Goucher Collects: Schools of Thought

GOUCHER COLLECTS:

Schools of Thought

GOUCHER COLLECTS:

Schools of Thought April 6 – May 19, 2017 Silber Gallery Sanford J. Ungar Athenaeum Goucher College Baltimore, MD

This exhibition was made possible by the generous support of Toni Perlman Young ’67, P ’98 in loving memory of Stuart B. Young P ’98 who taught her about collecting and living with art

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To everyone who made this exhibition possible, I offer my deepest gratitude.

My first thanks go to Toni Young ’67, whose long-term vision of what might be possible for the collection at Goucher College turned an idea into a reality.

To Adam Siegel for his unwavering support and guidance throughout the whole planning and execution phases. To Amy Bloomberg for helping me with all of the planning of the additional events surrounding this exhibit, and for being my main go-to person for everything. To Trishana Bowden, vice president of advancement, and the rest of Office of Advancement, in particular Susan Cohen and Karen Lyon, for providing me entrée and introductions to our alumnae/i. To Professors April Oettinger and Gail Husch, for brainstorming ideas, proofreading essays, and countless words of encouragement. To Laura Amussen, director of the Silber and Rosenberg Galleries, whose help on and support of this project was amazing and continuous. To the Office of Communications, especially Ayumi Yasuda, for all of their work in creating the beautiful catalogue and print information, and for their work in promoting the exhibition.

To Facilities Management and Campus Security, thank you for your generous cooperation and for being amenable to the additional work this project required. To the student gallery workers who helped to hang the exhibition, Sara Kattler-Gold ’17, Jessye Carlson ’17, Abigail Jones ’17, and Isabella Torres ’19, we could not have done it without you! And to the two students who spent the semester in class planning and executing this exhibition with me, Victoria Gingrich ’17 and Ilana Peskin ’19, congratulations on a job well done!

To Provost Leslie Lewis for her enthusiastic support and guidance.

To President José Bowen for allowing me this opportunity and taking a chance on my ideas.

Finally, and most importantly, to all of the lenders who were kind enough to open up their homes and their collections to Goucher and to trust Goucher with some of their treasured possessions. This exhibition would not be possible without the generous support of each of you.

Thank you!

Sonja Klein Sugerman Art and Artifact Collection Curator

| 1 |

WORKS ON VIEW in this exhibition are from the Goucher College Art Collection as well as the following generous lenders: Anonymous Kit Smyth Basquin ’63 Lisa Biskin ’85 Frona Brown ’65 and Dr. Beryl Rosenstein Melinda J. Burdette ’72 Constance Rose Caplan ’57 Elaine Kaplan Freeman ’58 Linda Grant ’72 Fern Karesh Hurst ’68 Mary B. Hyman ’71 Miriam E. Katowitz ’73 and Arthur Radin Barbara Kornblatt ’75 and David Kornblatt* Elizabeth Fagell Levine ’58 Nancy Magnuson Nancy Patz ’52 Lois Schwartzman Raphling ’59 Nancy Rosen Blackwood ’70 and Michael Blackwood Louise Rorer Rosett ’67, P ’92 and Walter Rosett P ’92 Arlene Palmer Schwind ’71 and Wilmont Schwind Dr. Robert Shapiro Jean Flah Silber ’54 and Sidney Silber* Pamela Cook Stearman ’77 and Robert Stearman Betty Applestein Sweren ’52, P ’75 and Dr. Edgar Sweren P ’75 Barbara Toll ’67 Jamila and Philip Weintraub P ’17 Toni Perlman Young ’67, P ’98 and Stuart B. Young P ’98*

*deceased

ABOUT THE ART AND ARTIFACT COLLECTION The Art and Artifact Collection at Goucher dates to the founding of the college in 1885, when Dr. John Franklin Goucher donated pieces from his personal collection for the benefit of students. The purpose of Goucher’s Art and Artifact Collection, which now numbers over 2,000 pieces, has always been two-fold: to adorn college buildings and grounds with art, and to serve as a teaching tool. Over the years, the college has purchased some items for its collection, but the majority of pieces have been gifts from alumnae/i and other generous donors. During your visit to the college, we hope you are able to enjoy some of the additional pieces from the collection on view in our public spaces, including our most recent gift of twenty outdoor sculptures.

ABOUT GOUCHER COLLECTS Great art collections represent the passion, expertise, and commitment of their owners. Now in its second year, Goucher College and its Board of Trustees have invited art-collecting alumnae/i, parents, and friends to share that passion. These generous lenders have offered exemplary works from their private collections in order to share the joy and inspiration they find in the art they love.

Goucher Collects, on view in the Silber Gallery from early April through Commencement, features works drawn from Goucher’s Art and Artifact Collection as well as from individual collections. Teaching through art is central to the mission of the college’s collection, and this exhibition highlights a piece of the history of art as well as the importance and pleasure of collecting.

| 4 |

Dale Chihuly (American, b. 1941) Royal Raspberry Seaform Pair, 2007 Blown glass 8 ½ inches high Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Julia Gelfand ’75 and David Lang 2009.02.0001

| 5 |

Garry Winogrand (American, 1928-1984) No 5: New York City, 1969 Gelatin silver print 11 x 14 inches Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Mr. and Mrs. James Hunter 1992.01.0050

SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT What is a school? A style? A movement? Why do we use these terms when we talk about art and what does it mean? What is behind this vocabulary?

