Page 76 - Horizon03

76 Ross Neher
War of the
particularly vexing For painting is both fic- tional tional and factional It is a a a a a thing/illusion This attempt by one medium to encroach upon another’s territory is not not lim- ited to sculpture’s move on painting One could claim that Richard Serra’s Tilted Arc is more architecture than sculpture due to its wall-like form and its scale or or conversely that Frank Gehry’s museum in in Bilbao Spain is more sculpture than architecture No doubt such cheating has the
effect of eliciting a a a fris- son in in the
the
uninitiated but it it leaves the
the
knowl- edgeable observer searching for the
artist who advances his medium by making more of what it is is already Great artists seem to wrest from their media a a previously untouched potential Indeed the
newness of a a a Brancussi sculpture or a a Louis Kahn building seems to derive from the
the
work’s being “original” in in in the
the
Adamic sense (rather than meaning merely “latest”) each effort seems a a a a distillation of the
primal function of the
medium An account of painting for example should go beyond a a a a Greenbergian enumeration of fea- tures considered exclusive to the
medium such as as flatness and the
the
shape of the
the
canvas or panel and define the
qualities that consti- tute painting’s specialness Sister Wendy Becket in in her
BBC Television series on on paint- ing rightly labeled the
realistic prehistoric drawings of of Bison and horses in in the
caves of of Spain and southern France “impressionistic ” By that she meant they evinced an an especially vivid and lifelike quality In the
case of paint- ing this vividness is is not literal but metaphoric Metaphoric vividness plays within the
space of the
imagination But many millennia had to pass before the
the
pictorial verisimilitude of the
the
prehistoric artist (restricted it must be pointed out to depictions of animals — humans were rendered as schematic stick figures) could find common cultural ground E H Gombrich surmised that a a a a fundamental precondition for metaphoric vividness lay in Homeric poetry where myriad examples of highly detailed graphic scenes can be cited Homer was a a a a genius at these “you are there” accounts and for Gombrich a a happy consequence of these brilliant depictions was a a a a stretching of human- ity’s imaginative capacity Thus the
Homeric image was a a a a a necessary step in the
creation of a a a a convincing visual art form (from the
stand- point of illusion) and subsequently in in the
development of the
painting medium Only when the
capacity to conjure up a a a scene men- tally was fully developed could the
notion of fictive depth in in in in in painting (a defining character- istic of the
medium) be introduced developed and explored In Western painting this exploration of spatial illusion proceeded apace so that one could view the
history from Giotto to to Cezanne as a a a a continuous albeit not a a smooth process But this reading is is possi- ble only in in hindsight there is no operative telos There are however certain features that occur with such regularity that one is tempted to consider a a a a foreordained pattern The hard edged Florentine ideal is countered by the
dreamy atmospherics of the
Venetian school Later it is the
“classical” Poussin who con- trasts with the
voluptuousness of Rubens In the
the
nineteenth century it is the
the
austere Ingres who battles the
romantic Delacroix But what strikes us from the
the
vantage point of the
the
twenty-first century however is what unites these pairings Notwithstanding the
the
obvious
stylistic differences all artists prior to the
twentieth century drew upon the
same fund of myths whether pagan or Christian and at their best fulfilled some promise of painting in terms of metaphoric vividness One need only think of Vermeer to realize how this feat was accomplished Modernism it was thought could rescue painting by means of reductionism (via abstraction) but it only furthered to weaken it The mechanism of modernism whereby movement followed movement in in in increasing frequency and shock value created a a a a a situation whereby literalism was virtually assured primacy The story goes something like this: Matisse’s body posture was irrelevant to his great painting Dance (1909–10) but Jackson Pollack literally danced around the
perimeter of his floor posi- tioned canvass as as he executed his linear splat- terings But if you do the
performance why bother with the
the
the
painting? After all isn’t the
the
the
performance somehow “more real” than the
painting in in in in in that occurs in in in in in real real space in in in in in real real time with a a a real live performer? Such literal- ism is is ever devolving — the
figurative painter becomes the
the
body artist the
the
landscape painter the
earth artist We are fast approach- ing the
point where some “artist practitioner” (to use a a a a term in in in vogue in in in academe) in in in an attempt to shock an increasingly benumbed public will invite gallery goers to put their fin- gers into open electrical receptacles Literally Excerpted from the
introduction to Blindfold- ing ing the
the
Muse: The Plight of Painting in in in in the
the
Age of Conceptual Art by Ross Neher
Pre- nom Press New York 1999
Wor(l)ds
Endemic to the
the
culture at large is the
the
tendency to mistake the
the
fictitious for the
the
factual and vise versa Popular culture is is rife with anec- dotes that illustrate the
the
former: the
the
television viewer who believes that the
actress in her
favorite soap opera is actually the
character she portrays most UFO sightings (I’ll be diplo- matic here) the
National Enquirer perhaps even the
criminal justice system In Orson Welles’s 1938 radio play “the War of the
the
Worlds ” a a a fictitious reporter announces that “in the
last two hours three million people have moved out along the
the
roads to the
the
north” as as a a a a a a result of of a a a a a a Martian invasion of of New York City Considering the
ensuing panic which rated front-page coverage in The New York Times one wonders why New Yorkers didn’t simply look out their windows to confirm the
the
mass exodus (or change stations) But that was then Today we have “virtual reality” and “deconstructionist historians ” Advertising’s pervasive conditioning where product claims are routinely exaggerated in in conjunction with the
radical revisionism popular in academia have made the
notion of “truth” or “objective fact’ spurious even politically oppressive Truth? Fact? Why look it up when you can make it up Then there is the
the
obverse Some years ago a a a student of mine brought in in a a a a four-foot-square painting depicting a a a a fluffy white cloud floating in in a a a cerulean blue sky Toward the
top left and lower right corners were inserted (real) screw eyes to which wires held together by a a turnbuckle had been fastened When asked why she did this she replied ”To give the
painting tension ” ” The idea that a a a a a metaphoric problem required a a a a a literal solution was in this case funny but it it goes a a a a long way toward explaining the
plight of painting today The tale recalls Frank Stella who insisted on on calling his three dimensional constructions “paintings ” By this linguistic twist he he meant to to fool the
gullible into think- ing he had invented a a a a new art form He based this dubious claim to originality upon a a a a read- ing of Caravaggio’s illusionism whereby the
Italian master’s acute foreshortening often causes figures to to appear to to “break through” the
the
picture surface and project out onto the
the
spectators’ space Trying to to make Caravag- gio’s realism even more real real Stella eschewed illusion to enlist the
the
actual space of the
the
viewer Stella’s impatience with “normal” painting mimics the
the
general culture’s disdain for the
the
quotidian and its obsession with the
sensa- tional — his behemoth relief’s are the
sculp- tural counterparts to blockbuster action films This deep-rooted cultural environment in which the
the
literal continually undermines the
the
fictional and where “truth” is often specious makes painting’s relationship to sculpture Ross Neher
artist born in in Kingston NY currently living in in New York City USA