Roy Lichtenstein: Graphics

with an essay by Craig Adcock

Roy Lichtenstein and "Image Duplication" by Craig Adcock

\ . ·.

February 25-March 20, 1983 Fine Arts Gallery /School of Visual Arts Florida State University acknowledgements

The 1983 Celebration of the Arts is an event under the sponsorship of President Bernard Sliger. Without the support offered through this annual programming, The Fine Arts Gallery would be unable to bring the university and surrounding community the current e_xhibition.It is with both pleasure for the offering and gratitude to the artist that we invite you to share the graphic works of Roy Lichtenstein.

This exhibition was also made possible through the kind attentions of the artist's assistant Olivia Motch, the Los Angeles atelier of Gemini G.E.L.,and Edison Community College's Gallery Director Lantz Caldwell. Mr. Caldwell made initial contact with the artist, gave us the opportunity to share the works on loan from the artist (and Castelli Graphics of New York City), and provided us with poster reproductions of The Student.

To complement the exhibition we have Craig Adcock's exceptional commentary, and it is \ with deepest appreciation that we \: acknowledge this contribution.

J. L. Draper, Dean School of Visual Arts

Images courtesy © GEMINI G.E.L., Los Angeles, California

Typesetting: RapidoGraphics, Inc. Printing: Precision Printing, Inc. Tallahassee, Florida Roy Lichtensteinand "Image Duplication"

