Summer Breaks: Labor, Leisure, Lust May 19 - August 5, 2016 Schneider Hall Galleries Hite Art Institute University of Louisville
Summer Breaks: Labor, Leisure, Lust Summer Breaks; Labor, Leisure, Lust is the result of a collaborative
a copy, since the original painting (Manet’s Olympia [1863]) was itself
exploration of the Hite Art Institute’s substantial print collection.
based on an older work (Titian’s Venus of Urbino [1538]). Kissel wonders
Co-curated by three Critical and Curatorial Studies Masters students
if Ramos’ nude enacts the same kind of radical break as Manet’s, or if his
(Ash Braunecker, Hunter Kissel, and Madison Sevilla)¹, it is the product
postmodern gesture amounts to a hollow pastiche of historical forms.
of a semester-long intensive curatorial seminar—a course that developed
Ash Braunecker’s contribution reads Lozowick’s prints (Loading
in step with the theoretical, historical, and aesthetic interests and
[1930] and Novel of Adventure) through Thorstein Veblen’s seminal
discoveries of the students enrolled. This year the exhibition is organized
turn of the century text, The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899). In her
around three key terms—labor, leisure, and lust—which it uses to pressure
analysis, depictions of leisure and depictions of labor act as two sides of
and re-orient 20th Century American depictures of recreation and
the same coin. Although Lozowick’s Marxist leanings suggest sympathy
consumption.
for the alienated workers in his images, the print’s status as an object
Summer Breaks investigates the critical power of the break—breaks
for conspicuous consumption means that these works ultimately serve
from the workday as well as breaks from conventional modes of
to enforce or affirm class stratification. Finally, Madison Sevilla’s essay
representation. In this sense at least, the show conflates two types of
takes up Laura de Bolanos Volkerdin’s Hand Painted Tie (1964), Carl
rupture. However, rupture in this exhibition is never absolute, and often
E. Schwartz’s Heirloom 2 (N.D.), and Arthur Werger’s Venus (1998) to
“breaks” from the status quo (from labor, from traditional depictions of
explore the decorative role of women’s bodies in 20th Century American
the female body) only end up affirming an existing power structure. The
print work. Sevilla argues that the female body itself becomes an object
point of departure for this investigation is the print medium itself. While
of leisurely visual consumption, but that in order for such objectification
on the one hand the print’s inherent mechanical reproducibility allows it
to take place it must first be dissociated from its personhood. Citing
to reach a broader (or at the very least larger) audience than painting or
John Berger’s Ways of Seeing (1972), Sevilla articulates the historical
sculpture, such reproducibility also mimics our consumer-oriented mass
use of women’s bodies as display apparatuses and sites of decoration
media apparatus—and indeed, the editioned nature of the print confirms
before describing how these prints not only depersonalize their subjects
the consumer-object status of the artwork. Because the work of art is the
through such display, but ultimately dismember them.
consumer good par excellence of the leisure class, the critical power of
In my roles as both gallery director and head of the Critical and
such work—even when produced by Marxist artists like Louis Lozowick—
Curatorial studies program, it has been an immense pleasure to work with
comes under pressure when it is framed and put on display.
these young curators to realize this tremendous exhibition. Mounting a
“Display” too is a central concern in this show. Like the print, the female body here is often employed to articulate various ruptures (from history, in the case of Ramos’ Manet’s Olympia [1974], or from the daily
thoughtful, cohesive, and critically-engaged show in one short semester is a monumental task, one that my students handled with aplomb. Special thanks are due to Brynn Gordon, an undergraduate student
grind, in the case of Lozowick’s Novel of Adventure [1942]). Yet in most
who was not enrolled in my course but who participated in the creative
cases these articulations also affirm the masculine, heterosexual gaze
formation of this exhibition. Additional thanks are due to John Begley,
of the work’s implied audience. In this respect, the titular themes that
former head of the CCS program, whose insight into the print collection
organize the work in this show (labor, leisure, and lust) are not rigid
was invaluable; Rachel Singel, whose introduction to print techniques
categories, but rather overlapping motifs that often serve one class of
helped guide our thinking; and Molly Bumpous, who designed the
viewer at the expensive of another. One man’s leisure or lust, in other
exhibition catalogue.
words, is another woman’s labor. For this catalogue, the curators have looked closely at a handful of
Chris Reitz
prints that act as signposts for the exhibition as a whole. Hunter Kissel’s
Gallery Director
essay bears down on Ramos’ Manet’s Olympia, a work that served as a
Assistant Professor, Critical and Curatorial Studies
kind of talisman during the planning stages of the show. Kissel addresses the almost simulacral quality of Ramos’ gesture: his print is a copy of
¹ Brynn Gordon, although not enrolled in the course, also participated in the curation of the exhibition.
Points of Reference: A Brief Analysis of the Lineage of Manet’s Olympia Hunter Kissel University of Louisville
Points of Reference: A Brief Analysis of the Lineage of Manet’s Olympia
of rigid uncertainly for Olympia—the two modes of depiction are unable
time has passed to allow the ramifications of Manet’s painting to develop
to create a unified sexuality for the figure.⁸
in full.
figure’s hair contradict traditional codes of sexuality. The figure in Venus
Ramos’ Manet’s Olympia. Here, Ramos simultaneously references Manet’s
Throughout the history of painting, the nude has stood out as a genre
of Urbino keeps with these traditional codes: her hair is abundantly let
painting as well as the disposition of Manet himself in 1865 by breaking
continually under revision. The nude’s long history is punctuated by
down—an inviting sign for the viewer—but her body is devoid of any
from the visual codes in Olympia just as Olympia broke the visual codes
scandalous ruptures—not least of which was Édouard Manet’s Olympia
pubic hair.⁹ If one looks closely enough at Manet’s figure, her hair is in
in Venus of Urbino. Manet’s Olympia offers many of the same
(1863) (Figure 1). Olympia’s public reveal at the Paris Salon in 1865 gained
fact down, but the similarly hued Japanese screen, as well as the
components depicted in Manet’s painting: a nude woman lounges atop a
considerably negative reviews because it broke from conventional codes
starkness of the flower, mutes its presence—her sexuality, although
pair of mattresses—she wears a bow around her neck and keeps slippers
of depicting naked women.¹ But with time, Olympia has become a
visible, remains subdued.¹⁰ Additionally, the essence of her pubic hair is
by her feet, her stare extends outward toward the viewer, and her left
significant modern work of art—it is arguably the first modern painting—
marked by a shadowed area in her armpit, a fading line running upward
hand is flexed over her crotch. Moreover, a servant woman extends a
and it has served as a reference point for artworks since, including Mel
from her navel, as well as her flexed hand above her crotch that “insists
bouquet of flowers towards the figure, an animal—Ramos uses a spider
Ramos’ Manet’s Olympia (1974) (Figure 2). This collotype print mimics
so tangibly on what it hides.” ¹¹
monkey—is positioned at the end of the bed, and the scene is divided in
One artwork that demonstrates the gravity of Olympia’s legacy is
Lastly, the modifications Manet made to Titian’s painting regarding the
the composition of Olympia and, like Olympia, incorporates aspects of
These are only three examples of how the visual codes of sexuality are
visual culture from the era in which it was made—namely advertising
two via the wall’s molding. The composition, at least, is familiar. But Manet’s Olympia breaks from its predecessor as well. Perhaps
handled in Olympia. There are other breaks as well: the servant acts as an
work and 1970s pornography. These are themes that frequently appear in
Figure 1
indication of the prostitute’s performed sexuality as it exists through
most noticeably, the main figure is no longer deadpan and indifferent in
Ramos’ body of work, and by including them in his nod to Manet he blurs
were more concerned with Olympia’s singularities.
