PAI NTI N G IS N OT D O O M E D TO RE PE AT IT S E LF
MIC HAEL ARMITAG E SQUE AK C ARNWATH DANIEL DOUKE JULIA FISH BRENDA GOODMAN MERLIN JAME S JOSHUA MARSH C ATHERINE MURPHY THOMAS NOZKOWSKI CORDY RYMAN PHILIP TAAFFE BARBAR A TAKENAGA WENDY WHITE JAC K WHIT TEN
Painting Is Not Doomed To Repeat Itself
September 24 to October 31, 2015 Curated by John Yau
HOLLI S TAGGART GALLER I ES 521 W 26th Street 7th Floor New York, NY 10001
Foreword
After the highs of Abstract Expressionism forever altered the state of modern art, each new wave of stylistic innovation and theoretical declaration that washed over the art world in the second half of the twentieth century seemed to announce the death of painting. The ironic hard edges of Pop, the pared-down compositions of Minimalism, the free-for-all expressionism of assemblage and street art, and finally the tongue-incheek homages of 1980s appropriation were interpreted by critics to signal painting’s demise. However, as we illustrate here, painting is far from over, and in fact continues to thrive in the contemporary moment. With this in mind, Hollis Taggart Galleries is pleased to open our new Chelsea space with Painting Is Not Doomed to Repeat Itself, an exhibition that celebrates the diversity of contemporary painting through the work of fourteen artists who are reimagining what it means to be a painter in the twenty-first century. Though they are certainly not without history, these artists rarely, if ever, look to their art historical precedents for aesthetic inspiration and instead turn to the accoutrement of the street, the inner workings of the artist’s psyche, the remnants and reconfigurations of their own past work, and even to investigations of the act of painting itself. The theme chosen by our esteemed guest curator John Yau is essentially the fact that there are no themes, no common threads, or “-isms” in the art world today. Yau has chosen what he calls “real painters” who are “serious and dedicated to their art.” There is no further common ground underlying this exhibition. It yields a revelatory snapshot of today’s art world, from the perspective of a wily and experienced art critic. John Yau has been a delight to work with over the last several months. His discerning eye for both emerging and well-established talent and his unerring sense of the state of the art world are the driving forces behind this exhibition, and we have learned much from him. Of course, our exhibition program is only possible due to the tireless efforts of our gallery staff. I would like to thank Stacey Epstein, Debra Pesci, Martin Friedrichs, Dan Weiner, Kara Spellman, Ashley Park, and Katie Zoni for their fine contributions to this endeavor. Thanks go also to Russell Hassell and Jessie Sentivan for this excellent catalogue. We express our deepest appreciation to Yau for helping us launch our new enterprise, and to all our friends and clients for their encouragement and support. From this beginning we will continue to investigate the themes, both new and old, which have molded and guided our gallery’s mission since 1979, and we hope you enjoy our newest incarnation.
—Hollis Taggart
7
Painting Is Not Doomed To Repeat Itself
John Yau
During the 1980s, while much of the art world was celebrating the return of painting, as exemplified by Neo-Expressionism, the Transavantgarde and Neo-Geo, it was nearly impossible to read an issue of Artforum without coming across at least one reference to Jorge Luis Borges’ short story “Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote.” Borges wrote the story in the form of a review in which the narrator considers Menard’s Quixote, which is completely identical with the original by Cervantes. The primary reason so many critics and theorists cited Borges’ story was to assert that the best one could do in the aftermath of the death of painting and the author was to make copies, which 8
both critiqued and improved upon the original. The argument that there was nowhere to go in painting was hardly a new one. In an interview that was printed in Art News (September 1966), Bruce Glaser, who was talking with Frank Stella and Donald Judd, asked Stella: “Are you implying that you are trying to destroy painting?” This was Stella’s response: It’s just that you can’t go back. It’s not quite a question of destroying anything. If something’s used up, something’s done, something’s over with, what’s the point of getting involved with it? For some, Stella’s answer was a deterrent, a good reason to work in another medium, but for others it became a challenge. As the twentieth century recedes into history’s lengthening shadows, it is apparent that painting wasn’t used up or over with, as the institutionally sanctioned Stella remarked. After Minimalism, painting didn’t die out or become outdated, like the dodo bird or phlogiston. It is also plain that movements and manifestoes, which were a central feature of modernism, along with the many reactions and offshoots it inspired, are less likely to reoccur in this century, which is already fifteen years old. The waning of historical styles, mass movements, and sweeping, often demagogic proclamations, in tandem with the continuing practice of painting, has left many observers confused, especially those who subscribe to the received idea that painting is dead. Nowhere was this confusion more evident than in the exhibition, The Forever Now: Contemporary Art in an Atemporal World at the Museum of Modern Art, the
