing, at that point, less planar, less frontal, less architec­ coat on a brick wall before applying the top coats of tural and much more to do with a central core; so that plaster. It has a filler of vermiculite or perlite which what started to happen was something much less predic­ means that it is light and you can build up with it very table, as they were more fully modeled; if you would thickly, and you can mix it very thick - it takes about take a section through the earlier plaster pieces half an hour to set up and you can mix it thick so it is anywhere it would be more or less of a rectangle, but like clay, and it is relatively much lighter than plaster with these pieces it would be perhaps a circle, perhaps ofparis. And you have much more time to work with it. Q .And then do you go at it with tools or your hands? A . The titles certainly came afterward. And I didn't have any number in mind. I usually work in a group, but that

A . and hands. If I want to the By large, just change thing oftenjust corresponds to a year's work. There are a cer­ I use an axe or a saw to cut of it radically, away pieces tain number ofpieces that seem to fall within a particular when the is set, and then start the same plaster process period oftime which also develop a theme in common. over again with the chicken wire, and then burlap and plaster, and then Structolite. Q .1 am still trying to draw you out about the relationship to the early gods and your work. Why did you pick that? Q .It has been about a year since I saw your work in per­ son at the Tate. I don't exactly remember whether the

A . Well 1 don't want to make too much of it. I have heard touch ofyour hand is visible, the fingerprints, and gouges more than enough about the titles. 1 wanted them to have A . I don't remember that there are but cer­ fingerprints, a kind ofpresence, which would be not ancient, but now, hand should be there. That is I have tainly my something immediate and physical and for which the Greeks a thing about. It disturbed me the way that sculpture themselves had no images. had become more and more to do with tools, or with pro­ cess, orjust the material, and presented in a very bar­ Q • How do you envision your relationship to your audience? ren, stark kind ofway. I just wanted to make sculpture Are you trying to communicate with them, or turn them that was really modeled, shaped by the hands. on to something, or share anything with them? Or do work for Q .In that regard, I would like to read you a quote that was you yourself? in the Dore Ashton essay that she wrote for the catalog

ofyour exhibition. She is quoting from Norbert Lynton A . Everybody works for himselfor herself. The audience and he says, "Sculpture is essentially an art not for is a very amorphous kind of quantity. There is an art " touching. I assume he means not by the spectator, and audience, and then there is an audience out there he goes on to say, "I do not mean that there may not somewhere, that you come in contact with, for exam­ be in sculpture an appeal to our sense oftouch I am say­ ple, ifyou are commissioned to do a public piece and ing that this touching must be done with our eyes and you are asked what it is about, or what is it for, or those not with the body. And it is the eyes that the sculptor kinds ofquestions that don't enable you to hide behind is addressing himself to. In other words, tangibility is the kind of alibis that artists have within the art world. the effective illusion ofsculpture just as the effective il­ The public is very anxious and eager for an explana­ " lusion ofpainting is space. I wondered what you think tion ofsomething that is essentially mysterious to them.. about that. I had a little problem with it. And my feeling has changed on that. 1 think that it is a good thing to make things that are mysterious and there A .1 went through a long period, I would say probably from should be more mysterious things around that don't have the early 70's through to the early 80's, when my an obvious function or explanation. Does that answer sculpture was very much about the difference between your question? its physicality and its opticality. Physically it was one thing

and it else. A different kind - optically implied something Q .Yes 1 am smiling. I love it you can't see that but 1 am ofstructure. 1 was very conscious of doing this - play­ smiling. ing between the optical and the physical and creating a kind of illusion of that kind. 1 certainly would have A . I would like to put that in a more positive kind of way subscribed to his remarks at that time. But since then, but find it hard without sounding pretentious about it. has become for me less and less to do with sculpture I think the experience ofthe sculpture is really diluted the optical. And that is another reason why I stopped by explaining it. I think it is diluted by the title, even if drawing for a while. Drawingjust seemed too much to I try to put a title on it to communicate a direct kind of do with the optical. experience, what happens is everyone gets off on the title and the experience may well get lost somewhere. Q .1 want to examine the sources ofyour imagery, and your way ofgoing about doing a series or not doing a series. Q .It certainly gives critics something to write about - to Did you plan on doing six, eight"gods" pieces, or were connect with. youjust dealing with the pieces themselves first, and then

the relationship ofthe pieces and their titles come after? A . Absolutely! ' <''''�' ..,'

�. A ,

'<- ,

, .

