THE SOURCE FOR STUART DAVIS’S ‘COMPOSITION’ OF

shoulder with manual laborer, skilled and professional worker’.12 He also asserted that artists’ ‘basic interests are not remote from those who do the work of the world’, and their ‘direction naturally parallels that of the great body of productive workers in American industrial, agricultural and professional life’. By 1935 Davis was not only fighting for artists’ rights but also arguing that ‘an artist who undertakes the portrait of [the American] environment automatically takes on the obligation of understanding its social meaning as well as [understanding that] social meaning is inseparable from his subject’.13 La Corona cigar boxes were a small part of the American environment of commercial packaging. The cigars were rolled by US citizens; American hands, moreover, employed all the implements and instruments depicted on the cigar box. Davis’s activism of the 1930s and his history of painting tobacco packages predisposed him to appropriate a picture from a cigar-box seal that spoke to his major social and political opinions of the era. The subject-matter on the seal provided the visual means to advocate worker parity and to encourage worker solidarity. Composition is one of Davis’s strongest political statements in paint.14 It is likely that he selected its bland title and lively colour scheme to downplay the work’s content and deflect bureaucratic control. With its message hidden in the guise of a simple still life, the painting moved smoothly into government hands and was hung in a school. It is clear that Davis’s interest in tobacco 13

1935

45. La Corona cigar-box seal (image from the end of the box). c.1935. (Collection of the author).

products, American quality and innovation resurfaced in Composition, a statement of his leftist political beliefs cloaked in a humble image appropriated from a cigar box.

S. Davis: ‘Davis Rejoinder’, Art Digest 9 (April 1935), p.26. In Davis’s 1935 cover design for Art Front, he specifically called for ‘free expression’ by artists enrolled in federal art projects; Boyajian and Rutkoski, op. cit. (note 3), no.600. J.R. Lane: exh. cat. Stuart Davis: Art and Theory, New York (Brooklyn Museum) 1978, p.36, grouped Composition with the Art Front cover, saying that

Davis integrated the ‘fine arts with manual and mechanical trades’. It should be noted, however, that artists commonly use all of the implements shown on Davis’s Art Front cover to construct stretchers or to produce paintings, prints and drawings. On the whole, Davis’s paintings have little political comment, but his illustrations and cartoons often make forceful statements.

New information on Barnett Newman’s exhibition history, 1948–52

Genetic moment the painting that Newman contributed to a group show at the Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, in 1948. Newman’s first solo exhibition opened at Parsons, along with a concurrent show of watercolours by Amy Freeman Lee, on 23rd January 1950 and closed nineteen days later.2 Mark Rothko installed Newman’s paintings, following a convention whereby gallery artists helped to install each other’s shows.3 Just one work sold: End of silence (1949), then known as ‘No.24’. The buyer, Frances Cohen, was a friend of Newman’s wife, Annalee; the price was $350, the lowest of any work in the show. After commission and expenses had been deducted, and taking into account an advance of $100 against expected sales, Newman owed the gallery just over fifteen dollars.4 The paintings were given no titles, just numbers. A checklist dated 23rd January 1950 lists only these reference numbers and prices, in the following sequence: no.26 ($900); no.22 ($1200); no.23 ($750); no.24 ($350); no.25 ($900); no.28 ($1200); no.29 ($1200); no.20 ($400); and nos.21, 33 and 36 (each $750).5 The checklist contains no indication of the rationale for the sequence.

14

by JAMES LAWRENCE

THIS ARTICLE CLARIFIES, and offers new information about, Barnett Newman’s early exhibition history.1 It presents evidence about a hitherto unidentified painting in Newman’s first solo exhibition – a painting known only as ‘No.20’ – and supports the existing tentative identification of Abraham (1949) as another of the paintings in that show. It also presents evidence that two of Newman’s paintings were exhibited in 1952, a year during which he is generally thought to have exhibited nothing, and identifies as

This article originated in research conducted during a 2004–05 fellowship at the Smithsonian Institution and draws from my doctoral thesis at the University of Texas at Austin (2006). I thank John P. O’Neill, Heidi Colsman-Freyberger and Brigid Herold at the Barnett Newman Foundation for their generous assistance. I would also like to thank David Anfam and Richard Shiff for providing additional information. 1 The most concise and thorough discussion of Newman’s exhibition history is Ann Temkin’s essay for the catalogue of the 2002 Newman retrospective, reviewed in this Magazine, 144 (2002), pp.583–85; A. Temkin: ‘Barnett Newman on exhibition’, in idem, ed.: exh. cat. Barnett Newman, Philadelphia (Philadelphia Museum of Art) and London (Tate Modern) 2002–03, pp.18–75.