institution’s first survey of contemporary painting in more than thirty years. According to the show’s corresponding press release, the concept of atemporality is embodied in contemporary art: [. . .] through the reanimating of historical styles or by recreating a contemporary version of them, sampling motifs from across the timeline of 20th-century art in a single painting or across an oeuvre, or by radically paring down an artistic language to its most basic, archetypal form. By exhibition curator Laura Hoptman’s standards, the only choices open to a painter are copying, sampling, or being reductive, all options that were already old hat to artists working in the last half of the twentieth century. This is how Hoptman restated the concept in her catalogue essay: Abstraction is a language primed for becoming a representation of itself, because as much as it resists the attribution of specific meanings, the abstract mark cannot help but carry with it an entire utopian history of modern painting. This is how my colleague Thomas Micchelli judiciously characterized Hoptman’s narrow description of abstraction: Old wine in new bottles, some may say. Others might argue that the Museum of Modern Art is throwing its weight behind a narrow bandwidth of contemporary painting practice, one that revolves around the artwork as a mediated object referencing institutionally sanctioned styles. This footnoted approach fits all too well within the historical narrative that MoMA, despite its best efforts, has never been quite able to shake: that after representation was subsumed into abstraction, and abstraction was reduced to Minimalism, painting could only repeat itself. The “historical narrative” that Micchelli refers to is based on the idea of progress, which is why Hoptman was comfortable linking “the abstract mark” with “utopian history.” In 1966, Stella thought he was the culmination of this narrative, and that in some sense he was the last painter. Within this context, “atemporality” is both a code word for the end of history (and painting) as well as an expression of longing
9
for the good old days, when movements and styles, such as Minimalism, Color Field painting, Op art, and Pop art, were the rage. Of course, it’s the specter of Abstract Expressionism, “the abstract mark” and the absolute authority of painting’s flat surface that looms behind all of these movements, like a parent you can neither please nor measure up to. If you subscribe to this kind of thinking, which upholds a repressive standard from the past, art can only devolve. The best you can do is to try and become a footnote that passes academic standards. The problem with The Forever Now: Contemporary Art in an Atemporal World was 10
that it was based on three fictitious conclusions. The first is that painting died and is doomed to repeat itself. This puts painting on a clock, which it isn’t. The second is that you can put painting in a box and sign, seal, and deliver it. The third is that the authority of Modernist flatness cannot be challenged, undermined, or undone. None of these finales are true. Painting has not died. It does not fit it neatly into a category, stylistic or otherwise. It remains unruly and unpredictable, as Philip Guston made evident. Instead of looking wistfully at the past, or reanimating a historical style, the artists included in this exhibition are neither obsessed with the “abstract mark” nor looking over their shoulder and “sampling” well-known examples of Modernist flatness. They are not nostalgic for the good old days. They recognize that being heroic is a thing of the past. Rather, they are outliers who found a way to move on without embracing sanctioned options or turning themselves into caricatures. I have selected work by fourteen artists for this exhibition. I have written about the majority of them, in many cases more than once, and certainly have been following their work, often for decades. For the most part they have thrived on the periphery of the flashy art world, working in a way that has nothing to do with approved options and fashionable styles. Recognizing that painting is a slow art, they choose not to look for shortcuts in an age that upholds the quick fix; their independence, commitment, and belief are consummate. Otherwise, they have little in common. Terms such as representation and abstraction seem less relevant with each passing day. Stylistic designations are beside the point. I could try to organize the work I have selected into different, related groups, but this exercise would soon dissolve into incredulity. I could point to affinities, overlaps and echoes, but I trust the viewer can
discover these things as well and many others I have not discerned. This is both the pleasure and adventure of experiencing art; it opens up a space in which one can reflect upon what it means to look. Meaning isn’t just a little pill you swallow in order to become enlightened. Painting isn’t just a parasite clinging to the ankle of greatness. I would go further and say that these artists resist style and branding. Many make uncategorizable hybrid objects. They work in oil, acrylic, and ink. They use brushes, spray cans, and silkscreens. They work on traditional stretched canvas, shaped canvas, multiple panels, and wood that has been cut up into blocks. They span everything from trompe l’oeil to abstraction, from image to language. Instead of narrowing and refining their options, which an earlier generation took care of, they found ways to bring back what had been banished from painting. In the early 1980s, when the art world was celebrating the return of painting and monumental works, one artist continued to work on modestly scaled, store-bought canvas boards; another remained true to depicting what she saw in front of her; and another explored the boundaries and ambient light of the house she and her husband lived in. Undeterred by fashion, they followed their own impulses and preoccupations, which, for one artist, meant studying the technique of marbling, as well as figuring out how to bring it into the domain of painting. They work in Glasgow, Scotland; London, England; Oakland, California; Chicago, Illinois; a rural town miles from Los Angeles, California; various towns and cities in upstate New York and Connecticut. Their work testifies to painting’s resiliency, its ability to morph into something fresh and engaging. And just as it takes time to make, it takes time to look and consider. In their resistance to sanctioned narratives and to aligning themselves with those experts who would have you believe that painting is dead or used up, these artists, in their different ways, channel the wry wisdom of the poet and Museum of Modern art curator Frank O’Hara (1926–66), who said, ”You just go on your nerve.” For these painters, going on your nerve means believing in paint’s potentiality, rather than being ironic or cynical—easy stances to take in turbulent times. It means being heretical and not drinking the Kool-Aid—whatever flavor it comes in—that authorities of one sort or another are always trying to hand out. It means not ceding to others, and choosing to do what you know is necessary, rather than what is easy.