The language surrounding art is often considered daunting, especially 20th century art, and styles and movements change with rapid speed, keeping pace with the changes in life, fashion, and music—a modern pace for a modern world. Schools, styles, and movements are seldom self-contained or simply defined. They are often overlapping and always complicated.

The one constant throughout the history of art is that it is neither created nor received in a vacuum. Artists are always responding to events in history, the work of other artists, and, of course, the public and the critics.

Some of the biggest and most dramatic shifts in the art world happened in response to the status quo; for example, the Impressionist movement was a reaction to the limitations of the French Salon.

To greatly simplify things, style can refer to multiple aspects of the art: the technique, the philosophy behind the art, or the form of expression/ appearance of artworks. A school is generally a group of artists who follow the same style, share the same teachers, or have the same aims. (This last one is similar to style.) Schools are also associated by location, e.g., the Flemish School. A movement, though very similar to a school, is slightly different: a group of artists who share a common style, theme, or ideology, but need not be in the same location, e.g., Pop Art. For this second Goucher Collects exhibition, we are endeavoring to look at various schools, styles, and movements of art in the 20th century in America. This exhibition is grouped by region and organized chronologically, thus showing some of the similarities and differences that arose over the course of the 20th century in a variety of media, including: painting, drawing, prints, photography, sculpture, artifacts, art glass, functional glass, ceramics, and art books. The main essays in this year’s catalogue are written by two Goucher students who are taking a practicum in Museum Studies and spent the semester assisting in the planning and executing of this exhibit. The remaining short essays are by some of the lenders, who are in their own rights experts in their fields of collecting.

We hope you enjoy!

Sonja Klein Sugerman Art and Artifact Collection Curator

| 7 |

| 8 |

FEATURED SCHOOLS AND STYLES IN THIS EXHIBITION ESSAYS BY GOUCHER STUDENTS AND LENDERS

Lila Katzen (American, 1925-1998) Composition, 1955 Oil on canvas 72 x 72 inches Signed upper center Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Selma and Israel Rosen 1965.04.0002

| 10 |

THE NEW YORK SCHOOL Art in the United States throughout the 20th century can be characterized by the word “reactionary.” Starting at the turn of the century and continuing onward, all of the styles and schools of art were reactions against the ones that came before them.

At the end of the 19th century, American Impressionism was the norm, but a group of artists reacted to the American Impressionist movement inspired by radical artists in Europe. This group of artists, spearheaded

by Robert Henri, chose to make a return to realism despite the rise in recognition and popularity of more abstract methods. To Henri, “art was life, and it was the artist’s task to see and to transfer directly what he saw; then the viewer would see just what the artist saw.”1 Henri forged a bond with a group of newspaper illustrators, whom he convinced to begin painting. William James Glackens, George Luks, Everett Shinn, and John Sloan, known as the Philadelphia Four, moved to New York between 1896 and 1904.2 These landscapes and cityscapes led to the beginning of the group of artists known as the Ash Can School. These artists served as “visual sociologists,” documenting what they saw in New York City.3 Their paintings depicted “the changing geography of the city, the disparity between wealth and poverty, the city’s ethnic populations and neighborhoods, the public display played out in the streets, parks, squares, and stores, commercial entertainments—from shopping to theatergoing—and the changing relationship between men and women.”4 The first generation artists of the Ash Can School, despite what the name of the group might suggest, were not part of an organized school, rather there was variation among style and subject. However, the artists were all urban

realists, and they supported Henri’s idea of “art for life’s sake,” instead of the traditional theory of “art for art’s sake.”5 In the early 20th century, a new wave of artistic style, known as Precisionism, emerged in the New York art scene. The idea of the “American Dream,” along with utilitarianism and the exaggerated view of New York City as an urban and technological utopia, greatly influenced this group of artists.6 Precisionists created works that highlighted “very American subject matter.”7 Both the photographs and paintings from this movement were heavily reliant on the use of architecture. Precisionist artists were fascinated by the industrial architecture found in urban New York City following the industrial revolution.8 Artists chose to focus on skyscrapers, factories, steel bridges, automobiles, machines, and other industrialized inventions that had become commonly used and seen in daily life in the twenties.9 These modern, industrialized forms, found mostly in outdoor urban settings, featured geometric shapes with hard edges, which Precisionists found particularly visually appealing.10 Charles Sheeler is perhaps one of the most well-known precisionists. Sheeler, who created both paintings and photographs, often used photographs as inspiration for his paintings.11 His works featured “an emphasis upon line, a monochromatic palette, the careful elimination of painterly surfaces.”12 Precisionist art was certainly influenced