business transactions. Moreover, the cat—a break from the dog, a
the print—she knowingly smiles at the viewer, her hair is clearly down and
classical symbol of fidelity—welcomes interpretations of promiscuity or
creates a halo for her seductive gaze, and her body is toned and marked
the distinction between high art and popular culture. Indeed, Manet’s
According to art historian T.J. Clark, there are three primary reasons
Olympia treats both the history of painting and mass culture as source
that critics were taken aback by Manet’s handling of the nude genre, all
curiosity. The breaks that Clark identifies that I have detailed here are
with stark tan lines. In Ramos’ version, the servant’s eyes focus on the
material for casual reference.
of which amounted to breaks from traditional visual codes regarding
ones noticed by critics in 1865 by way of the female figure, but enough
viewer instead of the figure, and the flowers she holds are turned slightly
sexuality. Clark maintains that Manet breaks from the standard
as if they are now a gift for the collective audience. In addition, the
her legs are stretched over a shawl and her posture is kept taut by the
presentation of the nude: in a classical nude painting such as Venus of
palette in Manet’s Olympia is more saturated and artificial than that of
support of two large pillows. Her body is decorated with adornments
Urbino, the viewer is given access to the figure by way of her height and
Manet’s, a trademark of Ramos’ Pop Art pedigree.¹²
such as a black tie around her neck, a flower behind her left ear, and
scale within in the frame.⁴ Manet, however, painted his model just enough
What, then, is the relationship between Manet’s composition and
slippers near her feet. Her immovable stare peers in the direction of the
above the painting’s midline (thanks to the height of the mattresses) that
Ramos’ recreation? And do the breaks in Manet’s Olympia challenge
viewer and is mirrored by the stare of an alert black cat that stands at the
her stare misses a connection with the viewer’s gaze without looking
painterly convention in a manner similar to the breaks Manet employed in
end of the bed. A female servant presents the figure with flowers—
degradingly downward at him.⁵ Her indifference towards the viewer is
1865? I contend that they do not, and that the difference between the
presumably a gift from a satisfied customer according to the reading that
further marked by her “jet-black pupils, the slight asymmetry of the lids,
two images is akin to the difference between what social theorist Fredric
Olympia depicts a Parisian prostitute. The scene is framed by the
the smudged and broken corner of the mouth, the features half-adhering
Jameson describes as parody and pastiche. For Jameson, both terms
architecture of the room: emerald drapes are kept from serving as a
to the plain oval of the face.”⁶ This was enough to provoke hostility from
involve a type of impersonation, but parody functions as mockery—it
complete backdrop by a Japanese screen placed behind the upper body
some Salon-goers.
ridicules by taking a moral high ground.¹³ Manet’s painting was a parody
In Olympia, a female figure lays naked atop a bed of two mattresses,
of the figure. Notably, the prostitute’s left hand is flexed over her crotch.
Clark also holds that there were some critics in 1865 who were
of Venus of Urbino because it subverted the conventions of the nude
displeased with Manet’s refusal to abide by the tradition in which the
genre, thereby provoking feelings of disgust from critics. Pastiche, on the
a Renaissance painting Manet had copied as a student.² In Titian’s
nude is rendered in smooth, unbroken brushwork.⁷ Manet’s painting style,
other hand, is an imitation using visual codes without deeper meanings:
example, a 16th century courtesan lounges on a pair of mattresses, a
characterized by what Clark refers to as “smooth hard edges” of the
pastiche is a “neutral practice of such mimicry” that makes reference
maid occupies the upper right corner of the image, and an animal—this
figure’s body juxtaposed by hard outlines of her contour, leaves a sense
simply because the reference is there.¹⁴ In short, parody critiques while
Olympia’s predecessor was Titian’s Venus of Urbino (1538) (Figure 3),
time a dog—is positioned at the end of the bed. The courtesan’s hand is
Figure 2
pastiche acknowledges.
also placed above her crotch, albeit rested instead of flexed. Yet of the
3. Clark notes the similarities of verbiage between the two reviews, concluding that
sixty reviews of the Salon published in 1865 that discussed Olympia, only
it was likely that the same critic published two separate reviews using two different
8. Clark signals this uncertainty by features such as “the indefinite contour of
two included mention of Manet’s reference to Titian.³ The fact that the
pseudonyms. Therefore, it may have been that only one critic referenced Venus of
Olympia’s right breast, the faded bead of the nipple; the sliding, dislocated line of the
Urbino. Clark,“Preliminaries,” 263.
far forearm as it crosses (touches?) [sic] the belly; the elusive logic of the transition
12. María Espinosa and Otto Letze, “Mel Ramos: Life and Work,” in Mel Ramos: 50
4. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 268.
from breast to ribcage to stomach to hip to thigh.” Clark, “Preliminaries,” 269-270.
Years of Pop Art, ed. by Otto Letze (Ostfildern, Germany: Hatje Cantz Verlag, 2010),
5. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 269.
9. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 270.
25.
1. T.J. Clark, “Preliminaries to a Possible Treatment of Olympia in 1865,” in Modern Art
6. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 268.