11
Catalogue
Michael Armitage
(B. 1984)
Armitage uses various modes to pay homage
For an artist who is deeply concerned with
to Africa, and specifically to East Africa. One
contemporary social and political issues, with a
dominant style implements large planes of
vested interest in using art to examine them,
flat color on the support, partially shrouding a
there is a layered philosophical element to his
more detailed background; this is derived from a
use of Lubugo bark cloth. While the material has
kind of tourist painting prevalent in East African
been adopted for use in craft geared towards
markets. His choice of materials—palm leaves,
tourists, its history is deeply rooted in Uganda,
Michael Armitage’s imagery focuses predomi-
various African fabrics, and Lubugo bark cloth—is
and it is used by the Baganda for burial shrouds
nantly on Kenya, the country of his birth.
intrinsic to his paintings. Armitage’s use of various
and ceremonial dress. In this way, Armitage’s
Drawing from both personal as well as national
textures of paint is enhanced by the presence in
use of the material very much mirrors his
and global memory, the artist seeks inspiration
his work of the Lubugo bark, with its natural
simultaneous consideration of past and present.
from Africa’s far reaching mythic past, while
texture that has been pounded, folded, and
Taking a traditional East African material whose
at the same time looking to the current digital
pounded again to create a supple cloth. He first
rich history has been coopted by the tourist
generation and the complications that arise
discovered the fabric in a tourist stall in Nairobi,
trade, Armitage recontextualizes it within his
from participating in it.
where it was used to make placemats and baskets.
own highly personal narrative.
Accident, 2015 Oil on Lubugo bark cloth 67 x 87 inches
13
Squeak Carnwath
(B. 1947)
Little Girls, 2015 Oil and alkyd on canvas over panel 30 x 30 inches
building blocks in large compositions. She
she calls it, organic materials placed on a
works mainly in a combination of oil and alkyd,
support are changed into something of greater
preferring the incorporation of the latter for
significance through a kind of alchemical
both its flexibility and quick-drying properties.
process. Carnwath considers the artist to
Carnwath’s interest in the ontological
Love, 2014 Oil and alkyd on canvas over panel 70 x 60 inches
be the conduit in the sacred conversion.
differences between painting and sculpture
Her paintings thus provide the viewer with
add a philosophical element to her work.
a closer look at the artist’s exploration of her
Her consideration of a painting’s represen-
“unmediated self.”
tational identity suggests her continued
Carnwath is the recipient of numerous
Squeak Carnwath’s paintings are instantly
engagement with a discourse that began with
awards, including one from the Society for
recognizable, with their cluttered combinations
the emergence of modern painting. The artist’s
the Encouragement of Contemporary Art,
of words, phrases, and aphorisms that are
own spiritual concerns heighten the philosoph-
two fellowships from the National Endowment
often peppered with personal iconographies
ical quality of her work: she considers the act
for the Arts, and a Guggenheim Fellowship.
pulled from the artist’s dreams. Her latest work
of painting to be a process similar to transub-
She is also professor emerita at University
repurposes song titles and lyrics as colorful
stantiation. In this ritualistic “conversion,” as
of California, Berkeley.
14
15
Daniel Douke
(B. 1943)
Wanted, 2014 Acrylic on canvas 38 x 20 x 14 inches
Folding Table, 2008 Acrylic on canvas 72 x 30 inches
distilled Stella’s aesthetic, and its stark prioritiz-
Despite taking the shape of real-world
ing of surface stands in contrast to the principles
objects, Douke’s paintings announce them-
underlying the work of such other painters as
selves as just that: paintings. To emphasize
Daniel Douke, who takes the viewer beyond the
this status, Douke insists that his work be
surface and posits that what you believe you see
placed on the floor. This allows the viewer to
is not necessarily what you see.
experience the works in the round, revealing
Douke’s work offers a combination of the
their canvas support and reinforcing their identity as paintings. Douke has turned the
century Dutch breakfast pieces, the trompe-
seriousness of late modernist aesthetic theory
Speaking of his own work at a defining moment
l’oeil skill of quattrocento illusionistic painters,
on its head. His is the stuff of parody. What
for American art in the mid-1960s, Frank Stella
and a reverence towards discarded objects.
appears to be an ordinary wooden crate or
famously said, “what you see is what you see.”