2

Exhibition chronology, probably compiled in 1961; Washington, Archives of American Art (hereafter cited as AAA), Betty Parsons Gallery records and Betty Parsons papers, reel 4089, frames 782–95. Amy Freeman Lee, who died in 2004, taught at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas. 3 On 16th April 1950 Newman helped to install Clyfford Still’s solo exhibition in the main gallery at Parsons. Rothko refers to this in a letter that he sent to Newman from Paris; Mark Rothko to Barnett Newman, 16th April 1950; AAA, Barnett Newman papers, reel 3481, frames 337–38. 4 Account statement, Betty Parsons Gallery to Barnett Newman, 17th May 1950; AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4122, frame 818. 5 Ibid., frame 814. the burl ington m aga zin e



cl



july 2008

473

BARNETT NEWMAN AT BETTY PARSONS GALLERY, NEW YORK

46. Installation photograph of Barnett Newman’s 1950 solo exhibition at Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, showing (left to right): Onement III, Covenant, Horizon light (hung vertically) and The promise. Photograph by Aaron Siskind. (Courtesy of the Barnett Newman Foundation, New York; © The Aaron Siskind Foundation, New York).

47. Barnett Newman at his 1950 solo exhibition, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York. Shown are (left to right): part of The promise, Be I, Yellow painting and End of silence. Photograph by Aaron Siskind. (Courtesy of the Barnett Newman Foundation, New York; © The Aaron Siskind Foundation, New York).

The only work positively connected to its reference number so far is ‘No.24’, End of silence. This suggests that the checklist ran clockwise from the entrance to the show, but the evidence of one work is insufficient. Fortunately, additional evidence connects ten of the eleven works in the show to their reference numbers. Three photographs by Aaron Siskind (Figs.46–48) confirm the presence of nine identified paintings. These photographs show all the paintings on three walls, but the west wall, which faced the entrance to the main gallery, was not captured in full. In an article of 1969, Lawrence Alloway published a list of twelve works in the show: Abraham; Be (1949; now known as Be I ); Concord (1949); Covenant (1949); Dionysius (1949); End of silence; Horizon light (1949); The name I (1949); The secret; The promise (1949); Onement III (1949); and Tundra (1950).6 There were, in fact, eleven works on display, and Alloway excluded Yellow painting (1949). Alloway consulted with Newman and revised his list several times.7 Siskind’s photographs confirm all but four paintings: Abraham, Dionysius, The name I and The secret. No painting known as solely as The secret exists, although the title has been connected to Yellow painting.8 Newman gave Yellow painting to Annalee in December 1952, just as he had given her Onement I (1948) in December 1948 and Two edges (1948) in December 1949.9 Yellow painting was not exhibited after the 1950 show until Thomas Hess organised a posthumous retrospective for the Museum of Modern Art, New York, in 1971, by which time it bore its current name.10 Insofar as ‘secret’ is a synonym for ‘private’ (in the sense of ‘concealed from view’), the fact that Newman gave Yellow painting to Annalee is intriguing, but there are many possible explanations for the discrepancy between Alloway’s list and the current titles of Newman’s paintings. One explanation is that Parsons apparently held five works by Newman that were not in the exhibition. According to an inventory sheet titled ‘Barnett Benedict Newman, Jan 23rd – Feb 11th 1950’, five works numbered 1–5 were in stock at the gallery at the time of the show.11 It is possible that The name I and/or other paintings were present but not displayed. No prices are given for these five works, and there is no suggestion that they were for sale. There is no concrete evidence of their identity, but possibly they were smaller works on display in the back office. Connections between the numbers on the checklist and the names by which the paintings are now known have hitherto been tentative. Documents in the Archives of American Art provide evidence that allows us to reconcile ten of the works in the show with the numbers by which they were identified. An inventory sheet headed ‘Barnett Benedict Newman, 1950’ lists the dimensions for two works: ‘No.21’ at ‘72h x 34w’, and ‘No.26’ at ‘69h by 52w’.12 The dimensions listed for ‘No.21’ correspond to those of Onement III. This confirms that the checklist ran clockwise beginning with ‘No.26’, The promise. The dimensions given for ‘No.26’ do not correspond to any known Newman painting executed during or before 1950 unless height and width are transposed, in which case the measurements correspond accurately to The promise.