New York Drawingfor the Rim, 1981, charcoal on paper, 186" x 186", Courtesy David McKee Gallery,

to for that mat­ use and so forth. But what has in the last few Q .What has been your relationship critics, happened is that I have become more and more at home with ter? Do you feel they have understood you? years plaster, not as a material with a character in itself, but kind of A . Just speaking about the last few years with the as a soft substance that can be continuously modeled, changes that my work has gone through, superficially but it isn't articulated by a series ofseparated decisions at any rate, I would have thought that would have upset as if you were plotting and joining steel. There is observers more than it seemed to have. I am pleased something about the actual continuity oftouch, ofhandl­ with how sincerely and perceptively, some critics have ing the material, that is very primitive, and something responded to my recent work. that isn't done much anymore. And ifit has been done with the use of soft materials it is usually to give form Q .Do you have any other issues you'd like to address. to a pre-decided image. A figure. But to handle material about is that so that are this continuous volume A . Something I have been thinking recently you handIng gives materials such rise to two One is the fact that are when you are working with constructive aspects. you dealing

with a volume that is - can't see as steel, wood and so on, there is no possibility of im­ opaque you through

itself. It oc­ it - have to learn about it around it or agery developing within the material might you by moving hands around it or the cur in terms of the conjunction of material, or the by putting your by pushing material itself might recall its origin and architectural material around, so that you are working blind a lot of Ouranos, 1985, bronze, 77" x 83" x 47", Edition of 3, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Horse IX, 1986, bronze, 30" x 35" x 18", Edition of6, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

time. Whereas working with the open forms of con­ tic and melodramatic 19th century aspect ofRodin. But structed materials you can see what is going on on the I saw a really wonderful Rodin show in the middle 60's far side often enough, or because the material is basically that started to turn me around - I have been getting more rationalized, you get to know what is happening on the and more impressed with Rodin ever since. far side. There is a basic element of not krwwing that Q .Do you consider yourself more of a romantic now? comes about through using opaque and in itselfformless

- materials. And the other thing is that what is intrinsic A . Yes I do. It is strange that when I started out, as I said in the material is the suggestion ofimages. That the forms at the beginning ofthis interview, I was very impressed that are given to it by yourworking on it, inevitably starts by the American Abstract Expressionists who were cer­ suggesting things, or not so much things, as bodies, or tainly romantic. And yet, the kind oftools I had at hand parts of bodies, rocks, trees, waves, clouds, whatever. at the time to make sculpture were very rational and I The occurrence ofimages is absolutely at one with the was working within a completely opposed tradition. So handling of the material. it seems what has really happened over the last twenty five years is to find a point to work comfortably within

- Q •Talking about modeling made me think ofRodin what a romantic tradition in sculpture. And modeling, of

is that connection? course, is a way into doing that. ..but I don't regret go­ ing down the road I have gone down at all. I don't think

- A . I used to hate Rodin when I first started to make con­ I would have been able to get the kind of distance on " structed sculpture, Rodin was defintely "out. I didn't it, or the understanding, to come back into where I am understand what he was doing - and I hated the roman- now. Horse X, 1986, bronze, 35" x 36" x 21", Edition of 6, Private Collection, New York Horse II, 1986, plaster for bronze, 24" x 14" x 31 ", Edition of 6, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Horse Ill, 1986, bronze, 25" x IS" x 30", Edition of6, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Drawingfor Prisoner, 1981, charcoal and acrylic on paper, 124" x 83", Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Horsehead, 1987, cast paper, 62" x 48" x 6", Edition of 10, Published by 3EP LTD, Santa Monica, Ca Works In The Exhibition

Dimensions are height preceeding width. Sculpture: Portrait ofK, 1975 Horse X, 1986 wood bronze