He is at once a master painter and sculptor,
mailbox is, in fact, a precisely executed
At the time of his comments it was the simplest
shaping the support upon which he paints
testament to Douke’s careful consideration
way to communicate a rather complicated idea
to mirror the shape of the object he chooses
of the everyday object and his innovative
about art’s philosophical turn. This statement
to depict.
approach to the painting tradition.
16
meticulous attention to detail of seventeenth-
17
Julia Fish
(B. 1950)
Threshold — Matrix : harbour [ spectrum : transposed ] / for E and L, 2014–15
producing there for more than twenty years. While Fish’s work privileges patterned motifs and may appear as something of a
Closer examination reveals where tiles were laid unevenly and where grout stains have set in. These works force the viewer to truly look,
Transfer chalk and oil on canvas
De Stijl abstraction rendered in the subtle
to sharpen his or her perception, noticing the
30 x 70 inches
tonalities of an Agnes Martin, her work is, in
way in which light affects the surface of the
fact, always representational. It is made up
most quotidian fixtures of everyday life. Fish’s
of nearly endless intimate examinations of
paintings thus manifest as both a lesson in
Oil on canvas
the space in which she lives, a practice she
looking and a lesson in living. Her paintings are
32 ½ x 32 ¾ inches
describes as “archival.”
marked with a curiosity and attention akin to a
Living Rooms : SouthEast — Two, with lights, action, 2003–05
Julia Fish’s work is about the displacement
traveller embarking on foreign journey. Fish’s paintings assert their value as more
Since the early 1990s, Julia Fish has kept her
and reorganization of space. It challenges
home and studio in a ninety year old former
our idea of appropriate spatial relationships,
than mere representations of domestic surfaces.
storefront located at 1614 North Hermitage
where the ground belongs on the ground,
Their subtle illusionism belies their status as
Avenue in Chicago. The specificity of this
not hanging on the wall. What might first
objects qua objects, as they maintain their
address is significant given the corresponding
appear to be a minimalist painting of a grid
identity as things existing in this world, not
specificity of the art that Fish has been
is actually a detailed section of a tiled floor.
merely as representational images of this world.
18
19
Brenda Goodman
(B. 1943)
Brush, 2013 Oil on wood 32 x 48 inches
behind, and thin glazes, a slightly veiled self.
When faced with the imagery, the viewer is
Goodman’s work is set apart as she commands
compelled to confront life, death, and the
the support as stomping ground for unapolo-
vulnerability of the human body. Using both
getic self-examination and presentation. Goodman makes use of both traditional and
Untitled a1, 2012
realistic and abstracted humanoid forms, she sheds light on these events and the
non-traditional tools such as palette knives,
emotions that are tied to them. While never
cake decorating tubes, and ice picks, combining
setting out to address universal issues, her
their uses on wood or paper with admixtures
deeply sensitive paintings nevertheless
of non-traditional materials in oil paint. The
resonate, giving the viewer a sense of
Deeply concerned with personal represen-
tactility of the medium forces a visceral
Goodman’s personal grappling with the
tation and reflection, Brenda Goodman
reaction in the viewer, rendering materiality a
weight of human experience.
presents a scatological worldview in her
key to the success of the individual paintings.
Oil on wood 72 x 72 inches
paintings through her incorporation of organs
While personal and deeply expressionistic,
Goodman is a Detroit-born artist who currently lives and works in Pine Hill, New
and excess. Through her own keen self-
the works affect the viewer psychologically,
York. She is the recipient of several grants
awareness, the artist uses the materiality of
placing them in touch with the core—and often
including two New York Foundation for the Arts
paint as a metaphor for different represen-
scarring—events of Goodman’s personal life.
Fellowships and The National Endowment for
tations of the self. Paint applied in thick
The artist herself has suggested that her work
the Arts. Her work is included in several perma-
impasto could represent something to hide
toes the line between “humor and horror.”
nent collections throughout the United States.