Roy Lichtenstein is now commonly art involved his own commercial success; it recognized as being one of the master somehow made his own work doubly ironic. workers of the commonplace, of imagery He was well aware of the incongruities. "We derived from Popular Culture. He is one of the like to think of industrialization as being top three or four Pop Artists, and Pop Art is despicable," he said, but "there's something now commonly recognized as being one of terribly brittle about it .... There are certain the major art movements of the twentieth things that are usable, forceful and vital century, This kind of consensus gives about commercial art. We're using those Lichtenstein some freedom. He is rich enough things-but we're not really advocating to get a great deal of work done and stupidity, international teenagerism and insightful enough to make that work terrorism."3 No. Lichtenstein's advocacy was powerful. far from stupid. The power of Lichtenstein's work grew out of Perhaps the most important aspect of his art an act of rebellion, He recalls that when Pop is its wit. Thishe inherits from earlier twentieth Art first appeared in the early sixties "it was century art movements such as Dadaism. It is hard to get a painting that was despicable a trenchant wit and one that brings art history enough so that no one would hang itself within the puNiew of his ideology of the it-everybody was hanging everything. It commonplace. Part of this stems from his was almost acceptable to hang a dripping awareness that you cannot continue to paint rag, everyone was accustomed to this. repeat things in art, as in anything else, if you The one thing everyone hated was expect anyone to listen to you. He said that commercial art; apparently they didn't hate he was "anti-contemplative, anti-nuance, that enough either.''1 Perhaps not. anti-getting-away-from-the-tyranny-of-the Lichtenstein certainly became successful. He rectangle, <1mti-movement-cmd-light, arrived at a personal formula that was anti-mystery, onti-pbint-quality, anti-Zen, and extremely engaging. His1961 painting, LOOK anti all of those brilliant ideas of preceding MICKEY,l'VE HOOKED A BIG ONE!!,2 could movements which everyone understands so be considered a self-portrait. The brilliant thoroughly." 4 Before saying something to us, idea of using commercial and comic book Lichtenstein had to get our attention, and the imagery was certainly one of the biggest fish shocking new style of Pop Art seNed that ever caught in the art world. purpose very well. But Lichtenstein's happy formula is not Much of what Lichtenstein had to say sufficient to explain his success. He involved the very act of rebellion in which he discovered in popular culture a series of himself was engaged: the replacement of images and emblems through which he one art movement with the next and the could examine the contemporary state of machinations, critical and art historical, that affairs, In other words, he discovered a way accompany that process, This "subject of doing what effective artists have always matter" can be seen in his 1961painting I done: He made a comment about his world. CAN SEETHE WHOLE ROOM! ... AND THERE'S He did it in an intriguing and a new way. He NOBODY IN IT!and his 1962WHAT? WHY DID shifted the low range- the world of comics YOU ASK THAT?WHAT DO YOU KNOW and advertising art- into the high range ABOUT MY IMAGE DUPLICATOR? the world of Castelli's Gallery and the Lichtenstein's opinion of the critical nouveau riche. Thismove gave him position. misunderstanding that was greeting his work Once in position, he proceeded to the was apparently part of his message. When profound. he began to exhibit his particular brand of "image duplication," there were not very MIRROR #5, lithograph and silkscreen, 1972 Lichtenstein's success was in a certain sense necessary, It was almost a metaphor. Part of many critics in the gallery or museum rooms Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L.. Los Angeles. California his comment about the world of commercial who could see it. Thiswas true in spite of his 7 early commercial success. It was bought, but obviously a fake Mondrian.'' His fake -.-.-.-.-.-.-.- it was not seen. In a work like REFRIGERATOR, Cezannes, Picassos, and Mondrians were II: 1962, he seems to say, in part, that the followed in the mid-1960s by other ersatz ••••• painting might as well have been a images. The most interesting of these were refrigerator for all the genuine understanding the "Greek Temple" paintings- sops, one that accompanied its purchase. assumes, for all the artists who have had to sit through art history courses - and his "Big The shallowness of the commercial side of Painting" parodies of Abstract the art world - not just of commercial Expressionism- marvelous comic-book art-with its fine art as fine commodity brush strokes. attitude was clearly one of Lichtenstein's concerns. The disparity between our In subsequent years, Lichtenstein romantic attitudes about artists and art increasingly expanded his banter into more making and the actual Art Scene was what and more areas of past art. During 1969, he made such images as WHY BRAD DARLING, did a fascinating series of images of I THISPAINTING IS A MASTERPIECE!MY, SOON cathedral facades, of which we have six YOU'LL HAVE ALL OF NEW YORK examples in this exhibition. His lithographs of ' overlaying screens capture an impression • CLAMORING FOR YOUR WORK! of 1962 so I fundamentally ironic. Everyone knew that the uncannily like the famous series that they reality of the New York art world .was very refer to, making one want to change the • different from that depicted in the romance remark made about Monet by Cezanne - comic, yet Lichtenstein himself was actually "Only an eye, but God, what an eye!"