10. Ibid.
13. Fredric Jameson, “Postmodernism and Consumer Society,” in The Anti-Aesthetic:
and Modernism: A Critical Anthology, ed. Francis Frascina and Charles Harrison with
7. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 269.
11. Ibid.
Essays on Postmodern Culture ed. by Hal Foster (Port Townsend, WA: Bay Press,
the assistance of Deidre Paul (Toronto: Westview Press, 1982), 259.
Figure 1: Édouard Manet, Olympia, 1863, oil on canvas, 130 x 190 cm. © RMN-Grand
Figure 2: Mel Ramos, Manet’s Olympia, 1974, collotype print, 15 3/8 x 22 1/8”. Courtesy
1983), 113-114.
2. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 263.
Palais (Musée d'Orsay) / Hervé Lewandowski.
of the University of Louisville.
14. Jameson, “Postmodernism and Consumer Society,” 114.
majority of these critics failed to notice the similarities suggests that they
Manet’s Olympia is an example of pastiche, one that almost seems to
By functioning as pastiche of Olympia, Ramos’ Manet’s Olympia in
Figure 3
celebrate mass culture of the 1970s. Whereas critics recognized Manet’s figure as a prostitute from Parisian life,¹⁵ the two women in Ramos’ print are both idealizations: the face of the reclined figure comes from a lifestyle magazine while the servant’s look is an appropriation from a cosmetics advertisement.¹⁶ ¹⁷ The cornered monkey—a visual break from the wavering feline—was chosen simply because Ramos was confident in his ability to paint the animal and found Manet inept at rendering a cat.¹⁸ Even Manet’s painting style is altered to match the feeling of Ramos’ home state of California. As one author argues, “Were Venus, we realize, to be carried to the shore on Pacific waves and land on a beach in California, she might well be a sultry blond surf girl who would remove her bathing suit just before usurping the throne of Manet’s modernized sex queen.”¹⁹ Without a substantial real world grounding, Ramos’ print becomes an empty hodgepodge of advertisement culture and nostalgia, a medley of references.
something which is bizarre,” and he takes no position on its decency.²⁶ But
turn serves as parody of high art and the tradition of the nude genre—
participating in this pairing is something Ramos does not hold back from:
a tradition in which various symbols circulate and reappear to maintain
his body of work includes renderings of pinups (with idealized traits
fixed meanings in support of the status quo. Ramos has admitted that his
common in pornography) straddling and groping bottles of Hunt’s
understanding of art history as a youth came from art magazines and
ketchup, tubes of Colgate toothpaste, and rolls of Lifesavers candy. Here,
that he found inspiration as a professional artist from the visual
Ramos seems to be suggesting that while sex certainly infiltrates the world
vocabulary of the “free enterprise system.” To him, Olympia had garnered
of advertising, it still takes a back seat to the product itself. Manet’s
a social rank comparable to the Coca-Cola emblem.²⁰ In other words,
Olympia, another image that upholds this relationship, evokes a kind
Manet’s painting was popular knowledge—by 1974 it had lost its
comparability to famous brands because it capitalizes on Olympia—now
avant-garde status and became, for Ramos, a means of addressing the
accepted as a positive moment in art history—as a desirable image, an
history of painting.²¹ As the world became more acquainted with Olympia
object of consumption.²⁷ And like other examples from Ramos’ oeuvre, the
outside of its original Salon context, the painting’s cultural value changed.
physical features of the figure in Manet’s Olympia are exaggerated to the
By the time Mel Ramos created his print in 1974, Olympia had lost what
point of artificiality so that her desirability is trumped by the desirability of
social theorist Walter Benjamin calls authenticity—or the “essence of all
a product that exists in the real world for real consumption—Olympia. The
that is transmissible from its beginning.”²² Such authenticity would
invented figure in Manet’s Olympia contains codes common in 1970s
necessarily include Olympia’s ability to provoke reactions like those of its
pornography that may make her appealing for some, but her lure stems
original critics. Reproducibility, as a solution to meet the social desire for
from her perpetual embodiment of the “seductiveness of great art.”²⁸
making things more immediate, decays the uniqueness of an object by stripping it of its history and its tradition.²³ Manet’s Olympia, as pastiche,
In the context of Summer Breaks: Labor, Leisure, Lust, Manet’s Olympia
capitalizes on the decay of Olympia’s tradition via reproduction. In turn, it
becomes a kind of talisman. It embodies all aspects of the subtitle with
serves as a parody of the contemporary status of high art itself. Such
references to historical indicators of prostitution, servantry, and sexuality.
playful parody was key for Ramos, an artist who claims that humor has
But the specific connection to lust in Manet’s Olympia becomes the most
always mattered to his practice and that high art “takes itself too
important one: yes, there is certain amount of lust assumed when looking
seriously.”²⁴ Manet’s Olympia, then, challenges the ways that we glorify
at an idealized nude, but there also exists a kind of lust for viewing prolific
certain images through their reproductions by treating an overly-
artworks like Olympia. And indeed, if mass media have desensitized us
reproduced avant-garde painting as a banal image from mass culture.
to images of idealized female nudes (as is often argued), then the figure
Make no mistake, though, Manet’s Olympia reveals the ways in which
alone in Ramos’ print should not be enough to stimulate the kind of
high art, and more specifically the nude genre, persists in the dominative
interested viewing that his artworks—and this print in particular—aim to
image circulation of present-day media. The figure in Manet’s Olympia
elicit. Rather, she needs help from the mattresses, the slippers, the servant
unquestionably typifies the sex appeal of women in contemporary
with flowers, and the animal to capture our full attention. Summer Breaks
pornography—Ramos’ slick presentation removes any imperfections from
is an exploration of the visual conventions of both art and non-art imagery,
her body in a way that dehumanizes her.²⁵ Additionally, as noted above,
and Manet’s Olympia celebrates—and capitalizes on—both.
she is an idealization made from magazine parts and fantasy—she is 15. Reviewers in 1865 recognized Manet’s model from their own experiences
simply beyond reality. But her desirability, I would argue, does not come
with prostitution—one linked her whereabouts to a popular rendezvous center
from her full-breasts or perfect complexion. Rather, she is desirable
while another recognized her from a specific club in Les Halles de Paris. Clark, “Preliminaries,” 261. 16. Klaus Honnef, “Girls, Candies, and Art: The World of Mel Ramos,” in Mel Ramos: 50
because of the popularity of Manet’s painting. Ramos considers the pairing of popular culture and pornography a “social condition…
Years of Pop Art, ed. by Otto Letze (Ostfildern, Germany: Hatje Cantz Verlag, 2010), 67.