6

L. Alloway: ‘Notes on Barnett Newman’, Art International 13 (1969), pp.35–39. Lawrence Alloway to Barnett Newman, 30th March 1969; New York, Barnett Newman Foundation archives (hereafter cited as BNFA). 8 R. Shiff, C. Mancusi-Ungaro and H. Colsman-Freyberger: Barnett Newman: A catalogue raisonné, New Haven and London 2004, p.198. 9 Ibid., pp.170, 172 and 198. 10 A typed, provisional list of paintings for the exhibition includes the series The stations of the cross: lema sabachthani (1958–66), which was added to the show after Newman’s death in July 1970. The list was therefore typed after that date; AAA, Thomas Hess papers, reel 5028, frames 595–601. 11 AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4122, frame 816. This inventory sheet also contains the prices as given on the document cited at note 5 above. 7

48. Part of the west wall at Barnett Newman’s 1950 solo exhibition, Betty Parsons Gallery, New York, showing (left) Concord and (right) Tundra. Photograph by Aaron Siskind. (Courtesy of the Barnett Newman Foundation, New York; © The Aaron Siskind Foundation, New York).

474

july 2008



cl



t h e b u r li n g t o n ma g a z i n e

BARNETT NEWMAN AT BETTY PARSONS GALLERY, NEW YORK

Newman confirmed that Abraham was in the show, and drew for Alloway an installation sketch that showed Abraham to the left of Concord.13 Further evidence comes from a checklist for 1949–1950, a group show at Parsons that ran from 31st May to 18th June 1950,14 and from Stuart Preston’s review of 1949–1950 in The New York Times. Preston writes of ‘Barnett Newman’s black bar on a blackish background’, a description that fits no work of the time other than Abraham.15 Newman’s work in this show is listed at $900, the same as ‘No.25’ in Newman’s solo exhibition four months earlier. ‘No.25’ was also one of six paintings that remained in the gallery after the solo exhibition closed.16 We may conclude that ‘No.25’ is Abraham. Following this reasoning, ‘No.26’ is The promise; ‘No.22’ is Be I; ‘No.23’ is Yellow painting; ‘No.28’ is Concord; ‘No.29’ is Tundra; ‘No.21’ is Onement III; ‘No.33’ is Covenant; and ‘No.36’ is Horizon light. This leaves ‘No.20’. Given its position on the west wall (Fig.48) next to Tundra, which is 89 inches wide, ‘No.20’ was probably one of his smaller works; this is supported by the more modest price of $400. Both The name I and Dionysius, which Alloway listed as paintings included in the show, are similar in size to Covenant, Yellow painting and The promise. Those paintings were on sale for $750 or $900, and it is unlikely that a canvas of this size would have been listed at $400. In the months following the 1950 solo exhibition, two exhibitions outside New York included a work, or works, by Newman. Post-abstract painting 1950: France – America, at the Provincetown Art Association in Provincetown, Massachusetts, included works by thirty-five artists, many of whom had participated in the ‘Irascibles’ protest in May 1950. Most of the works in the show were paintings; David Smith’s sculpture Steel drawing I (1945) was a notable exception.17 It seems that the show’s organiser, Fritz Bultman, invited Newman’s active participation in directing or curating the installation. When Bultman sent Newman the promotional flyer for the show, he wrote on the back: ‘Dear Barney – Don’t you want to come up as director of this? Or just come up? Until now a very quiet summer’.18 Newman’s contribution to the show is identified in the checklist as ‘Number 20’. A more informative listing appears in the catalogue for the Contemporary American painting: 5th biennial purchase exhibition at the Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, from 15th October to 10th December 1950. H. Harvard Arnason, then chairman of the Department of Art at the University of Minnesota, selected the works for the show. ‘No.20’ by Barnett Newman was listed at $400, the same price as ‘No.20’ in Newman’s solo exhibition nine months earlier. The catalogue gives its dimensions as 33 1⁄8 by 33 1⁄8 ins.19 These dimensions precisely match those of Onement IV (Fig.49), which is slightly larger than End of silence. The evidence firmly indicates that the work known as ‘No.20’ in 1950 is Onement IV. With few exceptions, the paintings in Newman’s first solo show followed a spartan set of formal predicates: parallel-edged stripes and flat, expansive fields. End of silence, the most heavily textured and ‘painterly’ work in the show, was the anomaly. Most