by Cubism; however, Precisionists took the early Cubist concepts and further developed them to represent contemporary industrial environments as beautiful places.13 Though the Precisionists were not interested in making pieces that documented the lives

| 11 |

of the people living in their respective environments, their visual interpretations showed their romanticized views of these new technologies.14 The artists removed themselves from social commentary regarding the effects of industrialization, for to them, industrialization represented a utopian paradise.15 In the early 1940s, a new group emerged in New York. These artists were known as Abstract Expressionists, a term that is sometimes used synonymously with the New York School. This group, unlike the earlier groups of artists who aimed to reclaim realism, was defined by the artists’ use of pure abstraction. Abstract Expressionists used different techniques in order to create works that revealed aspects of their individual psyches. Breaking away from traditional protocol, the artists shifted the focus of their work from subject to technique.

In other words, special attention was paid to the process of creating these works.

Jackson Pollock, one of the defining figures of postwar American art, used a very unusual artistic process. He chose not to stretch his canvases and instead of using an easel, he kept his canvas on the floor and moved around it while painting.16 Pollock preferred applying paint with foreign objects, such as sticks and knives, instead of brushes.17 These paintings, which feature layers upon layers of dripping paint, were typical of his style. He removed himself from the works of European Surrealists, which were contemporary during this time.18 His personal style and use of technique were described as “immediately American,” for no one had ever seen pieces like his before.19 According to Pollock’s friend and fellow Abstract Expressionist, Willem de Kooning, Pollock “broke the ice” within the art movement.20 However, Pollock disagrees with claims that his art is “nonrepresentational” as well as “nonobjective.”21 To Pollock, not all pieces of art must have an

| 12 |

obvious subject; abstraction goes against this.

“Painting is self-discovery. Every good artist paints what he is.”22 According to Pollock, the artist and the artwork must have a give-and-take relationship in order for the final product to be successful. This relationship creates a pure harmony that is necessary for abstract paintings.23 Abstract Expressionists changed the New York art scene by focusing on process first as opposed to subject. To these artists, there was a direct relationship between context and content. Once the process of painting began, the decisionmaking process could begin as well. The subject of the painting would eventually reveal itself to the artist, though in an abstract form.

Following the rise of Abstract Expressionism, another revolutionary style of art was introduced to the New York scene.

Minimal Art refers to “abstract, geometric painting and sculpture executed in the United States in the 1960s.”24 A reaction to Abstract Expressionism, Minimal Art primarily featured squares, cubes, and right angles.25 To Minimalist artists, the purpose of their works was to reject the nonconcrete, process-focused works that had previously been represented in the abstract art scene.

In the 1960s, a preoccupation with popular culture in its different forms led to thinking about art in a different way. Fine arts had always separated itself from the other art forms, and high art had always been kept distinctly separated from low art.26 For these reasons, the emergence of Pop Art was met with criticism. Andy Warhol became famous for his iconic pieces that featured Marilyn Monroe and the Campbell’s soup can. Many people opposed the merging of popular culture and the art world.27 Critics of the art form complained that the pieces were unoriginal and derivative.28

Robert Motherwell (American, 1915-1991) Spanish Republic XXV B, 1953 Oil on board 20 x 30 inches Signed and dated lower right Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Ethel M. Steuer Epstein ’21 1965.05.0001

Broad exposure to television and movies made celebrities known in most households.

The mass media affected nearly anyone with access to modern technology. This caused new information to be taken into consideration when thinking about Pop Art. “The subject matter of Pop Art, at one level, is known to the spectator in advance of seeing the use the artist makes of it.”29 Another aspect to keep in mind is that Pop Art does not fall into the categories of realistic or abstract art; it lies somewhere in the middle, with ties to both opposing ideas.30 There are different arguments about the transformations of known images that are used within pieces of Pop Art. To some, the known images, such as the Campbell’s soup can in Warhol’s famous piece, have not been altered enough to be considered pieces of art. The use of these images in artwork made people uncomfortable and confused. Critics’ hostility, however, did not prevent the art form from being successful.31 People enjoyed Pop Art because of the popular subject matter and familiarity.

The 20th century in America, and especially in New York, covers many changes in the art world. While certain artists found their niche, there were always other artists who did not agree with the direction of the movement. Therefore, each art movement caused reactionary movements, whether those movements rejected the overall ideas or took influence from them.

Ilana Peskin ’19

Bibliography: Alloway, Lawrence. American Pop Art. New York: Collier, 1974. Print.

Colpitt, Frances. Minimal Art: The Critical Perspective. Seattle: U of Washington, 2010.

Print.

Doris, Sara. Pop Art and the Contest over American Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2014. Print.

Fletcher, Valerie J. Dreams and Nightmares: Utopian Visions in Modern Art. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1983. Print.

Harris, Jonathan. “Painting in Theory.” Art History 21.1 (1998): 146. Art & Architecture Complete. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.

Herskovic, Marika. American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s: An Illustrated Survey: With Artists’ Statements, Artwork, and Biographies. New York: New York School, 2003. Print.

Perl, Jed. Art in America: 1945-1970. New York: Library of America, 2014. Print.