20. Ramos, “Talking with Mel Ramos,” 18.
17. Mel Ramos, “Talking with Mel Ramos,” interview with Carl Belz, in Mel Ramos: A
21. Ibid.
Twenty-Year Survey (Waltham, MA: Rose Art Museum, Brandeis University, 1980), 22.
22.. Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” in
18. Ramos, “Talking with Mel Ramos,” 24.
Illuminations, ed. by Hannah Arendt (New York: Schocken Books, 1969), 4.
19. Robert Rosenblum, “Mel Ramos: How Venus Came to California,” in On Modern
23. Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” 6.
America: Selected Essays by Robert Rosenblum (New York: Harry N. Abrams,
24. Ramos, “Talking with Mel Ramos,” 24.
Incorporated, 1999), 242.
25. Donald Kuspit, “The Uses of Irony: Popularity and Beauty in Mel Ramos’ Painting,”
26. Ramos, “Talking with Mel Ramos,” 20.
Figure 3: Figure 3. Titian, Venus of Urbino, oil on canvas, 1538, 119.2 x 165.5 cm.
in Mel Ramos Pop Art Fantasies: The Complete Paintings by Donald Kuspit with Louis
27. Kuspit, “The Uses of Irony,” 19.
Courtesy of www.Titian.org.
Meisel (New York: Watson Guptill Publications, 2004), 23.
28. Kuspit, “The Uses of Irony,” 29.
Louis Lozowick and the Human Condition Ash Braunecker University of Louisville
Louis Lozowick and the Human Condition
After receiving an art degree from Ohio State University in 1918 and
Russian Constructivism, Italian Futurism, and Dutch De Stijl. As an
spending a year in the U.S. Army Medical Corps, Lozowick moved to Paris
international scholar—well versed in European art movements—Lozowick
and studied French at the Sorbonne, then relocated to Berlin in 1922
is considered one of the earliest figures in the international machine
where he enrolled at the Friedrick Wilhelms Universität. It was in Berlin—
aesthetic, and he was particularly interested in Russian and Jewish
In The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), Norwegian-American
and then briefly in Moscow—that he became serious about painting and
art, on which he wrote extensively. As can be seen through Lozowick’s
economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen analyzed the implications
established connections with leading Russian artists. During this time,
impeccable work, the Precisionists practiced a controlled technique with
of “conspicuous consumption” for various social classes. He contended
he had his first solo exhibitions at K. E. Twardy Book Shop (Berlin, 1922)
compositions reduced to the underlying geometry of structures that
that individuals at the top of the social hierarchy—those who own the
and Gallerie Alfred Heller (Berlin, 1923), and was noted as being the most
featured clear outlines and smooth surfaces. Overall, there was a great
means of production—have carved out an existence that affords a life
recognized American artist working in Berlin.⁴
emphasis on dramatic perspectives and a sharp focus on abstract form.
of conspicuous consumption and leisure: unproductive activities that
Working mainly as a graphic artist, Lozowick supplemented his
While there was a shared international language among the era’s avant-
fail to contribute to the economy and the production of useful goods
income with commercial work as well as teaching art history and
garde movements, the Precisionists were distinctly American artists who
and services needed in a functioning society. Although useless to
lithography classes, lecturing, and writing about art. He moved to New
shared a specific focus on U.S. landscapes and culture, which included
society at large, these modes of consumption enforce an ancient social
York in 1924, where he continued teaching and cofounded New Masses,
the quickly developing industrial landscape of the twentieth-century as
stratification, a division between those who are capable of choosing the
an American Marxist magazine published from 1926 to 1948. During
well as classic rural landscapes. Within the Precisionist camp, there were
work they pursue thanks to their privileged status, and those who are
the Great Depression, he began utilizing his artwork to further explore
two general views of the machine’s place in the rapidly changing world—
not. In regards to the “working “class—those employed in industrialized
his interest in the human condition, which would become a reoccurring
it would bring order, or it would dehumanize society by replacing human
and productive, although unskilled, occupations—society views their
theme throughout his oeuvre. His prints—which to date had largely
workers and degrading the landscape.⁶
employment as shameful compared to the honorific status of their
depicted cityscapes—began to increasingly incorporate people. In a
skilled employers.¹
1969 exhibition catalog, David Shapiro (President, Society of American
depictions of faceless individuals in industrial cityscapes—in conjunction
Graphic Artists) wrote:
with his ties to Marxist publications, affirm a reading that his work
Drawing on Veblen’s theory, this essay analyzes the artwork of
The aesthetic and content of Lozowick’s works—his hard-edged
Louis Lozowick (American painter and printmaker, 1892-1973) and
In his most recent prints, Louis Lozowick shows more concern with people
advances a pessimistic view of industrial capitalism. According to Marxist
provides a critical framework for thinking about the working class in
than with things. The Precisionist symbols are gone. The humanist ones have
analysis, under capitalism, the laborer sells his time to the capitalist in
contemporary society. Lozowick’s decidedly Precisionist work depicts
taken over almost completely. The sympathy with the poor, the oppressed, is
exchange for a wage. The laborer produces commodities, which the
the condition of the working class, often through recourse to figures with
evident. Gone, seemingly, is the attraction to the mathematical pattern, the
indistinguishable faces. In so doing, his work serves to illustrate Veblen’s
verticals of the smokestacks, the raw brutal power of things. In its place is the
notion of shameful employment. Born in the Russian Empire during a time of social unrest, Lozowick began his studies at an Orthodox Jewish yeshiva at the bequest of his
need to identify with poor people in different countries of the world. Gone, too, is the purported “American” aspect which, one supposes in retrospect, may have been in actuality only the combination of American subject matter
capitalist sells in order to extract a profit. The capitalist seeks to get the most profit from the lowest wage, and in this respect the laborer’s product—his labor time—works against his best interests. Because the laborer does not control what commodities he makes or the terms
with the feeling of American materialism so beloved by European critics. The
under which they are made, he becomes alienated from the act of his
subject matter now is concerned with people who, though they age and die,
work. “[T]he worker is related to the product of his labor as to an alien
his older brother withdrew him in 1903 and enrolled him in the Kiev Art
constantly recreate themselves, and who are the ones responsible for the
object.”⁷ Marx argued that the worker’s life now belongs to the physical
School. According to Lozowick’s memoirs, the school taught drawing
symbols of power and industry found in the earlier work.⁵
commodity he produces—the greater the product, the less he is himself—
and painting with more rigidity and lack of imagination than his religious
Throughout his career, Lozowick exhibited work internationally and
and his labor has become alien to him. Thus, the worker’s labor now
devout father. However, upon seeing the filthy conditions of the school,
studies at the yeshiva. Nevertheless, Lozowick displayed an aptitude for