-to living just such a dream come true. They "Only a mechanical process, but God, what really were clamoring for his work. So, the a mechanical process!" Thistoo was a way real art world was like a comic book after all. of flattening high art into the level of the comic book. It was a "vulgarization of ' Lichtenstein's irony did not stop with these Monet's CATHEDRALS.I mean they're a '• kinds of references to the contradictory vulgarization in the regular sense of the word • workings of the art world. He soon began to in that I'm industrializing his images," 8 make specific images about art historical Lichtenstein explained. It was amazing that objects. His witty parodies of Erle Loran's he could do it so beautifully. analyses of Cezanne in such works as PORTRAITOF MRS. CEZANNE, 1962, his Ben Between 1970 and 1972, Lichtenstein did a • .-;A.- Day dot, comic-book-style renderings of series of paintings and prints whose subject ••• Picasso heads and Mondrian grids in such was the mirror surface. We have four prints •• works as WOMAN WITHFLOWERED HAT, 1963, from the series in this exhibition. The mirror ••• and NON-OBJECTIVEPAINTING, 1964, were surface was an appropriate subject for a also contradictory, By using a comic book parodist like Lichtenstein. He used it as a ••• style and Ben Day dots in these renditions of symbol for one of the eternal philosophical •••• modern masterpieces, Lichtenstein made concerns of art. Leonardo had argued that •• them part of his central approach which, he the purpose of a painting was to mirror the :t said, had "always been about world and the more perfectly the surface of vulgarization." 5 He explained that his use of the painting approximated the surface of a Ben Day dots was a way of "making mirror the more successful the painting was. reference to mechanical and insensitive "You should take the mirror for your guide," relationships; and they have a meaning he said, "because on its surface the objects 9 relating to the new ways data can be appear in many respects as in a painting." • transmitted. Dotted areas mean 'fake' -a Lichtenstein seems to parody this kind of •• fake whatever it is, whether it is an ersatz notion or the tension between it and the 6 ••• Picasso or an unreal image of a person." modernist denial of it. He, of course, knows • ••• Making a similar point in another context, he very well that the modernist tradition has ••••••·i··· said that the Ben Day dots "can mean an contradicted Leonardo's mirror surface ...... ~ industrial way of extending the colour, or model: The work of art need have nothing to CATHEDRAL #3, lithograph, 1969 data information, or finally, that the image is do with any such reflection. a fake. A Mondrian with a set of dots is Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L., Los Angeles. Colifomia The mirrors that Lichtenstein paint reflect ubiquitous reproduction. This may be one nothing. He seems to suggest that we can reason that Lichtenstein was so interested in supplant renaissance reflections with mechanically reproduced images. "This anything we wish. His mirrors ore actually flat relates strongly to comic book images which patterns- dots and swatches of bright color, ore not machine-like but are largely the relieved ever so slightly by embossing. These product of machine thinking. Then the fact patterns suggest the gleam of light off a that in the comics the rendition of a head, for bright surface, but they reflect no real instance, is so altered by the economics of objects as do real mirrors. In a certain sense, printing. Dots, black lines, yellow hair, etc., what Lichtenstein gives us reflected in his ore primarily the product of the economics mirror is the modernist tradition itself- the of printing." 11 By using these techniques as very thing that was supposed to have metaphors, Lichtenstein could make his replaced the realist tradition symbolized by point that the cubist and modernist images the renaissance mirror. His patterns are a kind that fill our museums, and the rebellion that of "fake" minimalism. they reflect, have become as commonplace as comic books, and just Perhaps it would be more accurate to say as funny. that Lichtenstein's mirrors remind us that not quite "anything" goes. His patterns suggest There is a sadness here-a nostalgia for a minimalist abstractions, but, at the same time when the simplicity of cubist aggression time, they seem to say that the perimeters of was adequate. In this, Lichtenstein recalls his such abstractions ore as narrowly drawn, in earlier uses of images derived from comic their way, as those of the realist models they books. They too were bitter sweet, funny sad. replaced, and that no matter how for A drowning girl thinking of her darling Brad removed from reality the abstractions was a laughable cliche but it was also a become, the renaissance mirror still lurks reminder of the suicidal displacements of the somewhere in the background. All those modern world. Smart, cynical people renaissance images in the museums ore just commit suicide because of broken hearts, too popular for it to ever be any other way. too. His other comic book images, particularly those taken from war comics, Thiswas the central point of his conflation of low and high art sources. "The comics, and were equally ambiguous. The exploding F-86 Sabre and MiG-15 jets in BLAM, 1962, paintings of Picasso, Mondrian, Monet and and WHAAM!, 1963, were all too close to the WP.A murals, as well as the modern heads F-100Super Sabre and MiG-15jets that were and designed objects, ore all available to just beginning to explode over Vietnam for me as reproductions," he explained. "The real. fact that some of the images happened to be advertising art is almost incidental." 