Kramer, Hilton. “Jackson Pollock & the New York School.” New Criterion 17.5 (1999): 17.

Art & Architecture Complete. Web. 7 Mar. 2017.

Tashjian, Dickran. William Carlos Williams and the American Scene: 1920-1940. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art, 1978. Print.

Weinberg, H. Barbara. “The Ashcan School.”

The Met’s Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Apr. 2010.

Web. 07 Mar. 2017.

Young, Mahonri Sharp. The Eight: The Realist Revolt in American Painting. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications, 1973. Print.

1 Young.

17 Ibid.

2 Weinberg.

18 Id.

3 Harris.

19 Herskovic.

4 Ibid.

20 Perl.

5 Weinberg.

21 Herskovic.

6 Fletcher.

22 Ibid.

7 Kramer.

23 Perl.

8 Tashjian.

24 Colpitt.

9 Kramer.

25 Ibid.

10 Ibid.

26 Doris.

11 Tashjian.

27 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

28 Id.

13 Kramer.

29 Alloway.

14 Ibid.

30 Ibid.

15 Id.

31 Id.

16 Perl.

| 15 |

CALIFORNIA IN THE 20TH CENTURY In the late 19th century, it was said that “those who know the Golden State as it really is…will not be surprised at the statement that there is a great deal of culture and taste there.”1 Moving into the 20th century, the melting pot of culture and taste stayed the same, with artists and movements popping up with rapid-fire speed. This was alongside the other schools of art that were prevalent in New York, a capital of art on the East Coast.

However, what differentiates California art is the use of space and color.

Before Ansel Adams and his cadre of photographers, the Pictorial movement of photography was the dominant style up until the beginnings of the Group f/64.

The artists of Pictorialism rejected the camera as machine. They embraced labor intensive methods of producing images, like “gum bichromate printing, which involved hand-coating artist papers with homemade emulsions and pigments, or they made platinum prints, which yielded rich, tonally subtle images.”2 With this, the focus was not on the subject of the photograph itself, but more on the artist as the craftsman and their subjective vision. In response to Pictorialism, eleven photographers announced themselves as Group f/64. The name “f/64” is a reference to the smallest aperture on a camera during this time. Four well known artists have sprung out of that group: Ansel Adams, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, and Edward Weston. Others such as Willard Van Dyke, Sonya Noskowiak, and Henry Swift have remained less well known throughout time. The main idea behind this particular movement was that the artists wanted to present the world as it actually was through the vehicle of a camera.

| 16 |

Group f/64 did not want to try to manipulate the image in any way as “the camera was able to see the world more clearly than the human eye, because it didn’t project personal prejudices onto the subject.”3 In this movement, they regarded photography as a medium with unique properties, the main one being that art can be made with a lens-based medium. In one of their manifestos that was displayed at their inaugural exhibition, they stated that their group “limits its members… to those workers who are striving to define photography as an art form by simple and direct presentation through purely photographic methods.”4 Simply put, they were not looking to showcase their work as a focus on the artists of Pictorialism, but to put a focus on the actual picture itself without any kind of editing.

There also seemed to be a broad range of what subject this straight photography would encompass: The men seemed to focus on landscapes, while women looked more broadly at the world and the people that inhabited it. For example, when Dorothea Lange joined, the group “expanded further to include documentary photography. Catalyzed by the Great Depression, Lange’s images were visual testimony of the heartrending conditions.”5 Ultimately, this movement did not want to place personal prejudices on the subject of the photograph, yet it also allowed the photographer to be a “selector.” This meant that they were able to choose what they wanted to photograph and selectively frame the focal point. In terms of the actual namesake aperture, this allowed photographs to be in sharp focus and to broaden the field of vision in the “eye” of the camera.

Ann McCoy (American, b. 1946) Underworld, circa 1980 Color lithograph 41 ½ x 29 ½ inches Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Stanley de Lisser 1981.01.0043

Garry Winogrand (American, 1928-1984) No 2: New York City, 1968 Gelatin silver print 11 x 14 inches Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Mr. and Mrs. James Hunter 1992.01.0047

Moving away from Group f/64 and the realm of photography, is a shift to Abstract Expressionism. It was a style that swept through California during the 1940s and flourished until the middle of the 1950s. Starting in New York, it eventually spread to California, sprouting from a result of energy due to the immediate post-war years of World War II. The movement between the regions of New York and California shared similar physical characteristics, such as the use of large canvases, and that the entire canvas has equal importance, however, there was a distinctive “West Coast” look to Abstract Expressionism, “gritty, rough, and uningratiating in color.”6 Some artists, like Sam Francis, can be easily considered Abstract Expressionist—his earlier pieces consisting of “unbounded space and use of cragged forms that crowd along an edge.”7 In later pieces, he moved on to richer and more saturated colors, with drips and verticals that would counteract with each other. Other artists of this movement, however, cannot be placed into a specific box as this movement was about the idea of self-expression, and more about subjectivity than objectivity. Another characteristic that set Californian Abstract Expressionism apart, specifically in the Bay Area, was the acceptance of clear references to nature and the use of color. California artists like Lawrence Calcagno created pieces that encompassed images like “sun discs and the shapes of trees…enclosed by heavy black lines.”8 There were other artists as well who spanned this time period and easily moved into the next.