was the recipient of numerous awards; his work can be found in the
exists outside of himself and wields power over him, as it belongs to
drawing and quickly becoming a technically proficient artist. Following
collections of major museums throughout the United States. Although
someone else (his employer). In addition, the laborer’s competition with
his brother’s socialist involvement in the Russian Revolution of 1905, the
the Precisionist artists never formally organized, Precisionism was the
other workers for jobs—for the ability to relinquish time to employers—
two brothers immigrated to the United States where Lozowick attended
first modern art movement in the United States and correlated with
alienates workers from each other. This sense of Marxist alienation—or
the National Academy of Design in New York (renamed the National
estrangement—and Veblen’s notion of shameful employment reverberate
Academy Museum and School; commonly known as the
4. William C. Lipke, “Abstraction and Realism: The Machine Aesthetic and Social
in Lozowick’s Loading (1930) (Figure 1). In this Precisionist composition,
National Academy).² ³
Realism,” in Abstraction and Realism: 1923-1943, Paintings, Drawings, and Lithographs
Lozowick’s workers blend into their industrial landscape; their bodies are
of Louis Lozowick (Burlington: Robert Hull Fleming Museum, 1971), catalog essay,
voided of distinct facial features, and they become part of the inhuman
Figure 1
Novel of Adventure (1942) (Figure 2) focuses on a more intimate human condition. The subject is a woman who has fallen asleep while reading a book. The print was created during the height of World War II, a time when U.S. women entered the workforce in unprecedented numbers to accommodate the loss of male workers to the war effort. Thus, it could be assumed that while the woman leisurely read, she was interrupted by her workday exhaustion. Lozowick further solidifies the woman’s connection to the labor of the machine age through the display
1. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class
accessed April 21, 2016 through “Louis Lozowick,” Smithsonian Archives of American
(New York: Macmillan, 1899).
Art, (series 6.1, box 4, reel 5898, frame 1089) http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/louis-
2. Louis Lozowick, Survivor from a Dead Age: The Memoirs of Louis Lozowick, ed.
lozowick-papers-9174.
Virginia Hagelstein Marquardt (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1997).
5. David Shapiro, [essay title not available], in Louis Lozowick: Graphic Retrospective
6. Jessica Murphy, “Precisionism,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art, published June
3. See [for biographical information] “Louis Lozowick Papers, 1898-1974,” Smithsonian
(Newark: Newark Public Library, 1969), catalog essay, accessed April 21, 2016 through
2007, http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/prec/hd_prec.htm.
Archives of American Art, accessed April 21, 2016, http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/
“Louis Lozowick,” Smithsonian Archives of American Art, (series 6.1, box 4, reel 5898,
7. Karl Marx, “Estranged Labour,” in Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844
Figure 1: Figure 1, Louis Lozowick, Loading, 1930, monochromatic lithograph, approx.
louis-lozowick-papers-9174/more.
frame 1042) http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/louis-lozowick-papers-9174.
(Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1961), 70.
10.5” x 7.5”, Hite Art Institute’s Permanent Collection
machinery of landscape.
of a framed image depicting an industrial factory setting. Marxist labor alienation describes a society stratified into owners and
of the early twentieth-century working class condition. Through the portrayal of faceless workers, his prints illustrate the essence of Veblen’s argument. As the leisure class “dresses up” in an attempt to display their supremacy in the social hierarchy, working class individuals who cannot afford such consumption and who do not control their labor time come to lose their individual identity. As the picture on display in Novel of Adventure suggests, artwork is complicit in processes of conspicuous consumption, and thus becomes a particularly apt mode of addressing and critiquing issues of social stratification. In addition, the mechanical reproducibility of printmaking makes such work particularly appropriate to mass consumption. The fact that Lozowick produced images of faceless, alienated workers for purchase by (at least potentially) an artsavvy professional class poses a series of questions. Does the gesture illustrate compassion—whether real or fictional—for working class conditions? Does it express empathy with industrial loss of identity? Or does it insist on the continued distinction between the faceless workers and the capitalists who decorate homes with their pictures?
Figure 2
workers, a stratification that maps to Veblen’s theory of the leisure class. Veblen argued that regardless of capitalism’s drive to evolve society, conspicuous consumption emerges from a primitive urge; humans simply have an innate desire for social hierarchy. With the nineteenthcentury’s Industrial Revolution, living standards improved and society split further into class groups. In turn, consumption developed into more sophisticated displays of social status, particularly displays of leisure (as opposed to practical utility). Working within the coded imagery of Marxism and the Precisionist avant-garde, Lozowick’s lithographs illustrate a compelling narration Figure 2: Louis Lozowick, Novel of Adventure, 1942, lithograph, approx. 13” x 8 ”, Hite Art Institute’s Permanent Collection
Women as Decoration Madison Sevilla University of Louisville
Women as Decoration
male and female figure in an unconventional composition. The image is tightly cropped, showcasing the torso of a man wearing a paisley tie with a woman’s head embroidered into the fabric. The female is literally
Summer Breaks: Labor, Leisure, Lust investigates and pressures
disembodied and acts as a decoration for a physical object not only
standard tropes for representing labor, leisure, and lust in American
owned, but also worn by a man. In Ways of Seeing Berger examines
print work from the 20th Century, particularly as they are articulated
the Allegory of Time and Love (1545) by Bronzino, which depicts Cupid
across social and gender constructs. The women in these prints are often
kissing Venus. Berger observes that the way in which Venus’ body is
treated as objects of consumption for the viewer. This objectification
arranged has nothing to do with her kissing—she is sitting upright and
not only strips the women of their personae, but it also deprives them
is contorted in a slight side bend with one arm raised holding Cupid’s
of their humanity. By disarticulating the female body and overlaying or
arrow.⁹ Venus is painted in this position to appeal to the male gaze and
incorporating decorative patterns, works like Hand-Painted Tie (1964),
is specifically situated for his enjoyment. “It has nothing to do with her
Venus (1998), and Heirloom 2 (N.D.) depict women in states of leisure
sexuality…women are there to feed an appetite, not to have any of their
while simultaneously treating them as objects of leisurely consumption.
own.”¹⁰ Just as Venus is composed as a visual object for the male gaze,
Historically, women have been viewed as physically, spiritually,
the woman in Hand Painted Tie appears as a decoration void of identity
and economically lesser than their male counterparts. According to
and intended only to demonstrate her wearer’s social status.
American economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen, the need for
This detachment and objectification becomes more absolute as the
a system of social stratification persists from our barbarian origins. In barbarian culture, each member worked laboriously to survive; however, within this system there were still dividing lines between the roles that were male dominated and the inferior roles of the women; i.e., hunters versus gatherers. Throughout history, women have served men in some capacity: at times supplying them with children, sex, or functioning as a mere ornament to be looked at, but acting always as the inferior sex.¹ Art critic and novelist John Berger, in his book Ways of Seeing (adapted from his 1972 BBC television series), describes the subordinate life of women in culture. Women have been raised to understand that they are to be kept by men, if not physically, then visually.² A woman is aware that she is watched and judged by others in ways that differ from her male counterparts. Women are constantly aware of those watching them, tracking how much space they take up, how much they eat, how often they speak, and what they wear. This intense focus causes women to
woman becomes further dissociated from her body. In the case of Hand
Figure 1
Painted Tie the women’s face is legible—it is in fact the man’s face that
The woman, consistently objectified in society, is considered an object of leisure, just as she consumes leisure objects. The objects that
is not seen; her beauty becomes a symbol of his identity. A true loss
surround her and the clothes that she wears manufacture her status.
of identity and depersonalization occurs when the female is visually
Berger suggests that there is nothing a woman can do, say, or buy that
and symbolically decapitated in the image. Venus (1998), printed by
does not add to the presence that she is attempting to create.⁴ My
Arthur Werger, is a voyeuristic, underwater observation of a woman
analysis only departs slightly from Berger’s on this point, as I agree with
swimming. The figure is cut off at the shoulders by the break between
Veblen’s theory that the male psyche also curates his style, speech, and
the viewer and the surface of the water. The only indication of her head
gestures to compose an identity that he wants to put forth.⁵ However,
and potential identity is the hair cascading down her back. Flowers and
for men, one of the carefully selected objects in this curation is a female
leaves decorate her torso, much like that of the paisleys in Hand-Painted
companion. Historically, if a man worked, his wife would be expected
Tie, and the reflection from the water cascades on her skin mimicking
to stay home and consume for him, furnishing their house with objects
the veins on the leaves. Her skin becomes as much a decoration as the
and buying expensive clothes to adorn herself. These clothes become
swimsuit that she wears and she stands in a manner to be consumed by
an emblem not only of her status, but a symbol of her husband’s earning
the viewer. The aquatint print is saturated with brilliant colors that draw the viewer’s eye towards her torso first, and then to the rest of her body.
develop a self-awareness of their bodies and habits; they become both the viewer and the viewed. This female conflation of subject and voyeur affirms the assumption that men have the ability to act and exist in their own right free from constant observation. However, women must simply
She is waiting, possibly taking a break, but nevertheless stopping in a
3. Berger, Ways, 47. “One might simplify this by saying: men act and women appear .
freeze frame for the viewer to consume.
Men look at women. Women watch themselves.”
Figure 2
4. Berger, Ways, 46. “a woman's presence expresses her own attitude to herself, and
power—a power evidenced through her “conspicuous consumption,” a
defines what can and cannot be done to her. Her presence is manifest in her gestures,
phrase coined by Veblen to denote the consumption of objects to display
(2010) investigated the depth at which objectification leads to
wealth.⁶ The female becomes an object to be decorated within the man’s
personalization. In the article, the authors reference Immanuel Kant to
appear, existing as an object to be watched by men and critiqued by
voice, opinions, expressions, clothes, chosen surroundings, taste - indeed there is
themselves and other women.³
nothing she can do which does not contribute to her presence.”
A study published by the European Journal of Social Psychology
5. Veblen, Theory, 19. “In all but the lowest stages of culture the normally constituted
life as proof of his own wealth. In our industrious world, a life of leisure
1. Thorstein Veblen The Theory of the Leisure Class:An Economic Study of Institutions.
man is comforted and upheld in his self-respect by “decent surroundings” and by
that allows one to live in “manifest ease and comfort” is the ultimate
11. Steve Loughnan, Nick Haslam, Tess Murnane, Jeroen Vaes, Catherine Reynolds
(The Modern Library of the World’s Best Books; New York: Modern Library, 1934),
exemption from “menial offices.” Enforced departure from his habitual standard of
goal for both the male and female.⁷ We value our worth based on the
and Caterina Suitner. “Objectification Leads to Depersonalization: The Denial of Mind
4. “There is in all barbarian communities a profound sense of the disparity between
decency, either in the paraphernalia of life or in the kind and amount of his everyday
and Moral Concern to Objectified Others.” European Journal of Social Psychology
man’s and woman’s work. His work may conduce to the maintenance of the group,
activity, is felt to be a slight upon his human dignity, even apart from all conscious
property that we obtain and the ease in which we obtain it, which is
but it is felt that it does so through an excellence and an efficacy of a kind that
consideration of the approval or disapproval of his fellows.”
cannot without derogation be compared with the uneventful diligence of the
6. Veblen, Theory, 30.
women.”
7. Veblen, Theory, 19. “A life of leisure is the readiest and most conclusive evidence
2. John Berger, Ways of Seeing. (A Pelican Original; Pelican original. London: British
of pecuniary strength, and therefore of superior force; provided always that the
Broadcasting Corp., 1977): 46 “To be born a woman has been to be born, within an
gentleman of leisure can live in manifest ease and comfort .”
9. Berger, Ways, 55.
consumption directed to the comfort of the consumer himself, and is, therefore, a
allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men.”