6'9" x 10'12" x 10" 35" x 36" x 21" Collection: Edward R. Broida Trust, Los Angeles Edition of6 Private Collection, New York The Trap, 1976 steel Atreus, 1987 55" x 120" bronze Collection ofthe Artist, Courtesy David McKee Gallery, 46 1/2" x 43" x 23" New York Edition of 4 Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York The Rim, 1981 steel Daktyl III, 1986-1988 14' in diameter bronze Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami 24" x 32" x 22 1/2" Edition of6 Fear, 1979-1980 Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York steel 7'6" x 13" Parable II, 1980 Collection: Dorothy Elkon, New York hydrocal, wood base 12" x 32" x 26" (with base) Guardian II, 1983 Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami bronze, unique 74" x 27 1/2" x 57 1/2" Collection: The Metropolitan Museum ofArt, New York Drawings: Studyfor Guardian III, 1983 1985 Gaia, charcoal on paper bronze 61 1/2" x 45 31t." 87" x 55" x 50" Edition of3 Collection: Arkansas Art Center, Little Rock Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Untitled, 1984 Ouranos. 1985 charcoal on paper bronze 45" x 30" 77" x 83" x 47" Edition of3 Private collection, New York Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Horsehead, 1987 Horse 1986 II, cast paper bronze 62" x 48" x 6" 24" x 14" x 31" Edition of6 Edition of 10 Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Published by 3EP LTD, Santa Monica, Ca

Horse III, 1986 Studyfor Okeanos, 1987 bronze charcoal on paper 25" x IS" x 30" Edition of6 60" x 46 1/2" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Horse IX, 1986 Untitled (Studyfor Sculpture), 1988 bronze charcoal on paper 30" x 35" x 18" Edition of6 60" x 52" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Studyfor Okeanos, 1987, charcoal on paper, 60" x 46 1/2", Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Untitled (Studyfor Sculpture), 1988 Drawingfor Prisoner, 1981 charcoal on paper charcoal and acrylic on paper

60" x 47" 124" x 83" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Untitled (Studyfor Sculpture), 1988 Drawingfor the Rim, 1981 charcoal on paper charcoal on paper

60" x 46 1/2" 186" x 186" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Untitled (Studyfor Sculpture), 1 988 Studyfor the Promise, 1980 charcoal on paper charcoal on paper

60" x 50" 18" x 24" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami

Studyfor Daktyl, 1988 The Promise, 1982 charcoal on paper lithograph

60" x 54" 29 1/2" x 41 1/2" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York Edition 38/40 Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami Studyfor Daktyl, 1988 charcoal on paper The Law, 1982 60" x 50" lithograph Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York 29 1/2" x 41 1/2" Edition 18/20 Drawingfor Arc, 1978 Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami charcoal on paper

106 1/2" x 360" Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York

Parable II, 1980, hydrocal, wood base, 12" x 32" x 26" (with base), Collection: Anne and Martin Z. Margulies, Miami Untitled (Studyfor Sculpture), 1988, charcoal on paper, 60" x 52", Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New York William Tucker Biography