10 This is Lichtenstein's essential tension. A Lichtenstein was interested in subsuming comic book image is a kind of realistic everything under his category of the image and his use of such images created commonplace. an art style that is even more real in certain After his examination of the mirror surface, senses than earlier realisms. Many of his with all its inevitable associations, works are almost cinematic: The words Lichtenstein proceeded to those movements written on them "contribute to the belief in in twentieth-century art that have contributed the subject matter as 'real,'" he explained. to its reexamination: Expressionism, Cubism, "Not only are the figures depicted 'realistically' but they talk." 12 This was, of Futurism, Purism, Surrealism, etc. His MODERN BLONDE, lithograph. 1978 HEAD,1970, NUDE IN THEWOODS, 1980, and course, one of the things that fascinated early critics of Pop Art; called "New Realism" STUDENT,1980, included in this exhibition, Roy Lichtenstein© Gemini G.E.L..Los Angeles. California remind us of Cubism, perhaps the most momentarily, it reintroduced subject matter after the non-objectivity of abstract important outbreak of the modernist expressionism. Asked if the drowning girl gets rebellion in this century, and also that the urgency of that rebellion has dissipated any help from Brad, Lichtenstein said "You - largely because of its success and can take it from me she makes out popularity, which was fostered by its smashingly! I had the idea of taking a single frame out of something that implied a story. metaphors. Art sees and re-sees; it sees and To ascribe all this emotion to the subject re-sees itself. The results are sometimes makes her even more real. All this, you must strangely distorted-the high becomes the remember, was done in the early 1960s in low, the low becomes the high, the contrast to the prevailing aesthetic disdain innovative becomes the banal, the banal for literary content." 13 becomes the innovative, the good becomes the bad, the bad becomes the good. Roy But comic book art is also very abstract in its Lichtenstein, with wit, good humor, and irony, way. One of the most effective things about illustrates for us the many ways in which it all Lichtenstein's work is the way in which he works. monumentalized comic book art's "economic" simplifications. When he blew Craig Adcock up small frames from the comics to wall size, Assistant Professor of Art History they took on enormous impact. Their Florida State University 1 abstractness only enhanced the tension between the comic book real and the real j real. Both the form and the narrative of the comics were a simplification of li,fe. No romance, no war ever went the way of a comic book. They did not look the same either. Lichtenstein's blowups of comic book images removed them from the world of minor diversion. They became tragi-comic. AT THE BEACH, lithograph, 1978 Stylistically and emotionally they became something that went beyond a new kind of Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L., Los Angeles. Califomia realism. Notes One wants almost to say that they were a new kind of Surrealism, although that term 1. Interview with G. R. Swenson, "What Is Pop Art?" Art does not really fit. Perhaps it was a similar News 62 (November 1963), 25. feeling that led Lichtenstein himself to make 2. In an interview with PhyllisTuchman, "Pop!" Art News \: a series of surrealist images between 1977 73 (May 1974), 27, Lichtenstein explained that this and 1979.In his BLONDE,1978, included in this work was a breakthrough painting: "At the time I was doing semi-abstract paintings using those exhibition, one of his earlier faces from a Donald Duck forms in an Expressionistway. But I romance comic has transmogrified into a could never complete another Expressionist surrealistic biomorphic blob floating in a painting. The new thing was very insistent. It was so Tanguiesque landscape. Speaking of such different from any1hing I had done. I saw there were works, Lichtenstein said that "A sense of so many possibilities here. I could hardly contain Surrealism may be generating the forms but myself ... I didn't!" what I really want is the appearance devoid 3. Interview with Swenson, p. 25. of its purpose. This is something I've always 4. Ibid. been interested in, to take the meaning out. 5. Interview with John Coplans, "Lichtenstein's Graphic · The result is not something devoid of Works," Studio International 180 (December 1970), meaning but is something that is devoid of 264. 6. Interview with Tuchman, p. 27 their meaning. The meaning, partly, is fake 7. Interview with Coplans, p. 263. I 14 Surrealism or the appearance of it." 8. Ibid., p. 265. I Interestingly, it is Lichtenstein's own work that 9. Jean Paul Richter, ed., The Notebooks of Leonardo he translates into Surrealism. "I am also very do Vinci (New York: Dover, 1970), p. 264. 10. Interview with Coplans, p. 265. interested in the relationship between 11. Ibid., p. 264. Surrealism, or at least my view of it, and 12. Interview with Tuchman, p. 27. earlier art of mine-the comics, landscapes, 13. Ibid. brushstrokes, mirrors, abstractions and so 14. Interview with Philip Smith, "Roy Lichtenstein forth .... I want to re-see them in this surreal Interview," Arts Magazine 52 (November 1977), 26. context." 15 Again, his images are powerful 15. Ibid. catalog of the exhibition