12

Ibid., frame 815. Y.-A. Bois: ‘On two paintings by Barnett Newman’, October 108 (2004), pp.3–27, esp. p.5, note 1. 14 AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4089, frame 361; and op. cit. (note 2). Newman’s contribution is listed as no.17 on the checklist, which runs in strict numerical sequence beginning with no.6. 15 S. Preston: ‘Chiefly modern’, The New York Times (4th June 1950), p.X6. 16 Op. cit. (note 11). 17 C. Giménez et al.: exh. cat. David Smith: A centennial, New York (Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum), Paris (Centre Georges Pompidou) and London (Tate Modern) 2006–07, pp.296–98, no.37. 18 Flyer for Post-abstract painting 1950: France – America; BNFA. The exhibition 13

49. Onement IV, by Barnett Newman. 1949. Oil and casein on canvas, 83.8 by 96.5 cm. (Allen Memorial Art Museum, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH).

of the paintings appeared anonymous and monotonous by the standards of the day. Before entering the show, viewers caught a glimpse of Covenant through the doorway. Two stripes interrupt the maroon field: a firmly constrained one-inch band of black about two feet from the left edge, and a freely applied yellow stripe about two feet from the right edge. Upon entering the gallery, viewers saw Tundra, Onement IV and Onement III in one field of view. The tones, colours, field effects and linear definition of these paintings all vary considerably. In 1950, however, expressive variation in painting tended toward indexical marks that explained themselves and betrayed their origins: Jackson Pollock’s choreographic recordings of fluid distribution, for example, or Willem de Kooning’s impromptu but controlled linear adventures. An entire gallery of Newman’s canvases implied legibility, not least because the stripe motif appeared in enough permutations to suggest a code. No clear message emerged from the syntax, however. The canvases shared a common language which resisted translation. Visitors accustomed to forty years of abstraction emerged baffled and looked for qualities in the canvases that might explain their formal isolation from the abstract tradition. In Newman’s work they found few or none. There was scant evidence of considered development and scarcely a hint of why Newman’s idiom had evolved the way it had. Newman’s slender exhibition history offered few clues. Before 1950, Newman had exhibited fewer than ten paintings. Only two of the canvases he painted in 1947 – a crucial year of stylistic development – were shown in public before 1958, the year of his mid-career retrospective exhibition at Bennington College.20 Euclidian abyss (1947) appeared (along with Newman’s drawing Gea, 1945) in The ideographic picture, a group show of contemporary

ran from 6th August to 4th September 1950. The flyer includes a brief text written by Weldon Kees; see I. Sandler: ‘The Irascible Weldon Kees’, in D.A. Siedell, ed.: Weldon Kees and the arts at midcentury, Lincoln 2003, pp.39–50. 19 H.H. Arnason: exh. cat. Contemporary American painting: 5th biennial purchase exhibition, Minneapolis (Walker Art Center) 1950, no.80. Arnason was sufficiently curious about Newman’s work to solicit information from Betty Parsons prior to the exhibition. When Newman discovered this he sent additional information to Arnason; Barnett Newman to H. Harvard Arnason, 27th September 1950; BNFA. 20 Exh. cat. Barnett Newman: A retrospective, Bennington VT (Bennington College) 1958. This exhibition included eighteen paintings executed between 1946 and 1952. 21 B.B. Newman: exh. cat. The ideographic picture, New York (Betty Parsons Gallery) 1947, nos.7 (Gea) and 8 (Euclidian abyss). the burl ington m aga zin e