20
21
Merlin James
(B. 1960)
Two Trees and Water, 2012–13 Oil on canvas
of the quotidian, James seems to acknowledge
way, rallying against the preciousness of
its ephemerality and ultimate dissolution.
traditional painting practice, viewing, and study,
In James’s paintings, the support could be
by creating work that evades the “necessary”
literally skewed—bowed is more accurate—in
elements of painting as a high art form. A frame
order to skew the viewer’s perception of the
only exists for the most pragmatic structural
background’s place in the greater history of art.
purposes. He rarely cedes to the decorative
Landscapes and genre scenes are scrubbed and
component most often aligned with a frame’s
partially dissolved, leaving thick daubs of paint
utility. This is James’s way of loudly signaling
Capriccio, 2014
in some places and faint washes of color in
the disillusionment of traditional art-historical
Acrylic fabric, wood frame, acrylic paint
others. James’s paintings tend to look damaged,
discourse and the way in which painting is
41 x 31 inches
besmirched. In other works, a nylon material
still displayed in many institutional settings.
akin to ladies’ stockings forms a scrim, partially
In his reverse collage and the burning and
The subject matter of Merlin James’s painting is
obscuring the painting or shadow box behind it,
distressing of his canvases, James both literally
satisfying in its simplicity—beautiful banalities
suggesting that the way that we engage with
and metaphorically pokes holes in traditional
of sea and landscape, genre scenes, and other
art might be similarly dubious.
forms of painterly practice, thereby reframing
16 ⅞ x 23 ¼ inches
Red, 2013–14 Acrylic on fabric 17 ½ x 26 ½ inches
prosaic subjects. It is attractive because it is familiar. However, in his nod to our appreciation
22
For James, any leaning towards traditional fine art motifs is turned on its head. He is, in a
the way that art has historically been received and appreciated.
23
Joshua Marsh
His subject matter is narrow—he focuses on
nuclear glow radiating off of his oil paintings
domestic objects like dustpans, a turned over
has been likened to the light of a television
pitcher, or a single thong sandal, rather than
screen, an x-ray machine, and even the TSA
the vast American landscape—but his treatment
screening devices we have all become familiar
of those subjects harkens back to the Luminists’
with at the airport. The use of aggressive
sense of the sublime. Marsh’s subject matter
hothouse colors not only gives his paintings
remains banal in order to keep the viewer’s
a thoroughly modern edge, but it also gives
attention on his real aim: the examination and
the mundane objects a ghostly aura. There is a
exploitation, even, of light and its effects on
sense of voyeurism in viewing these paintings
The American Luminists, an offshoot of the Hudson
form. Like his nineteenth-century forebears,
that is difficult to pin-point. Perhaps it is in the
River School, were interested in the sublime
Marsh focuses on the underappreciated, shedding
recognizable silhouette of those TSA machines,
effects of light on the American landscape,
light on light as the ultimate subject matter.
or maybe the sinister glow of a colored window in
(B. 1973)
Dust, 2015 Oil on panel 15 x 18 inches
Thus Gone, 2015 Oil on panel 22 x 20 inches
emphasizing clarity and tranquility through nearly
The post-modern twist found in Marsh’s own
an unsavory neighborhood. Either way, his work
invisible brushstrokes. Joshua Marsh’s work can
brand of Luminism is his use of technological
resists strict categorization, maintaining an
be understood as that of a post-modern Luminist.
light rather than sunlight. The sort of post-
allure that is at once ethereal and haunting.
24
25
Catherine Murphy
(B. 1946)
Moire Chair, 1991 Oil on canvas 40 x 46 inches
Red Pages, 2003 Oil on canvas 60 x 60 inches
Catherine Murphy is a realist painter whose particular choice of subject matter is enriched
light on that which exists right under our noses. Murphy’s subject matter is never precious.
what otherwise might go unnoticed. Her work confronts the limitations of the photograph,
She is drawn to surface in the same way as
which is only able to snap what exists within the
other photorealist painters, but her snippings
picture field at a single moment. She has been
of hair left in the flooded sink or words drawn
known to allow multiple moments and an excess
with fingers on a frosty window carry more
of time to coexist in a single composition in
allure than something considered conven-
order to achieve the most successful painting.
tionally interesting. Her work is observational
Murphy was the recipient of the Robert
and honest, and she has a knack for closely
De Niro, Sr. Prize in 2014, and her work is
looking at the overlooked.
included in the permanent collections of the
Murphy has argued that she is not obsessed
Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Smithsonian
by her close observation of quotidian tableaux.
with form per se; she never paints the same
American Art Museum, and the Museum of
While the work of her predecessors and
things twice. Rather, as she explains, her work
Modern Art, among many others. She was
contemporaries in the genre explores the most
is meant to “slow things down.” Even if her
awarded two National Endowment for the Arts
irresistible, punchiest of surfaces (the perfect
paintings take years to complete (which they
grants—in 1979 and 1989—and a Guggenheim
raindrop, faces of well known celebrities, jars
often do), they manage to capture a cluster
Fellowship, and she is a member of the
of sticky candies), Murphy is compelled to shed
of moments in one image, suspending in time
American Academy of Arts and Letters.
