Dan Flavin - Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam

Dan Flavin untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2 1986 / 2011

Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1

Foreword

Dan Flavin New York, NY (US), 1933 – Riverhead, NY (US), 1996 ntitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue), 1986 u pink, yellow, blue, red, and daylight fluorescent light 80 modular units, each comprised of 2 ft (61 cm) vertical fixtures adjacent to 16 in (40 cm) circular fixtures; and four sections, running along the top of each wall: two sections, 36 ft. (1087.3 cm) wide; two sections, 60 ft (1828.8 cm) wide Collection Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam Acquired with the generous support of Mr. R.H. Defares, the Mondriaan Foundation and the Rembrandt Association, in part through the Titus Fund ntitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, 1986 u green fluorescent light four sections around the perimeter of the skylight: two sections, 24 ft. (731.5 cm) wide; two sections, 52 ft. (1585 cm) wide Collection Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam Acquired with the generous support of Mr. R.H. Defares, the Mondriaan Fund and the Rembrandt Association, in part through the Titus Fund

This publication marks the reinstallation and acquisition of Dan Flavin’s two-part artwork, untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, by the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam. The Stedelijk originally commissioned the work in 1986, and from March 2 to October 9, 2011, on the occasion of the exhibition Making Histories, it was presented in the exact location it was originally installed. This exhibition was part of the special program that took place during 2010 and 2011 called The Temporary Stedelijk, in which the museum opened the doors of its historic building to the public temporarily. The exhibitions Taking Place and Making Histories—both part of The Temporary Stedelijk program—addressed the ways in which artists use, occupy, and animate museum spaces. In addition, they looked at how a museum collection constructs and embodies histories to be reconsidered over time, offering a range of perspectives on the Stedelijk’s own history—including that of its collections—right up to the present day. This program offered the perfect opportunity to initiate a reinstallation of Flavin’s impressive and monumental work, which was conceived by the artist to be in dialogue with the work of Piet Mondrian, the history of modern art, and the museum’s own distinctive architecture.

With the support of the Dan Flavin Estate and David Zwirner Gallery, the museum embarked on the research and preparation necessary so that the site-specific, situational artwork could occupy the same space as before, albeit transformed by the renovation.

realize this reinstallation. An interview with former Stedelijk curator Dorine Mignot, who assisted Flavin during the installation in 1986, sheds light on the process of installing the work at that time. Finally, a letter by the artist himself, drawn from the archives of the Stedelijk Museum and published here for the first time, describes the installation and Flavin’s experiences in Amsterdam, revealing his distinctive ironic sense of humor.

The Stedelijk Museum is very grateful to the Dan Flavin Estate and David Zwirner Gallery, New York, for their support of the reinstallation. The knowledge and collaboration of Steve Morse, conservator for the estate, was absolutely vital to the success of this project.

Through the very generous support of Mr. R.H. Defares, the Mondriaan Fund, and the Rembrandt Association, in part through the Titus Fund, the Stedelijk Museum has been able to acquire this remarkable and monumental work for its collection, allowing the museum to honor the significance of the work and preserve it for future generations. On behalf of the museum, I extend my deepest thanks to all that have made this important acquisition possible.

Ann Goldstein Director

This publication is intended to offer more ­insight into untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2. The introductory essay

by Stedelijk curator Bart Rutten introduces the artist and addresses his characteristic use of fluorescent light, while reflecting on Flavin’s view of modernism and the work of Mondrian, in particular. An essay by Britte Sloothaak, curator-in-training, describes the process that was required to successfully 2

Bart Rutten

he often produced individual works in series, by 1968 Flavin was also creating large-scale environments with light, reconceptualizing sculpture in relation to space.1 These installations became increasingly situational and site-specific.

In his work, American artist Dan Flavin ­challenged the established conventions of painting and sculpture, and also what a work of art could be, with his unprecedented use of fluorescent light and light fixtures.