cl



july 2008

475

BARNETT NEWMAN AT BETTY PARSONS GALLERY, NEW YORK

time it was Marie Carr Taylor, whose economical sculptures of animals seem to owe something to Henry Moore.25 None of the sixteen paintings was sold, and, although the reviews were more considered, they were no more enthusiastic. The expenses for the exhibition (including advertising, printed announcements, postage, transportation and elevator service) came to $108.33. Newman still owed the gallery $15.86 from the 1950 show, and Parsons advanced him a further $75 in 1951.26 It is generally held that Newman ceased to exhibit his work for several years after this show, deterred by the hostile critical reception and lack of sales. Checklists for two group shows at Parsons during 1952, however, include works by Newman. One from the opening day of Gallery group 1951–52 refers to ‘#4 ’48’ and notes that the work was not for sale.27 The checklist for Recent paintings includes ‘#20’, listed at $600.28 There is no evidence that this was the same ‘No.20’ that Newman exhibited at Parsons and elsewhere in 1950. The significantly higher price suggests that it might be a different painting. Early opinion on Newman fell into two categories. Either he was playing a joke on the art world or he was sincere but mired in solipsism. Thomas Hess, a sceptic who later became a staunch advocate, detected bunkum along with misplaced bravado. His review of the 1951 exhibition refers to The voice (1950), The wild (1950) and Vir heroicus sublimis (1950–51), which were listed in the exhibition as ‘2-1951’, ‘8-1951’ and ‘1-1951’ respectively:

50. Genetic moment, by Barnett Newman. 1947. Canvas, 96.5 by 71 cm. (Fondation Beyeler, Riehen/Basel).

Barnet Newmann [sic ] (Parsons) again wins his race with the avant-garde, literally breaking the tape. This genial theoretician filled a gallery with stripes and backgrounds – a thin white line surrounded by white; a red line surrounded by nothing at all; and a Cecil B. de Mille-size number on Indian-red with five verticals were some of the better ideas presented. In discussing the announcement of his exhibition – a white card printed in white ink – the artist suggested that it was a combination of the tabula rasa and Huck Finn’s invisible ink. This may also give some idea of the exhibition.29

art that Newman curated for Betty Parsons in 1947.21 In June 1948 Genetic moment (Fig.50) appeared in Survey of the season, a group show at Parsons.22 Newman’s mature style, with its economical but varied vocabulary, was not seen in public until Onement II (1948) appeared in an exhibition at Parsons usually known only as ‘Group Show’ but properly titled Painted in 1949: European and American painters.23 Onement II prompted Helen Carlson’s well-known rhetorical question in The New York Sun: ‘It’s as pointless as a yard rule, which at least has the advantage of being functional. Is Newman trying to write finis to the art of abstraction?’24 Without a sense of where he began and the path he took, the place he had reached seemed to be in the middle of nowhere. Newman’s second solo exhibition, which ran at Parsons from 23rd April to 12th May 1951, was no more successful than his first. Once again, Newman shared the gallery with another artist. This

Stuart Preston of The New York Times, on the other hand, suspected that Newman was sincere but that the depleted intellectual appeal of his paintings offered thin gruel: ‘These canvases are of interest because they put the challenge of extreme abstract theory so cleanly. They point to arguments that have more to do with philosophy than with art criticism. For works of art are not made with theories but with paint and stone’.30 Preston’s sense that Newman occupied an aesthetically barren utopia was also apparent nine months later, in a review of an exhibition that claimed to trace international relationships in constructivism: ‘Certainly nowadays an artist can hardly be unaware of what his colleagues in the free world, at least, are up to. But who knows, there may be, this very moment, a Pollock behind the Iron Curtain, a Barnett Newman in some Shangri-La’.31 By December

22 AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4089, frame 363. Genetic moment is listed as no.7, with a price of $300. This checklist bears a handwritten and erroneous date of 1950. Survey of the season actually ran during June 1948. A review in The New York Times refers directly to seven of the participating artists and gives the titles of three of the paintings in the show, including Jackson Pollock’s Cathedral; S.H.: ‘New art displays open at galleries’, The New York Times (5th June 1948), p.13. 23 Op. cit. (note 2); the exhibition ran from 10th to 29th October 1949. 24 H. Carlson: ‘Diversity of Style and Media’, The New York Sun (14th October 1949), p.27. 25 Parsons displayed several abstract sculptures of animals in this period. Bird, by Henry Moore, appeared in the small gallery during 1949–1950, the group show that included Newman’s Abraham. Checklist for 1949–1950 (small gallery), June 1950; AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4089, frame 362.