Richard Diebenkorn straddled both the Abstract Expressionism movement and the Bay Area Figurative Movement. During his days as an Abstract Expressionist, he would depict relatively explicit allusions to objects with the incorporated use of light and space on the canvas. Combined with these, his works had elements of “raw, unmodulated ochres and ox-bloods with

Miró-esque symbols and spontaneous, whiplash calligraphy.”9 Diebenkorn’s use of color is also similar to the artist David Park, who was an exception to the grittiness of California Abstract Expressionism. Much like Diebenkorn, Park also straddled the two movements, starting with Abstract Expressionism and venturing into the world of the Bay Area Figurative Movement. In Park’s work, color was one of the most important aspects of the piece being created. He also managed to shock Diebenkorn and other colleagues by using an excessive amount of paint, mainly house paint. This practice of letting the forms grow out of the medium used eventually carried on into the next decade and his first figurative paintings. The changes in Park’s work shows that there were small sub-groups within Abstract Expressionism and then movement away from it.

The Bay Area Figurative Movement (1950s to the 1960s) signaled the shift away from abstract expressionism, but it was meant initially as an extension of it, a testing the limits of the “rules” of abstraction. Part of this movement was a return to nature, which critics and artists alike thought was a turn into a more conservative frame of mind. This movement was “quickly accepted by the art-conscious public, which was happy to welcome a new style that could be understood in terms of recognizable images.”10 Artists like Diebenkorn and Elmer Bischoff looked to and expressed admiration for the old masters and artists Degas, Munch, and Toulouse-Lautrec, as life-drawing and the external world became more prominent once again.

Originality and expression was not the overarching goal anymore, and artists were not thinking of their work as a catalyst for a revolution. What was considered good painting had become distinguished again, although some of the rules had changed as what defined something as “good.” However,

| 19 |

there are exceptions to this rule of conservatism and objectivity. For example, artist Joan Brown, a second generation artist of the Bay Area movement, was more inclined to work on pieces that were more indicative of her personal experiences and subjectivity.

Her early art work was filled with thick paint and heavy impasto, sometimes reaching a thickness of five inches, which was inspired by artists like Bischoff. Brown’s earlier subjects were inspired by David Park, with simple forms of full figures, dogs, and still life objects. In her later works, even up into the 1970s, she moved away from thick paint and loose splatters to surface patterns and contrasting colors; however, her “better” paintings came from people and places she knew intimately.

It was predominantly in the area of Northern California, where a variety of different forms of artistic expression co-existed such as poets, jazz musicians, and artists.

Even though it was not an extension of the Bay Area or Abstract Expressionism, many artists of this style did originate from the Bay Area movement. Where both the Abstract Expressionism movement and the Bay Area movement seemed to bloom from within art schools, Funk art originated from the bohemian underground. The Funk art movement did not have a cohesive “style” but was a “constellation of attitudes and ideas.”11 Such that observed things in the world that were traditionally not meant to be looked at were then made into art. Artists would use found objects, mixed media, and ceramics to create something that could be humorous and sometimes vulgar as well, with the ultimate goal of something that the viewer was able to tangibly experience.

In David Park’s case, the acceptance of the outside world in painting brought about a new sense of freedom in his works—he eliminated horizon and ground lines on the canvas; he altered the use of space within a painting where the background of a work is the floor, wall, and sky simultaneously. He also felt as if there was not a sharp distinction between figurative painting and abstraction as he would go to extremes with the picture plane, pulling figures to the edge of the canvas and contrasting it with diagonal lines such as a fence or an oar of a boat. While heavily textured paint and brushstrokes were present, they were in ambiguous state of abstraction and everyday life that had a touch of surreal. Much like the artist Willem de Kooning, Park used light, color, and heavy brushstrokes to craft rough figures that commanded the canvas. Perhaps this was a lead in to the next movement, where art was not supposed to be pretty but to dominate the senses of the viewer.

During this movement, artists like Roy de Forest rose to prominence. His early work of the 1960s leaned more towards the vestiges of Abstract Expressionism along with the use of oil paints. His paintings during this time were “map-like compositions filled with intricately patterned paths of movement, ‘childishly’ painted silhouettes of animal and human figures, and busy repetitions of vibrant color dots, squeezed directly from the tube, in candy-kiss relief.”12 However, as abstraction receded, he switched to water based paints instead, such as tempera and acrylic. With these paints, his work was filled with flat slivers of landscape, mixed with cartoonish animals and a sporadic human figure. There were wild dogs with wolf-like characteristics and unnaturally colored eyes, a popular subject matter throughout his pieces.

The Funk art movement (1960s to the 1970s) was against the non-objectivity of Abstract Expressionism and moved away from it, much like Bay Area Figurative Movement.