1935 Born in Cairo, Egypt 1974 Hester van Royen Gallery, London

1937 Family moves to England 1976 Galerie Wintersberger, Cologne, West 1955-58 Studies at Oxford University, England Germany Elkon New 1959-60 Studies at Central School of Art and 1977 Robert Gallery, York Design 1978 Retrospective Exhibition, sponsored by at St. Martin's School of Art, London the British Arts Council. Originated at the Fruit Market and 1961-62 Teaches at Goldsmith's College, London Gallery, Edinburgh travelled Great Britain Teaches at St. Martin's School of Art, throughout London 1979 Robert Elkon Gallery, New York 1968-70 Receives Gregory Fellowship in 1980 David Reids Gallery, Sydney, Australia Sculpture, Leeds University, London Robert Elkon Gallery, New York Powell Street 1973 One-man exhibition at Hamburg Gallery, Melbourne, Kunstverein, Bochum, West Germany Australia 1981 L'Isola 1976 Teaches at University ofW. Ontario, Gallery, Rome, Italy Canada 1982 Robert Elkon Gallery, New York Los 1978 Moves to United States Bernard Jacobson Gallery, Angeles, CA 1978-81 Teaches at New York Studio School of McKee New York Painting and Sculpture, New York 1984 David Gallery, L'Isola Gallery, Rome, Italy 1978-82 Teaches at Columbia University, New York 1985 Neuberger Museum, SUNY, Purchase, New York 1980-81 Receives Guggenheim Fellowship Pamela Auchincloss Santa 1986 Becomes American Citizen Gallery, Barbara, CA Receives National Endowment for the Arts Fellowship David McKee Gallery, New York 1987 Pamela Auchincloss Gallery, Santa Lives in New York Barbara, CA Tate Gallery, London One Man Exhibitions Annely Juda Gallery, London 1962 Grabowski London Gallery, David McKee Gallery, New York 1963 Rowan London Gallery, 1988 Storm King Art Center, Mountainville, 1965 Richard Feigen Gallery, New York New York Rowan Gallery, London 1966 Kasmin Gallery, London Installations Galleries, London Waddington 1972 Peter Stuyvesant Sculpture Project, 1968 Robert Elkon Gallery, New York Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England 1969 Leeds City Art Gallery, (Gregory Fellow 1976 Angel, Livingston Development Exhibition), London Corporation, Lanark, Scotland 1970 Kasmin Gallery, London (permanent) 1972. XXXVI Venice Biennale, Italy 1982 The Promise. Grove Isle Sculpture FL 1973 Waddington Galleries, London Garden,Miami, (permanent) Hamburg Kunstverein, Bochum, West 1982-83 Journey, Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, New Germany Serpentine Gallery, London York, NY Gaia, 1985, bronze 87" x 55" x 50", Edition of 3 Courtesy David McKee Gallery, New YOlk 1983 Victory, Doris C. Freedman Plaza, Fifth 1979 Contemporary Sculpture, Museum of Avenue at 60th St., New York, NY Modern Art, New York, NY Prospect A to 1984 Arc and Fear, Spring Mills Building at 104 Mountain Sculpture Show: Homage W. 40th St., New York, NY Guardian I, David Smith, Lake George, New York Saint Peter's Church at Citicorp Center, 1980 International Sculpture Conference, New York, NY Washington, DC Contemporary British 1986 Rhea, Greenwich Plaza, Greenwich, CT Painting and Sculpture, Museum of (permanent) Modern Art, Tokyo 1981 New Work on Paper I, Museum of Modern Art, New York, NY Il Luogo Installations Selected Group della Forma, Museo di Castelvecchio, 1960-61 26 Young Sculptors, Institute of Verona, Italy Bronze, Patricia Hamilton Contemporary Arts, London Gallery, New York, NY British Sculpture 1961 II Biennale de Paris, National Museum of in the 20th Century, Whitechapel Art Modern Art, Paris Gallery, London 1965 New Generation 1965, Whitechapel Art 1983 Monumental Drawings by Sculptors, Gallery, London London - The New Hillwood Art Gallery, C.W. Post Center, Scene, Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, Long Island University, Greenvale, NY MN The Sculptural Line, Damon Brandt Gallery, New York, NY Artists Choose 1966 Internationale Beelderuentoonstelling, Artists II, CDS Gallery, New York, NY Sonsbeek, Holland Eight British The Sculpture Show '83: Selected New Sculptures, Stedeliijk Museum, Work by 50 Sculptors, Hayward and Amsterdam Primary Sculpture, The Galleries, London Jewish Museum, New York, NY Serpentine 1984 Varieties ofSculptural Ideas, Max 1967 Sculpture in the Open Air, London Hutchinson Gallery, New York, NY County Council, London Guggenheim Drawings 1974-84, Hirshhorn Museum International Sculpture Exhibition, and Sculpture Garden, Washington, D.C. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New The British Council, York, NY Sculptor's Drawings, London The 7th Dalhousie Drawing 1968 Documenta IV, Kassel, West Germany Exhibition: Actual Size, Dalhousie Art Orpheus II, 1965, exhibition of British Gallery, Halifax, Nova Scotia Seven artists, circulated by the Museum of Sculptors in America, 1 Penn Plaza, New Modern Art, New York, NY York, NY International Exhibition ofContemporary 1985 in - Art, Helsinki Working Brooklyn Sculpture, Brooklyn Museum, New York, NY 1971 British Painting and Sculpture, 1 960-61, Transformations in Sculpture: Four National Gallery of Art, Washington, Decades ofAmerican and European Art, D.C. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New 1972 British Sculptors, Royal Academy, York, NY London 1986 Recent Acquisitions, Museum of Modern 1975 New The British Acquisitions: Drawings, Art, New York, NY Entre el Objeto y la Museum, London The Condition of Imagen, Palacio de Velazquez, Madrid Sculpture, Hayward Gallery, London,(curated by William Tucker) 1976 The Biennale ofSydney, Art Gallery of New South Wales, Australia Arte Inglese Oggi, Milan

Catalog Design

Terry Witherell Art Editor, Advancement Services

Yolanda Hechavarria Typesetter