26 Account statement, Betty Parsons Gallery to Barnett Newman, 21st May 1951; AAA, Betty Parsons papers, reel 4122, frame 819. A handwritten note confirms the outstanding balance from 1950 and the further loan in 1951. 27 Ibid., reel 4089, frame 365. Gallery group 1951–52 ran from 12th to 31st May 1952; op. cit. (note 2). 28 AAA, Betty Parsons Papers, reel 4089, frames 340 (without prices) and 366 (with prices); Recent paintings ran from 29th September to 11th October 1952. 29 T.B. H[ess]: ‘Reviews and previews: Barnet Newmann’ [sic ], Artnews 50 (June–August 1951), p.47. The voice, The wild and Vir heroicus sublimis are in the permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art, New York. 30 S. Preston: ‘Diverse new shows’, The New York Times (29th April 1951), p.X6. 31 Idem: ‘Modern pioneers’, ibid. (27th January 1952), p.X9; the exhibition under discussion was Coincidences at the Rose Fried Gallery.

476

july 2008



cl



t h e b u r li n g t o n ma g a z i n e

BARNETT NEWMAN AT BETTY PARSONS GALLERY, NEW YORK

1955, however, when Newman participated in an exhibition for the first time in more than three years, Preston could acknowledge the artist’s role in the rise of Abstract Expressionism. Horizon light appeared (as ‘No.7’) in Ten years, an exhibition to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Betty Parsons Gallery. Preston wrote: ‘Once a far outpost of the advance guard and now a secure terrain, this gallery has promoted adventurous talent which later received wide recognition. Hans Hofmann, Barnett Newman, Jackson Pollock, Ad Reinhardt, Mark Rothko and the late Bradley Tomlin (all represented here) are some of the painters who have fashioned the now famous style of abstract expressionism, the chosen style of most

contemporary American non-figurative artists’.32 By 1955 it was much easier to consider ‘Abstract Expressionism’ as shorthand for a group endeavour than as an umbrella term for individual projects. It is consistent with the incommensurability of Newman’s work and the critical language of the early 1950s that Newman’s reputation improved markedly between October 1952 and December 1955, during which time he exhibited nothing.

Letters to the Editor

major and minor works alike are used as examples in pedagogic ensembles, again overpowered by gimmicky paraphernalia. Certain works are entirely unlabelled (a print by S.W. Hayter, a seventeenth-century Dutch interior), existing only as visual stimulae in a learning area. The café franchises in the entrance hall and the jokey clown heads hanging on the stairs (designed by a communications firm) set the tone that extends into the galleries. Touch-screen and interactive interfaces abound; one painting has funny ‘thought bubbles’ attached to it; mobile phones are used freely in the galleries; noise levels are often high; and the computer monitors in the Resource Centre show search histories almost entirely of chat rooms, trivia video sites or online shopping. It is in this context – the demystification of art to the point of disrespect – that the very low hanging of many works does, contrary to O’Neill’s claims, represent increased risk to the physical safety of the collections. Of course there is a thrill in being given intimate access to works of art, as long as there is also a sense of curatorial care. But without that aura of reverence the effect is to devalue the work and leave it more vulnerable to casual abuse. Indeed, a bronze by Zadkine, free-standing on an activities bench,