8. Veblen, Theory, 21.
10. Berger, Ways, 55.
mark of the master.”
why abstention from labor is one of the greatest indicators of social and economic superiority.⁸ Laura de Bolanos Volkerding’s Hand Painted Tie (1964) features a
40 (2010): 709. “Objectification has interested philosophers since the term was introduced by Immanuel Kant. Kant argued that the risk of objectification is present in all sexual encounters, where a person can become merely a need-satisfying ‘object of appetite’.” 12. Veblen, Theories, 35. “The consumption of luxuries, in the true sense, is a
The moderately unconventional female nude that is Carl E. Schwartz’s Heirloom 2 (N.D.) displays a highly stylized woman half decapitated by the edge of the image. The female figure is lying on a couch with floral prints bleeding onto her body like tattoos beginning to envelop her in a cocoon. The figure looks like she is both at ease and as if she is in motion, her hands are delicate, yet awkward as they trace along her shoulders and as one knee is brought up towards her waist. Curvaceous, yet fit, it is difficult to tell whether the female is full figured or muscular. It is as if half of her body resembles one of Michelangelo’s Sybil’s on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, while the other half is gentle and feminine. Regardless of her physique, she is laid out for the viewer to see, her face removed from the lips down. The eyes of the woman, a reflection of her soul, are cut out of the image to eliminate her potentially uncomfortable gaze at the viewer. The appearance of her lips allows the viewer to be seduced, but her missing eyes insure this seduction comes without confrontation. Heirloom 2 manages to include most of the female erogenous zones while still denying the subject an identity. The word “heirloom” is used to describe a valuable object that has been possessed by a family for generations. The title Heirloom 2 suggests that the woman depicted is a valuable object, and thus resembles something like a piece of jewelry rather than a human being. Further, the patterning on the couch both in front of and behind the figure is once again of a floral pattern. There are multiple associations between women and flowers, many of which revolve around her presumed innocence. However, here the patterning claims her as a decorative object, one to be passed on and kept—a possession rather than a person. Hand-Painted Tie, Venus, and Heirloom 2 play with the codes of seeing that modern western viewers have been trained to understand, and they affirm the ways in which women are objectified when differing from the traditional female nude. The figures in these works, when viewed together, reveal the codes used to articulate women as decorative objects. Such codes take away women’s identities in order to turn them Figure 3
discuss “the risk of objectification present in all sexual encounters, where a person can become merely a need-satisfying ‘object of appetite’.”¹¹ By decapitating the figure—and thus stripping her of a specific identity— the print offers the viewer a depersonalized body depicted in a state of leisure. She becomes a part of the background, an ornament to go with the pool, herself an object of leisure to be used for male recreation. Veblen describes this consumption of luxuries by the female as being a “mark” of the consumption “directed to the comfort of the consumer,” and thus a sign of conspicuous consumption of her “master.”¹² The female is not expected to consume for her own leisure. Instead, women are expected to consume for others: dressing herself, embellishing her house, and ultimately keeping up appearances for her family.
into objects of consumption. By physically detaching these female bodies from their minds and by overlying those bodies with decorative patterns, these prints remove any threat of confrontation or resistance to male voyeuristic consumption. This allows the viewer to see these women not only as objects, but also as objects to be possessed by male spectators either through the actual purchase of the artwork or through the command of their gaze.
Exhibited Works
Arne Charles Besser Bridgehampton 1979 Silkscreen 25 x 18 1/2
David Bumbeck Girl with pictures No date Etching and aquatint 5 x 6�
Hilo Chen Rooftop Sunbather No date Silkscreen 16 3/4 x 25” Richard Diebenkorn Seated Woman in Striped Dress 1965 Lithograph 28 x 22”
Fritz Eichenberg Subway 1943 Wood engraving 6 1/4 x 4 3/4”
Antonio Fransconi Fisherman 1953 Woodcut 10 5/8 x 7 7/8”
Emil Ganso At the Sea Shore 1932 Wood engraving 8 x 12�
Dilley Martin and Hess, Inc. Vacation Loan Ad Print on poster board
Tom Huck Mile High Handjob 2011
Louis Lozowick Loading 1930
Woodcut
Lithograph
12 x 12”
10 5/8 x 7 3/8”
Noel Mahaffey Night — Times Square 1979 Silkscreen Louis Lozowick Novel of Adventure 1942 Lithograph 12 15/16 x 8 1/8”
17 x 25 1/8”
Mel Ramos Manet’s Olympia 1974 Collotype Barry Moser The Lovers 1999 Relief engraving (AP) 16 x 11”
15 3/8 x 22 1/8”
Mel Ramos Touche Boucher 1974
Carl E. Schwartz Heirloom 2 No date
Collotype
Lithograph
16 x 20 1/4”
22 x 30”
John Sloan Connoisseurs of Prints 1905 Etching 4 7/8 x 6 7/8
Laura (de Bolanos) Volkerding Hand Painted Tie 1964 Woodcut 21 x 14 3/4�
Arthur Werger Venus
Wolf Zingraff Afternoon...The Whole Thing
1998
1972
Aquatint
35 1/2 x 23 1/2”
15 x 11 1/2”
Exhibiton Checklist 1. Mel Ramos
9. John Sloan
18. Tom Huck
Manet’s Olympia
Connoisseurs of Prints
Mile High Handjob
1974
1905
2011
Collotype
Etching
Woodcut
15 3/8 x 22 1/8”
4 7/8 X 6 7/8”
12 x 12”
2. David Bumbeck
10. Hilo Chen
19. Wolf Zingraff
Girl with Pictures
Rooftop Sunbather
Afternoon...The Whole Thing
Etching and aquatint
Silkscreen
1972
5 x 6”
16 ¾ x 25”
3. Richard Diebenkorn
11. Emil Ganso
Seated Woman in Striped Dress
At the Sea Shore
20. Noel Mahaffey
1965
1932
Night – Times Square
Lithograph
Wood engraving
1979
28 x 22”
8 x 12”
Silkscreen
4. Louis Lozowick
12. Arthur Werger
Novel of Adventure
Venus
21. Antonio Frasconi
1942
1998
Fisherman
Lithograph
Aquatint
1953
12 15/16 x 8 1/8”
35 ½ x 23 ½”
Woodcut
5. Louis Lozowick
13. Dilley Martin and
Loading
Hess, Inc
1930
Vacation Loan Ad
Lithograph
Print on poster board
10 5/8 x 7 3/8”
NEED DIMENSIONS
6. Mel Ramos
14. Arne Charles Besser
Touche Boucher
Bridgehampton
1974
1979
Collotype
Silkscreen
16 x 20 ¼”
25 x 18 ½”
7. Carl E. Schwartz
15. Fritz Eichenberg
Heirloom 2
Subway
Lithograph
1934
22 x 30”
Wood engraving
8. Laura (de Bolanos)
6 ¼ x 4 ¾”
Volkerding
17. Barry Moser
Hand Painted Tie
The Lovers
1964
1999
Woodcut
Relief engraving (AP)
21 x 14 ¾”
16 x 11”
15 X 11 1/2”
17 x 25 1/8”
10 5/8 x 7 7/8”
Hite Art Institute
Hite Art Institute Faculty & Staff
The Department of Fine Arts at the University of Louisville was founded in 1937. In 1946, the Department was endowed as the Hite Art Institute
Faculty
in recognition of the bequest of Allen R. and Marcia S. Hite. The Institute currently has 24 full-time faculty members, a full-time staff of six, and 400 undergraduate and graduate majors in the combined studio, art history, and critical & curatorial studies areas. As the most comprehensive Fine Arts program in the state of Kentucky, we offer majors the opportunity to earn a BA, BFA, MA or MFA in a variety of disciplines. Areas
Ying Kit Chan, MFA Professor and Chair
of study include art history, ceramics, critical & curatorial studies, drawing, fiber, glass, graphic design, interior design, painting, photography,
Moon-he Baik, MFA
printmaking and sculpture.