26
27
Thomas Nozkowski
(B. 1944)
Untitled (9-48), 2015 Oil on linen on panel 22 x 28 inches
Untitled (7-95), 1997 Oil on linen on panel 16 x 20 inches
Angelo Ippolito. However, his most recog-
still shows pangs of his early systemic
nizable work is small in scale and marked
paintings dating from the 1960s, themes
by distinct whimsy, both ways in which he
of which are visible in his consistent decon-
deviates from his painterly predecessors.
struction of the grid and other patterns.
And while it has taken him up to fifteen
Although a critically acclaimed artist, the
years to finish a single painting, he never
general consensus is that Nozkowski’s work
becomes preoccupied with the arduous
resists any stylistic category.
painterly process. Instead, his approach is
Born in 1944 in Teaneck, New Jersey,
Untitled (3-67), 1980
rather reductive. Often, he scrapes or scours
Nozkowski received his B.F.A. from the
Oil on canvas board
the painting’s surface after already having
Cooper Union in New York in 1967. He currently
16 x 20 inches
applied paint in extremely thin layers.
teaches at The Mason Gross School of Art
Nozkowski’s work is characterized by an
at Rutgers University in New Jersey. His work
Thomas Nozkowski is best known for paintings
idiosyncratic use of color, playful line, and
is housed in several esteemed permanent
done on an intimate scale on pre-stretched
quirky use of shape. He is influenced by the
collections in the United States that include
canvases, his trademark since 1974. The artist
everyday, seeing even the most mundane
the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Museum
was a student of the Abstract Expressionists,
objects or events as having potential as a
of Modern Art, and the Art Institute of Chicago,
including Nick Marsicano, David Lund, and
source of inspiration. His more recent work
among others.
28
29
Cordy Ryman
Cordy Ryman’s proclivity for collecting found
The mark of his hand and the past life of
objects and salvaged scraps has informed his
all of the components of a piece are integral
body of work since the 1990s. Producing both
in Ryman’s art-making, giving his work a
site-specific sculptures as well as hybrid
rough-hewn quality that calls more attention
painting/sculptures, Ryman’s attention to the
to materiality and process than anything
integrity of the medium leans towards a kind of
else. Despite the incorporation of unfinished
Cream Moon Horizon, 2014
reverence. While the work nods to both his
industrial materials, the work never feels
Encaustic on wood
abstract and minimalist forebears, his magpie
macho, lacking both in the high-gloss factory-
ways set him apart. In discussing his work, he
finish of 1960s Minimalist sculpture and the
Recon Figured 13, 2010
constantly incants the idea of a “life-force”
bloviatism of their makers. Instead, Ryman’s
Enamel on wood
exuded from particular materials and their
work maintains a playfulness, and often a
14 ¾ x 12 x 1 ¾ inches
corresponding “needs.” This partially explains
sense of humor that is more slapdash than concerned with strident formalism.
(B. 1971)
56 Special, 2015 Acrylic and enamel on wood 9 x 8 ¾ x 4 inches Opposite, clockwise from top left:
4 ¾ x 3 ½ x 1 ½ inches
Eye of Jupiter, 2014
the artist’s consummate recycling, even making
Encaustic on wood
use of elements from past installation pieces.
6 x 6 x 1 inches
For as much as Ryman discusses giving life to
and internationally. His work is included in a
his materials, he seems particularly concerned
number of private and public collections, as
Encaustic on wood
with providing each with the best life, which may
well as in a large public commission at Michigan
7 x 6 ¾ x 1 ½ inches
not be granted until the second time around.
State University.
Cross Facts, 2014
30
Ryman has exhibited widely both nationally
31
Philip Taaffe
(B. 1955)
Ophiuran, Prismatic, 2014 Mixed media on canvas 76 ½ x 70 inches
Double Calligraphic Fountain, 2002 Oil on paper mounted on canvas 81 ½ x 54 ½ inches
gouache, and collage chine-collé. This rich
his own fusion of ancient myth and post-
process is part of what makes Taaffe’s
modern flair that the paintings can be
work exceptional. Although there is certain
meditative, complex, and deeply challenging.
“vocabulary,” so to speak, that is recognizable
Taaffe finds inspiration in all forms of
in most of his work, his “grammar” is wholly
religious, mystical, and occult practice.
his own.