1. TEN DOLLAR BILL,1956 10. CATHEDRAL #2, 1969 lithograph lithograph 11 x 19 3/4 inches (red and blue) edition 300 48 1/2 x 32 1/2 inches Leo Castelli Gallery edition 75 Gemini G.E.L. 2. CRAK, 1964 offset lithograph 11. CATHEDRAL #3, 1969 18 x 24 inches lithograph edition 300 (35/300) (blue) Leo Castelli Gallery 481/2 x 321/2 inches edition 75 3, TEMPLE,1964 Gemini G.E.L. offset lithograph 23 3/4 x 17 3/4 inches 12. CATHEDRAL #4, 1969 edition 300 lithograph Margo Leavin/Castelli Graphics (red and blue) 481/2 x 321/2 inches 4. MOONSCAPE, 1965 edition 75 silkscreen on rowlux Gemini G.E.L. 20 x 24 inches edition 200 13. CATHEDRAL #5, 1969 from "11Pop Artists" /Castelli lithograph (yellow and black) 5. LANDSCAPE 3, 1967 481/2 x 321/2 inches silkscreen on rowlux edition 75 12 x 16 5/8 inches edition 100 Gemini 4,E.L. \ . , Original Editions/Leo Castelli 14. CATHEDRAL-#6, 1969 lithograph 6. LANDSCAPE 10, 1967 (black and blue) silkscreen on rowlux 48 1/2 x 32 1/2 inches 15 1/2 x 16 5/8 inches edition 75 edition 100 Gemini G.E.L. Original Editions/Leo Castelli 15. LITHO/LITHO, 1970 7. SALUTETO AVIATION,1968 lithograph silkscreen 35 x 48 inches 451/8 x 23 3/4 inches edition 54 (15/54) edition 135 (18/135) Gemini G.E.L. Feigen Graphics 16. MODERN HEAD #4, 1970 8, MODERN TRIPTYCH,1969 NUDE IN THEWOODS, woodcut/embossing, 1980 engraved and anodized lithograph printed aluminum Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L..La; Angeles. California; photograph by Doug Parker 16 3/4 x 40 3/4 inches 20 3/4 x 17 1/4 inches edition 100 (37 /100) edition 100 (58/100) Mourlot Gemini G.E,L. 9. CATHEDRAL #1, 1969 17. MODERN HEAD #5, 1970 lithograph embossed graphite (yellow) composition with die-cut 48 1/2 x 32 1/2 inches paper overlay edition 75 28 x 19 1/2 inches Gemini G.E.L. edition 100 (15/100) Gemini G.E.L. 18. MIRROR #2, 1972 27. BLONDE, 1978 line cut and silkscreen lithograph and embossing 29 3/4 x 27 inches 28 x 28 inches edition 38 (15/38) edition 80 (7 /80) Gemini G.E.L. Gemini G.E.L. 28. NIGHT SCENE,1980 CRAYON ON STONE CRAYONAM ON STONE 19. MIRROR #5, 1972 etching with oquotint MA lithograph and silkscreen 20 3/4 x 20 1/2 inches STONE WlfH DESENS ITl2 JNG ETCH 341/2 x 24 inches edition 32 (31/32) edition 80 (15/80) Tyler Graphics Gemini G.E.L. 29. TWO FIGURESWITH TEEPEE,1980 20. MIRROR #6, 1972 etching with aquotint lithograph and silkscreen 23 1/2 x 20 3/4 inches W!AMROLLER FORCING INK IN\AGE GREASE 401/2 x 29 3/4 inches edition 32 (21/32) INTO RECEPTIVE AREAS "SOAKING"INTO STONE edition 80 (15/80) Tyler Graphics ZINC Gemini G.E.L. 30. DANCING FIGURES,1980 21. MIRROR #7, 1972 etching with aquotint lithograph and silkscreen 25 x 22 1/2 inches --WATfl? 39 x 25 1/2 inches edition 32 (9/32) !MAGE GREASE e DESENS/T/1.ER• edition 80 (15/80) Tyler Graphics Pt.Arf Of? STONE Gemini G.E.L. 31. MORTON A. MORT,1980 22. STILLLIFE WITH CHEESE,1974 woodcut/ embossed lithograph and silkscreen 291/4 x 39 inches 33 x 441/4 inches edition 50 (15/50) edition 100 Gemini G.E.L. Castelli Graphics/Multiples 32. DR. WALDMAN, 1980 LITHO/LITHO, lithograph, 1970 , \: \ : : 23. STILLLIFE WITH PITCHERAND FLOWER, woodcut/ embossed Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L., Los Angeles, California 1974 38 1/2 x 33 3/4 inches lithograph and silkscreen edition 50 (15/50) 37 x 52 inches Gemini G.E.L. edition 100 33. THESTUDENT, 1980 Castelli Graphics/Multiples woodcut/ embossed 24. ENTABLATUREVIII, 1976 38 1/2 x 33 3/4 inches screen print with silver metallic edition 50 (15/50) foil collaged Gemini G.E.L. 291/4 x 45 inches 34. NUDE IN THEWOODS, 1980 edition 30 (2/30) woodcut/ embossed Tyler Graphics 39 3/4 x 35 3/4 inches 25. ENTABLATUREX, 1976 edition 50 (15/50) screen print and lithograph Gemini G.E.L. with collaged block and silver foil 35. LAMP, 1981 291/4 x 45 inches woodcut edition 18 (2/18) 25 x 18 1/4 inches Tyler Graphics edition 30 (5/30) 26. AT THEBEACH, 1978 Tyler Graphics lithograph 26 x 43 inches edition 38 (15/38) Gemini G.E.L. biography