A visit to Kelvingrove Your November 2007 Editorial (pp.747–48), to which Mark O’Neill’s letter objected in your May issue (p.330), only began to touch on the failings of the fine art displays at the Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow. I write as a Glasgow resident and frequent visitor to the Museum. The overwhelming problem at Kelvingrove is that the ability to concentrate and reflect is compromised by intrusive, crude information scrambles and an insistent parading of ‘enhanced visitor experience’ that is ultimately counterproductive. The main gallery of wonderful modern French paintings has children’s activity islands a few steps away from the works, creating a playschool hubbub. Flip-chart labels for each painting (Fig.51) demand that viewers huddle within inches of the closely hung works. A Picasso and a Dufy hang at knee height, unlit, behind a computer-screen animation whose voice-over broadcasts, in a charming French accent, a tale of ‘Monsieur Dufy’s Day Out’. Simultaneously a soundtrack from the adjacent Italian Renaissance gallery explains the rudiments of perspective and iconography. When you reach the Italian pictures (Bellini, Botticelli, Titian) your view is cluttered and obstructed by giant graphic boards and by cases of armour, artefacts and explanations of paint manufacture (Fig.52). The clunky (often malfunctioning) light show projected directly onto the Botticelli Annunciation is particularly shocking. Then come strains of Josquin des Prés from a ‘side chapel’ complete with mini-pews, a big information panel about altarpieces, a hefty hand-placard with yet more facts, and a painting from the workshop of Pesellino. The music (available on disc from the shop, a label tells us) is a rather approximate historical match with the painting and serves only as mood Muzak in a caricature of the kind of solemn contemplation that is actually so difficult to achieve in this Museum. The next room of Dutch art restores some dignity, marred only by obtrusive story-boards; but too often at Kelvingrove any sense of art’s unique qualities and the veneration it might deserve have been sacrificed, presumably as being synonymous with exclusivity and elitism. When art’s preciousness or emotive power are heeded at all they are not given space to make their effect but instead are pedantically and rather condescendingly ‘thematised’, as in the Pesellino chapel or in zones about conservation and restoration or ‘Scottish Identity in Art’ (cue the bagpipes). On the ground floor SIR,

32

Idem: ‘Year-end exhibitions’, ibid. (25th December 1955), p.X14; Ten years ran from 19th December 1955 to 15th January 1956.

51. Flip-chart labels on either side of Charles Camoin’s Place de Clichy, Paris, Kelvingrove Museum and Art Gallery, Glasgow, 2008. the burl ington m aga zin e



cl



july 2008

477

New Information on Barnett Newman's Exhibition History, 1948-52

was a friend of Newman's wife, Annalee; the price was $350, the lowest of any ..... bubbles' attached to it; mobile phones are used freely in the galleries; noise ...

3MB Sizes 0 Downloads 82 Views

Recommend Documents

New Information on Barnett Newman's Exhibition History, 1948-52
expected sales, Newman owed the gallery just over fifteen dollars.4. The paintings were .... smaller works on display in the back office. Connections between the ...

The Barnett Shale
Uncertainties remain for Tier 2 – Not enough data exists to conclusively ...... Within the Barnett, long-term recovery data are not available due to the ...... 713.333.2965 Fax│ 1800 West Loop South │ Suite 300 │ Houston, Texas 77027.

Exhibition Registration.pdf
Page 2 of 3. BOOTH PREFERENCES (PLEASE ENTER BOOTH NUMBER FROM DIAGRAM). FIRST. CHOICE. SECOND. CHOICE. THIRD. CHOICE. FOURTH.

pdf-1321\cardinal-newmans-dream-of-gerontius-primary-source ...
... the apps below to open or edit this item. pdf-1321\cardinal-newmans-dream-of-gerontius-primary ... dition-by-john-henry-newman-julius-joseph-gliebe.pdf.

new berkeley - Computer History Museum
APP LI CATIONS. Counting, time interval, EPUT* .... gladly be supplied on request. Call your nearest Berkeley representative (listed below), or write us now.

Leaflet Euromaintenance 4.0 Exhibition & Sponsorship.pdf ...
Page 1 of 4. On the verge of the 4th industrial revolution, IoT and predictive analytics are bringing. unseen possibilities in maintenance, reliability and condition monitoring. Euromaintenance 4.0 will provide a comprehensive and attractive agenda o

Information on Aps.pdf
Rando 4Me bills itself as 'Anti-Social Media' because. it doesn't require conversation or linking in with people to send/receive. images. As there is no way of ...

pdf-0716\college-algebra-graphs-and-models-by-raymond-barnett ...
... the apps below to open or edit this item. pdf-0716\college-algebra-graphs-and-models-by-raymond-barnett-michael-ziegler-karl-byleen-david-sobecki.pdf.

INTERIOR AND EXHIBITION DESIGN WORKSHOP ... -
organization of content, discussion of logistics, examination of the physical and digital tools needed ... Timings: 9 AM - 1 PM. Venue: Yalamaya Kendra, Patandhoka. About the Facilitators: Yashodha Pathirana. Yashodha Pathirana is an Interior and Set

Akerman Exhibition December Event Handout.pdf
responsive service. Page 3 of 4. Akerman Exhibition December Event Handout.pdf. Akerman Exhibition December Event Handout.pdf. Open. Extract. Open with.