Associate Professor, Interior
The University of Louisville, founded in 1798, is one of the oldest municipal universities in the United States. With a current enrollment of
Design
22,000 students, the University of Louisville is Kentucky’s major urban university and one of the most rapidly expanding universities in the United States. The Hite Art Institute maintains six art galleries which feature rotating exhibitions by nationally and internationally renowned artists and designers, as well as students and faculty of the Institute. Schneider Hall, on the Belknap campus of the University of Louisville, is home to the Morris B. Belknap Gallery, Dario A. Covi Gallery, and Gallery X, as well as a library dedicated to fine arts scholarship. The Cressman Center for Visual Arts, located in the heart of the downtown arts district, houses the John B. and Bonnie Seidman Roth Gallery, Leonard and Adele Leight
Assistant Professor, Interior
Assistant Professor, Foundations
Design
Photography Mitch Eckert, MFA Photography James Grubola, MFA Graduate Studies in Studio Art Barbara Hanger, MFA
Our students learn by doing: They conduct research and express their creativity, include ethical considerations in their thinking, and
Associate Professor, Art
experience the world from the perspectives of other cultures. The College brings the heritage of intellectual tradition to bear on the
Education
to the liberal arts and sciences and to the intellectual, cultural, and economic development of our diverse communities and citizens through the pursuit of excellence in five interrelated strategic areas: (1) Educational Experience, (2) Research, Creative, and Scholarly Activity, (3) Accessibility, Diversity, Equity, and Communication, (4) Partnerships and Collaborations, (5) Institutional Effectiveness of Programs and Services.
Jesse Gibbs, BFA Sculpture Shop Technician Amy Fordham, MA, MLIS
Susan Jarosi, PhD
Mark Rosenthal, MA
Associate Professor, Women’s and Gender Studies and Art History Pearlie Johnson, PhD Assistant Professor, Pan-African
Unit Business Manager
Thomas Buser, PhD
Jongwoo Jeremy Kim, PhD
Henry Chodkowski, MFA
Cristina Carbone, PhD
Dario Covi, PhD
Lida Gordon, MFA Jay Kloner, PhD
Assistant Professor, Art History
Stephanie Maloney, PhD
Chris Reitz, PhD
Suzanne Mitchell, MFA
Assistant Professor, Director of Graduate Studies in Critical and Curatorial Studies, and Gallery Director, Hite Art Institute
Administrative Assistant
John Begley, MFA
Stow Chapman, MArch
Art History
Renée K. Murphy, BFA
Linda Rowley
Studies and Art History
Associate Professor, Art History
Exhibitions Assistant
Professor Emeriti
Linda Gigante, PhD
Professor, Graphic Design
Graduate Program Assistant
Bess Reed, PhD
Associate Professor,
Steven Skaggs, MS
Art History Program,
Associate Professor, Art History
Delin Lai, PhD
Assistant Professor, Printmaking
Program Assistant, Senior,
Jessica Bennett Kincaid, MA
Associate Professor, Painting
Rachel Singel, MFA
Janice Blair
Sharon Leightty, MFA
Gabrielle Mayer, MFA
Associate Professor, Glass
Graduate Program Assistant
Benjamin Hufbauer, PhD
Julia Duncan, MA
Ché Rhodes, MFA
Academic Coordinator, Senior
Curator of Visual Resources
Art History
Professor, Painting
Theresa Berbet, MA
Associate Professor, Art History
Associate Professor, Sculpture
Belknap Campus is three miles from downtown Louisville and houses seven of the university’s 12 colleges and schools. The Health Sciences
Staff
Matthew Landrus, PhD
Director of Graduate Studies in
Mark Priest, MFA
Mission Statement: The University of Louisville shall be a premier, nationally recognized metropolitan research university with a commitment
Christopher Fulton, PhD
Megan Kocisak, MA
Scott Massey, MFA
supported public institution for many decades prior to joining the university system in 1970. The University has three campuses. The 287-acre
Hospital. The 243-acre Shelby Campus is located in eastern Jefferson County.
Wendy Dunleavy, MA
Bill Gilliss, MFA
and ever-accelerating change because its prepares our graduates to be informed and critical thinkers, creative problem-solvers, and confident
Center is situated in downtown Louisville’s medical complex and houses the university’s health related programs and the University of Louisville
Fiber / Mixed Media Director,
Jennifer Dumesnil, MS
Philip Miller, MFA
Professor, Drawing, Director of
The University of Louisville is a state supported research university located in Kentucky’s largest metropolitan area. It was a municipally
Assistant Professor,
Steven Cheek, MFA
Kyoungmee Kate Byun, MFA
We believe that an excellent education in the liberal arts and sciences is the best preparation for life and work in a world of increasing diversity
University of Louisville
Maggie Leininger, MFA
Brian Faust, BFA
Associate Professor,
challenges of the future.
Graphic Design
Part-time Faculty
Quilt Project
Associate Professor,
communicators.
Designer-in-Residence
Associate Professor, Ceramics
operations of the glass studio.
creating knowledge through its research, sharing knowledge through its teaching, and guiding all its students to realize their potential.
Associate in Fine Arts
International Honor
Mary Carothers, MFA
The mission of the College of Arts and Sciences is to improve life in the Commonwealth and particularly in the greater Louisville urban area,
Peter Morrin, MFA
Power Creative
Todd Burns, MFA
Gallery, and the Alice S. and Irvin F. Etscorn Gallery for ongoing exhibitions, and provides the public with an opportunity to observe the daily
College of Arts and Science
Leslie Friesen, BA
William Morgan, PhD Nancy Pearcy, MA John Whitesell, MFA