Islamic arabesque—a geometric patterning
The works are predicated on the super-
of natural forms—could be laid upon his
imposition of multiple layers of medium and
handmade marbled paper, a technique that
imagery. The viewer is at once seduced by
most likely originated in China during the Tang
Philip Taaffe’s recent paintings are an
the familiarity of something in the painting,
dynasty. Other paintings incorporate distinct
exercise in various tensions, adding as much
then upon closer inspection is lured into
properties of ancient Greek mythology and
layered meaning to each individual work
its complexity. Taaffe’s work introduces
Meso-American religion. His access to, and
as there are layers of artistic process and
imagery from both the celestial sphere and
grasp of, arcane and esoteric knowledge of
materials. His materials include, but are not
its opposing, underworld counterpart. He
both near and far-off lands is staggering,
limited to, linocut, the use of rubber stamps,
weds the worlds of Eastern mysticism with
and his layering of these historical opticalities
silkscreening, stenciling, watercolor and
Western philosophy, the sacred with the
leads to a psychedelic synesthesia apt for
gold leaf, acrylic, enamel, paper marbling,
profane, and vitality with mortality. It is in
the twenty-first century.
32
33
Barbara Takenaga
(B. 1949)
Falling (black tracings), 2014 Acrylic on wood panel
obvious brushstrokes that call attention to
appears to explore three different realms—
the artist’s hand or process.
the celestial, the terrestrial, and one invisible
Takenaga’s purported antecedents span
to the human eye: the molecular. A single
from Buddhist mandalas to Op art to the
painting could call to mind photographs of
psychedelic posters of John Van Hamersveld.
galaxies or retro-futuristic images of the
However, Takenaga is indeed a Visionary
space age, the sporangia one encounters on
painter in her own right. Since the 1970s
the back of a fern, or the thousand-times
she has consistently created paintings with
magnification of a human cell. The wedding
themes that transcend this physical world
of these worlds in one finite space at once
Before fully embarking on a career as a painter,
and challenge the viewer’s complacency
feels expository, yet at the same time
Barbara Takenaga trained as a printmaker.
of perception, thus aligning her with other
transcendent. The viewer becomes lost in the
This experience is revealed in her paintings
contemporary Visionary artists.
vortex-like fields produced from Takenaga’s
24 x 30 inches
Red Geode, 2015 Acrylic on wood panel 24 x 20 inches
imagination. Their opticality challenges one’s
through a keen precision of line and finish that
Takenaga’s work goes beyond the limits
call to mind the formal qualities of a traditional
of portraying dizzying patterns and optical
perception of a two-dimensional field, creating
print. Her painstaking application of paint
illusions. While she does not often mimic
a distinct experience for the viewer: one of
on the canvas is finessed to the point that it
nature directly, her imagery draws from reality
movement, one of illusion, and perhaps one
possesses a streamlined finish, lacking any
while remaining mostly abstract. Her work
of hypnotism.
34
35
Wendy White
(B. 1971)
Bollé, 2015 Acrylic on canvas, custom gold mirrored PVC frame 29 x 21 ½ inches
Strolz, 2015 Acrylic on canvas, custom gold mirrored PVC frame
her comparison between the life of the athlete
White’s body of work is also a commentary
and the life of the artist, part of White’s astute
on the limitations of traditional paintings on
observation about the hard-won and often
canvas. Not only does she use a variety of non-
short professional lives of people in physically
paint materials—custom fabricated Plexiglas
and emotionally taxing careers.
and PVC frames, rugs, and wood—she also
Many of White’s recent paintings begin
undermines traditional modes of display. Some
with color photographs, which she drains of
works sit on the floor and lean against the wall.
their color, prints on a large scale, and then
They are placed upon their own hand-painted
Ice, 2013
eventually paints over. The characteristic
rugs, which speak as much to domesticity,
Acrylic on canvas, wood and enamel artist’s frame
“fogginess” of her paintings calls to mind the
offering some kind of comforting invitation
98 ½ x 76 ½ inches
white residue on the window of a recently
into their space, as they do to White’s cool
closed shop; a “For Rent” sign would not feel
rebellion. Her mirror paintings assign the
Wendy White’s work is most preoccupied with
entirely out of place. This furthers White’s
actual mirrored surface to the painting’s frame,
the lifespan of seemingly dissonant places,
pointed remark on the ephemerality of things;
in direct reaction against the way that we are
people, and things, all of which are bound by
when she paints a soapy wash over a well-
used to looking at things. Their frames often
the same sense of impermanence and eventual
known photograph of a famous athlete, she
feature the bulbous evidence of a drip at their
decay. She considers a deli in Chinatown—here
seems to be saying that this newsworthy
corner, like the swollen bases of old glass
today and gone tomorrow—and the consequent
moment and the physical vitality of this athlete
windows, signaling, again, an erosion and a
graffiti on the building’s surface. Then there is
will, too, eventually “go out of business.”
sense of impermanence.