Other artists, like Robert Arneson, worked more in the realm of ceramics, yet he still managed to inspire others after him. Arneson was a mixture of Funk and Pop Art, due

| 20 |

Garry Winogrand (American, 1928-1984) No 11: New York City, 1972 Gelatin silver print 11 x 14 inches Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Mr. and Mrs. James Hunter 1992.01.0056

| 21 |

to implementing his own style but using everyday objects in his work. His early work was not seen in the context of fine art, but rather a craft. The influence of Arneson’s work was immense and spread outwards from the Bay Area, as it answered the question of how one could integrate painting and sculpture together. Artists in the Pop Art movement, such as Wayne Thiebaud, had a different influence on the Bay Area than Arneson and even the artist William T. Wiley. Thiebaud painted objects such as gumball and slot machines, with rough, thick textural qualities and elements of silver and gold metallic paint. However, once he went to New York, he focused on smaller images, mainly foodstuffs seen in display windows, as can be seen in the well-known painting Desserts. On his return to California, he took old paintings and stripped them down to geometric shapes and rich colors of blue and green, similar to the vibrant colors of de Forest and Arneson.

California, with its rapid-fire movements and intersectionality, is difficult to keep straight. However, once one is able to delve more deeply into each movement, there is a treasure trove of rich, poignant art that deeply inter-connects each artist. The use of pure color and space is important, allowing the viewer to fully experience the work and delve into deeper meanings, and this paired with feeling connected to the artist through the artwork is like talking with an old friend.

Tori Gingrich ’17

Bibliography: Albright, Thomas. Art in the San Francisco Bay area, 1945-1980: an illustrated history.

Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1985.

Alinder, Mary S. Group f.64: Edward Weston, Ansel Adams, Imogen Cunningham, and the Community of Artists Who Revolutionized American Photography. New York: Bloomsbury, 2014.

Avery, B. P. “Art in California.” The Aldine 7, no. 4 (1874): 72-73. doi:10.2307/20636746.

Boas, Nancy, and Park. David Park: A Painter’s Life. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012.

Burg, William. Sacramento Renaissance: Art, Music and Activism in California’s Capital City. Arcadia Publishing, 2013.

De Forest, Roy. “ Oral history Interview with Roy De Forest.” Interview by Lynn Robert Matteson. Archives of American Art. https:// www.aaa.si.edu/collections/interviews/ oral-history-interview-roy-de-forest-13232.

Engelbach, Barbara. Looking For Mushrooms: Beat Poets, Hippies, Funk, Minimal Art, San Francisco 1955-68. Walther König, 2009.

Hirsch, Robert. Seizing the Light: A History of Photography. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2007.

Hostetler, Lisa. “Group f/64.” Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. October 2004. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/f64/ hd_f64.htm.

Hostetler, Lisa. “Pictorialism in American.”

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. October 2004. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/ f64/hd_f64.htm.

Stella, Paul. “Abstract Expressionism.”

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. October 2004. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/ abex/hd_abex.htm.

| 22 |

1 Avery.

7 Albright.

2 Hostetler.

8 Ibid. 39

3 Ibid.

9 Id. 39

4 Alinder.

10 Id. 58.

5 Ibid. XIV.

11 Id. 81.

6 Boas.

12 Id. 243

| 23 |

Frank Blackwell Mayer (American, 1827-1899) Kag’he-madokah (The male Raven), Siseton Dakota, 1899 Watercolor on paper 14 x 18 inches Signed in drawing Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Henry Walters 1903.02.0026

THE ARTISTS’ BOOKS We collect because we love being surrounded in our home by the joyful presence of our custom wood furniture, studio glass objects, and, especially, our beautiful books, all works of art handcrafted by the unique talent of contemporary artists, many we are fortunate to have met and some who continue to enrich our lives as personal friends. Bibliophiles from birth, our serious collecting dates from 1975 with the books in the library, adding the furniture and glass as welcome companions a few years later to extend throughout the rest of our house that feeling of visual warmth and sense of spiritual happiness.

In 2002, the Walters Art Museum held an exhibition of works from our collection, The Artful Book, which presented a special view of contemporary art as expressed in book form. The introduction to this exhibit stated that these books “explore, challenge, and reinvent traditional notions of how books look and function. Interactive by nature, these dynamic art works take us on exciting visual and textual journeys, playing on structure and content, engaging us with imagery and colorful formats. Their handcrafted papers, innovative printing techniques, imaginative bindings, as well as their intriguing use of pop-ups, dioramas, and framing devices, all are employed to express and enhance a multitude of ideas and experiences.” According to the Outside the Margins catalogue in 2016 for the recent exhibition at Julio Fine Arts and Loyola-Notre Dame Library, contemporary book artists take their inspiration from what has come before, imbuing their bookworks with the spirit of the present while they invent new techniques.

On view at the Goucher Collects exhibit are five book art examples chosen for their

variety and range of sizes, shapes, structures, and printing and binding techniques: A Flora by Susan Allix shows what an evocative and enticing part her unique leather binding plays as an elegant introduction to her gorgeous book featuring 16 famous literary quotes about flowers.