... --··•.·; ...... : ...... b. 1923, NYC; resided in Ohio from 1951-57, Instructor, Ohio State University, 1949-51 ...... : : . . . and returned to NYC in 1963; current Assistant Professor, State University of New ...... : ...... York, Oswego, 1957-60 ...... : : ...... residence and studio in Southampton, NY ...... Assistant Professor, Douglass College, . Art Students League, NYC, 1939 Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Ohio State University, Columbus, 1940-43 Jersey, 1960-63 Armed Forces, Europe, 1943-46 MFA, Ohio State University, 1949

...... ··: . ... ·:: ...... ·:: .... ·: ...... ·:...... : . . .. ' ...... ·...... · ...... : ...... : ...... ·.: : : : : .. : : : : ..: : : : : : : .. : : : ....: : : : : : ...... : : ...... : ......

MIRROR #2, linecut/screen embossed, 1972

MORTON A. MORT. woodcut/embossing, 1980

Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L. Los Angeles. California •••••••••••••• selected bibliography •••• Alloway, Lawrence. "On Style: An Hahn, Otto. "Roy Lichtenstein," Art Press, •••• Examination of Roy Lichtenstein's December 1974-January 1975. •• Development Despite a New Monograph Harvard University, Fogg Art Museum. The on the Artist," Artforum, March 1972. GraQhic Art of Roy Lichtenstein. Ballatore, Sandy. "Lichtenstein Paintings and Introduction/Henri Zerner, 1975. Sculpture," Artweek, June 14, 1975. Heard, James. "Lichtenstein," Arts Review, The Boston Institute of Contemporary Art. ~ April 16, 1976. Lichtenstein: The Modern Work, 1965-1970. The Houston Contemporary Arts Museum. Essay/Elisabeth Sussman. 1978. Roy' Lichtenstein. Introduction/Lawrence California Institute of the Arts (Valencia). Roy Alloway. 1972. Lichtenstein at Cal Arts. Introduction/ Allan Kozloff, Max. "Lichtenstein at the Kaprow 1977. Guggenheim," Artforum, November 1969. California, University of (INine). Roy Kuspit, Donald B. "Lichtenstein and the Lichtenstein: Graphics, Reliefs and Collective Unconscious of Style," Art in SculRtures, 1969-1970.Preface and America, May-June 1979. interview I John Coplans. 1970. Kuspit, Donald B. "Pop Art: A Reactionary Coplans, John. "Lichtenstein's Graphic Realism," Art Journal, Fall 1976. Works: Roy Lichtenstein in Conversation," Lebensztejn, Jean-Claude. "Eight Studio International, December 1970. Statements/Roy Lichtenstein ... ," Coplans, John, ed. Rov. Lichtenstein. New Art in America, July-August 1975. York: Praeger, 1972. Lichtenstein, Roy. "Letters,0 Artforum, May Cowart, Jack (St. Louis Art Museum). Roy 1972, Lichtenstein: 1970-1980,New York: Hudson Locksley Shea Gallery (Minneapolis). Roy Hills Press,1981. Lichtenstein: TromQe l'Oeif Painting~ Crichton, Fenelia. "London Letter: Essay/ John'.C_oplbns. 