29 x 21 ½ inches
36
37
Jack Whitten
(B. 1939)
Ode To Jake, 2013 Acrylic on canvas 12 x 9 x 1 inches
time at Washington Square’s famed Cedar
something of Andy Warhol’s silkscreens, and
Tavern, brushing shoulders with American
predating Gerhard Richter’s own squeegee
Abstract Expressionism’s cognoscenti:
paintings by more than a decade.
Rothko, Pollock, de Kooning, and Kline. “Gesture,” “process,” and many other
Space Sifter, 2014
Whitten continues to explore options beyond the paintbrush, challenging the
argot commonly associated with the Abstract
boundaries of paint’s materiality and
Expressionists also apply to Whitten’s work.
complicating the traditional hierarchy of
However, for him, process informs the many
fine art materials. His works are built up
ways in which acrylic paint can be manipulated
with as many as twenty-five layers, and
Jack Whitten has said himself that he does not
as a medium. He has done everything from
caption information often includes the
paint paintings, but rather, he makes them.
boiling paint to freezing it, grinding it,
depth of the piece, which can measure as
Growing up in segregated Alabama, Whitten
laminating it, sanding it, and chiseling it. Paint
much as three-quarters of an inch thick.
attended the Tuskegee Institute as a pre-med
is cast into molds, made into tesserae, and then
That is to say that Whitten is most interested
student for one year, then Southern University,
used to make mosaics. He sometimes presses it
in exploring the plastic qualities of the
later moving to New York City in 1959 to study
through thin material with a squeegee-like
material, and his “paintings” hover in some
art at the Cooper Union. In the city, he spent
device he calls “the developer,” recalling
liminal space between painting and sculpture.
Acrylic on panel 16 x 20 inches
38
39
This catalogue has been published on the occasion of the exhibition “Painting Is Not Doomed to Repeat Itself,” organized by Hollis Taggart Galleries, New York, and presented from September 24 to October 31, 2015. ISBN: 9780988913981 Front cover: Merlin James, Capriccio, 2014. Frontispiece: Squeak Carnwath, Love, 2014 (detail). Pages 4–5: Catherine Murphy, Red Pages, 2003 (detail). Page 6: Philip Taaffe, Ophiuran, Prismatic, 2014 (detail). Back cover: Barbara Takenaga, Red Geode, 2015. Publication copyright © 2015 Hollis Taggart Galleries Essay © John Yau All rights reserved Hollis Taggart Galleries 521 West 26th Street 7th Floor New York, NY 10001 Tel 212 628 4000 Fax 212 570 5786 www.hollistaggart.com Reproduction of contents prohibited Catalogue production: Jessie Sentivan Design: Russell Hassell, New York Printing: Puritan Capital, Hollis, N.H. PHOTOGRAPH AND REPRODUCTION CREDITS
p. 13: Courtesy
of CIRCA 1881, © Michael Armitage, photo © White Cube (George Darrell); p. 14: Courtesy of the artist, photo by M. Lee Fatherree; p. 15: Courtesy of the artist and James Harris Gallery, photo by M. Lee Fatherree; pp. 16–17: Courtesy of the artist, © 2015 Philipp Scholz Rittermann; pp. 18–19: Courtesy of the artist and David Nolan Gallery, photo by Tom Van Eynde; pp. 20–21: Courtesy of Brenda Goodman and Life on Mars Gallery; pp. 22–23: Courtesy of Sikkema Jenkins & Co., New York; pp. 24–25: Courtesy of Jeff Bailey Gallery, photo by Brilliant Studio; pp. 26–27: Courtesy of Peter Freeman, Inc., photo by Nicholas Knight; p. 28: Photo by Tom Barratt, courtesy of Pace Gallery; p. 29 (top): Photo by Kerry Ryan McFate, courtesy of Pace Gallery; p. 29 (bottom): Photo courtesy of Pace Gallery; pp. 30–31: Courtesy of the artist and Zürcher Gallery, New York; pp. 32–33: © Philip Taaffe; Courtesy of the artist and Luhring Augustine, New York, photo by Jean Vong; p. 34: Courtesy of the artist and DC Moore Gallery, New York, photo by Jean Vong, 2015; p. 35: Courtesy of the artist and DC Moore Gallery, New York, photo by Joshua Nefsky; p. 36: Courtesy of the artist; p. 37: Courtesy of the artist, photo by Robert Banat; pp. 38–39: Courtesy of the artist, Alexander Gray Associates, New York and Zeno X Gallery, Antwerp, photo by John Berens
HOLLI S TAGGART GALLER I ES Chelsea 521 W 26th Street 7th Floor NY, NY 10001
Private Viewing 18 E 64th Street 3F NY, NY 10065
212 628 4000 hollistaggart.com
HOLLI S TAG GART GALLER I ES