Ode to a Grand Staircase ( for 4 Hands)

by Julie Chen and Barbara Tetenbaum is a clever visual interpretation of an Eric Satie musical composition with an unusual gatefold center opening and printed card panels layered to form the stairs.

Peabody Library, Baltimore by Paul Johnson provides a delightful variant on the pop-up format known as the tunnel book to represent the interior of the Peabody Library, decorated with the vivid party colors Paul remembers from the day of his visit.

St. Ostrich in Manhattan by Lois Morrison uses a star formation carousel, variant of an accordion book, for a lively tour of New York City scenic attractions with a most unusual guide, who takes us through a playful set of layered dioramas.

Circulus Sapientiae (Circle of Wisdom) by Claire Van Vliet pays homage to the words of the great 12th century mystic and abbess Hildegard von Bingen, presenting them in a series of striking and intricate pop-ups on the pages of this marvelous accordion book with a variety of handmade papers, pulp paintings, and collages.

Betty Applestein Sweren ’52, P ’75 and Dr. Edgar Sweren P ’75

| 25 |

An additional word about artists’ books: Artists’ books are works of art, like paintings or sculptures, but in book form. While book illustration has a much longer history, the book as art object is a product of the 20th century. Artists’ books can also be unique creations undertaken with extreme care and attention to detail. Some are experimental and done by artists better known as painters or sculptors, as a way to extend their artistic practice. Many artists use the book format to create narratives to deal with difficult issues, with ideas that cannot be conveyed as clearly on a canvas or other medium. Some artist-made books illustrate the words of others, integrating art and literature. And some artists’ books do not have words at all.

As a work created by an artist, the nature, appearance, and purpose of an artist’s book can be fundamentally different from what one might find on the shelves of the library.

Artists’ books exist at the intersections of printmaking, photography, poetry, experimental narrative, visual arts, graphic design,

| 26 |

and publishing. They have made a place for themselves in the collections of museums, libraries, and private collectors. They have caught the interest of art historians and critics writing about art, and there are numerous studio programs in art schools dedicated to the art of the book, ushering in new generations of artists making books.

Because these works straddle the boundary between the art and literary worlds, they present certain challenges. Many artists intend their works to be interactive and expect their pages to be turned and the weight and texture of the book to be felt by the reader. However, when on display in the museum, the book cannot be read; these works are often protected under glass, installed as art objects.

Excerpted from the website of: Smithsonian Libraries Artists’ Book Collection Smithsonian Libraries; Smithsonian Institution

Frank Blackwell Mayer (American, 1827-1899) Kapoji or Kaposia 1851, Little Crow’s Village, The Last on the Mississippi, 1897 Watercolor on paper 14 x 18 inches Signed in drawing Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Henry Walters 1903.02.0009

| 27 |

NATZLER POTTERY The husband and wife team of Gertrud and Otto Natzler created extraordinary pottery pieces from the late 1930s until Gertrud’s death in 1971. Gertrud threw the clay and crafted it into perfectly proportioned, simple forms. Otto experimented with different glazing techniques and discovered rich, luminous glazes that set Natzler Pottery apart from the rest. Otto developed over 1,000 glazes before his death at age 99.

Gertrud and Otto’s pottery had numerous American, European, and international exhibitions. Their exquisite work can be found in over 50 museum collections around the world, including such prestigious places as the Smithsonian and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

The vase stands even now in my dining room, glorious as ever.

My February 1970 letter to Gertrud and Otto Natzler began with these words: “You are—and I think you should know it—an addiction!” And then I described how, to add a particular piece to our Natzler collection, I’d gone to the Natzler exhibit in Springfield, Massachusetts, “on my way” from Baltimore to Chicago. The detour—one only an addict would make—had this purpose: to see and probably purchase an absolutely magnificent, tall Natzler vase I’d fallen in love with in the catalogue—with its shimmering copper glazes on bursts of soft turquoises and royal blues.

Nancy Patz ’52

| 28 |

My roughly 50-year love affair with Natzler pots has two components: the shapes and the colors. I’ve admired the purity of Gertrud’s fluid forms, and the astounding thinness of clay as she molds it. Perhaps an even greater thrill for me lies in Otto’s incomparable glazes, achieved through multiple firings and unique kiln techniques of his own imaginings.

My deepening friendship with these two superb artists only strengthened my love of their work. It’s a joy to have their beautiful pots displayed in this Goucher exhibit so others can appreciate them, too.