1974. Lichtenstein's Futurism," Art International, Meyer, J. D. "Les Illusions Optiques de Roy Summer 1976. Lichtenstein," XX Siecle, December 1973. Edwards, Ellen. "Miami Beach: Lichtenstein's Multiples Inc. and Castelli Graphics (New Mermaid," Art News, Summer 1978. York). Mirrors of the Mind. Essay/Nicolas Ellenzweig, Allen. "Roy Lichtenstein," Arts Calas.1975. Magazine, November 1974. New York, State University of (Stony Brook). Fagiola d'Arca, Maurizio, and Gianni Mirrors and Entablatures. Introduction/ Berenga-Gardin (photography). Lawrence Alloway. 1979. "Lichtenstein at the Piano," Metro, August Perlmutter, Elizabeth Frank. "Reviews: Roy 1970, Lichtenstein," Art News, January 1975. Frank, Peter. "New Editions: Mirrors of the Ratcliff, Carter. "Roy Lichtenstein at Castelli Mind," Art News, September 1975. Downtown and Blum/Helman," Art in Frank, Peter. "New York Reviews Roy America, March-April 1978. Lichtenstein," Art News, April 1978. Roberts, Keith. "Roy Lichtenstein and the Glenn, C. W "Roy Lichtenstein: Ceramic Popular Image," Burlington Magazine, July Sculpture," Ceramics Monthly, May 1977. 1976. Gruen, John. "Roy Lichtenstein: from Rose, Barbara. Roy Lichtenstein, Entablature MODERN HEAD #4, engraved, anodized and printed aluminum, 1970 Outrageous Parody to Iconographic Series. Bedford Village, N.Y.: Ryler Elegance," Art News, March 1976. Graphics Ltd., 1976. Roy Lichtenstein © Gemini G.E.L.. Los Angeles, California The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (New Rosing, Larry. "Roy Lichtenstein," Arts York). Roy Lichtenstein. Text by Diane Magazine, December 1975. Waldman. 1969. Russell, John. "Roy Lichtenstein, Pop. No. 1," Waldman. Diane. Rov. Lichtenstein. New Connaissance des Arts, October 1969. York: Abrams, 1971. Schaff, David. "A Conversation with Roy Walker Art Center (Minneapolis). Johns. Kelly, Lichtenstein," Art International, Lichtenstein, Motherwell, Nauman, January-February 1980. Rauschenberg Serra, Stella: Prints from Gemini G.E.L. Essay and interview /Philip Schuyler, James. "New York: Roy Lichtenstein at Castelli." Art in America, November/ Larson. 1974. December 1974. Welish, Marjorie. "Lichtenstein at S.V.A.,"Arts Siegfried, Joan C. "The Spirit of the Comics," Magazine. December 1971-January 1972. Art and Artists, December 1969. Tuchman, Phyllis. "Pop!." Art News, May 1974. Smith, Phillip. "Roy Lichtenstein: Interview," Young, Joseph E. "Lichtenstein: Printmaker," Arts Magazine, November 1977. Art and Artists, March 1970. Sterckx, P. "Lichtenstein: le Mondrian de Young. Joseph E. "Lichtenstein: Printmaker," pop," Cles Qour les Arts. February 1972. Metro, August 1970. Swenson. G. R. "What is Pop Art?" Art News, Young. Joseph E. "Los Angeles: Gemini November 1963. G.E.L.," Art International, December 1971.

I .

Florida State University

Bernard F. Sliger, President Augustus B. Turnbull 111,Vice-President for Academic Affairs J. L. Draper, Dean, School of Visual Arts

University Fine Arts Gallery

Jody Baker Allys Palladino-Craig, Director Allison Barrows Susan Parks, Secretary Catherine Riley Billups John Skau. Preparator Albert Coven Shih Chuang Donna Hinson Gabrielle Li Lee Modica \ .

~E ARTS 1983 Fine Arts Gallery /School of Visual Arts Florida State University