Frank Blackwell Mayer (American, 1827-1899) Tatanka-Waeipi (Buffalo Dance), 18 51 Watercolor on paper 14 x 18 inches Signed in drawing Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Henry Walters 1903.02.0004

| 29 |

Frank Blackwell Mayer (American, 1827-1899) Cha-Tan-Wah-Koo-Wah-Mannee (The Hawk that Chases Walking or “Little Crow”), Traverse des Sioux, July 2, 1951, Chief of the Kapoji Band, 1851 Watercolor on paper 18 x 14 inches Signed in drawing Goucher College Art Collection Gift of Henry Walters 1903.02.0008

| 30 |

THE BOSTON & SANDWICH GLASS COMPANY MULTI-COLORED CANDLESTICKS The Boston & Sandwich Glass Company operated in the seaside town of Sandwich, Massachusetts, on Cape Cod, from 1826 until 1888. Company founder Deming Jarves oversaw the manufacture of beautiful, traditional, hand-blown glassware, but also pioneered the new, mechanized process of glass pressing. During its more than 60 years of operation the company produced a wide variety of glass, ranging from extremely fine blown and cut tableware, chandeliers, banquet lamps, and fancy centerpieces to less expensive pressed glass, pharmaceutical goods, telegraph insulators, and door knobs.

The seven-inch-tall stick is one of our favorite forms because of its beautiful shape and balanced proportions. The top has six petals and reminds us of a flower.

It is supported by a bottom that flares out, being highlighted by seven loops. We never imagined over our thirty-plus years of collecting that we would discover such variations and variety of colors. We are honored and excited to be sharing our petal-and-loop collection with the Goucher community.

Jamila and Philip Weintraub P ’17

The petal-and-loop candlesticks were first produced in 1840-1870, as evidenced by fragments that have been retrieved from the site of the Cape Cod factory, the same excavations that brought to light some of the earliest known Sandwich patterns. Among the fragments are the range and variety in colors of which many examples are displayed in this exhibition. What makes these candlesticks authentically Sandwich are the way they were made. Molten glass was cast in two-piece iron molds and then the top and base were fused together by a glass wafer, while the glass was still hot enough to be plastic. This connecting wafer is unique to the Boston and Sandwich Company. The various shades do not represent different periods of production, rather the glass makers’ desire to offer as many variations of color as possible. It is important to realize that the petal-and-loop pattern is only one of many combinations of styles the glass company produced.

| 31 |

NATIVE AMERICAN AND FIRST NATIONS ARTWORK Modern Native American and First Nations artwork are included in this year’s exhibition and show examples of 20th century interpretations of earlier centuries’ traditions.

Included as well are 19th-century examples of Northwest coast artifacts, as the traditional art and artifacts were made together. Only six different nations are represented in this exhibition and it is a small sampling of the art that is and was created.

Formline Art is a distinctive feature in the art of the Northwest Coast that is distinguished

by the use of characteristic shapes. Formlines are continuous, flowing, curvilinear lines that turn, swell, and diminish in a prescribed manner. They are used for figure outlines and internal design elements. The most common colors used in Northwest art are red and black, sometimes with the addition of yellow.

The contemporary artists represented are part of the new generation of Native American artists who are helping to redefine their culture’s relationship to contemporary American life and its problematic past.

ART FROM MAINE Some of the biggest names of the late 19th and early-to-mid 20th century American art either were from or spent time in Maine. Artists like Eastman Johnson, Winslow Homer, Rockwell Kent, John Marin, Marguerite Zorach, Edward Hopper, Bernard Langlais, and Fairfield Porter, just to name a few. While all of these artists had their own style, their own way of expression in their painting, they were all drawn to the Maine coast and the Maine landscape. As you can see from the examples in this exhibition, there was

| 32 |

a return to naturalism when artists worked in Maine. They tended to give up on their cubist, abstract, or other tendencies. Only the Precisionists seemed to be able to retain some of the abstract nature of their style while simultaneously portraying the Maine shore or skyline. While we are able to only show a small sampling of the many artists that worked and lived in Maine and New England, we hope you enjoy the examples here and can have some understanding of what we mean by Maine art.

REFERENCES: The following references were used for background information.

Alsop, Joseph. The Rare Art Traditions: The History of Art Collecting and Its Linked Phenomena Wherever These Have Appeared. Princeton University Press/Harper and Row Publishers, New York, 1987.

Carrier, David. Museum Skepticism: A History of the Display of Art in Public Galleries. Duke University Press, Durham, NC. 2006.

Dempsey, Amy. Art in the Modern Era: A Guide to Styles, Schools & Movements 1860 to the Present. Harry N. Abrams, New York, 2002.

Glossary of art terms. The Tate Museum, London, 2000-2016.

Gombrich, Ernst. The Story of Art. Phaidon Press, New York, 1995.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. Funded by the Heilbrunn Foundation, The New Tamarind Foundation, and the Zodiac Fund. The Metroplitam Museum of Art, New York, 2000.

Kleiner, Fred S. Gardner’s Art the Ages: A Global History. Vol I and II. Cengage Learning; 14th Edition, 2012.

Mellon, Gertrud A., and Elizabeth F. Wilder. Maine and Its Role in American Art, 1740-1963. Viking Press, New York, 1963.

Osborne, Harold. ED. The Oxford Companion to Art. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York, 1987.

GOUCHER COLLECTS:

Schools of Thought April 6 – May 19, 2017 Silber Gallery

Sanford J. Ungar Athenaeum Goucher College Baltimore, MD

www.goucher.edu/silber