From 1963 onwards, he worked exclusively with these industrially manufactured products, utilizing standard tubes, fixtures, and colors. Flavin is closely associated with the emergence and foundation of Minimal art in the United States, though he himself resisted the connection; however, the nonhierarchical and systemic relationships among the component elements of Flavin’s work bring to mind the Minimalist sculptures of Carl Andre and Donald Judd, as does the concern for the relationship of a work to its surrounding space and architecture. Though

Flavin’s sculptures and installations are often explicitly related to art history, s­ pecifically the Modernist period; this connection is expressed in his titles. In the early 1970s, the Stedelijk Museum acquired two iconic works that refer directly to influential twentieth-century artists and are in dialogue with other works in the museum’s c­ ollection. His early work “monument” for V. Tatlin (1969) is a tribute to Russian Constructivism, of which the Stedelijk has an outstanding collection. The second work, untitled (to Barnett Newman to commemorate his simple problem, red, yellow, and blue) (1970), is dedicated to the famous abstract painter for whom Flavin had a deep regard.

Newman’s work also features prominently in the Stedelijk’s collection.

Dan Flavin’s untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2

Dan Flavin during the installation in 1986

“monument” for V. Tatlin, 1969 fluorescent light, 244 x 61 cm Acquired in 1972, collection Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam

3

An Installation Made Especially for the Stedelijk Museum Flavin’s installation for the museum was intended to be site-specific, so the form of the work was partly driven by the architectural features of the site for which it was made: the hall on the second floor, at the top of the stairwell. As a result, the work would be engaged in a strong and specific relationship with the high ceilings, blind arcades, pilasters, and simple cornice that characterize this space. Flavin himself used the term “situational art” for these types of interventions, perhaps to indicate that his work was never subservient to the architecture. The installation, comprising untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, relates to the surrounding area in its own particular way. untitled (to Barnett Newman to commemorate his simple problem, red, yellow, and blue), 1970 fluorescent light, 304 x 244 cm Acquired in 1971, collection Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam

During the 1960s, the Stedelijk Museum very actively began to collect American contemporary art and continued in subsequent decades to bring works by artists such as Carl Andre, Jo Baer, Jasper Johns, Donald Judd, Agnes Martin, Bruce Nauman, Barnett Newman, Claes Oldenberg, Robert Rauschenberg, Richard Serra, Frank Stella, Andy Warhol, and Lawrence Weiner, among others, into the collection. Flavin’s former gallery, Leo Castelli in New York, was an important early source for several of these artists, and both of Flavin’s works, which the museum has regularly presented over the years, were acquired through the gallery.

Another important connection between Flavin and the Stedelijk relates to his influence on artists pioneering the use of new technologies in art, such as Bruce Nauman and Nam June Paik. Their use of new materials, such as neon and video, is reminiscent of the way Flavin used fluorescent tubes as material for art.2 The Stedelijk was one of the first museums to exhibit and collect

Flavin devised a logical and consistent system for the installation of the fixtures for the fluorescent tubes to which aesthetics and

symmetry were subordinate. For example, the green fluorescent tubes around the perimeter of the ceiling always adjoin the left edge, as though adhering to a margin. As a result, the lights do not run the entire length of the coving and are not concentrated in the middle, where an architect would probably place them. Space remains on the righthand side of the fixtures, demonstra­ting just how strict and uncompromising the artist was in pursuing his concept. For Flavin, it was the material and the system—not the building—that determined the form of the work.3 Flavin’s systematic approach was misunderstood at the time by Dutch art critics, whose dismissals of the installation as “decorative” and “subservient to the architecture” seemed to miss the point.4 The same applies to the placement of the fixtures with regard to the floor. All of the fixtures relate to the edge of the ornamental molding on the wall beneath, thus appearing as though they are supported, conforming to gravity.

The fixtures climb the wall at prescribed intervals, always seeking support from the protruding elements of the wall.

video art, and Flavin’s works can thus be seen as part of the institution’s early recog­ nition of artistic practices that experimented with and utilized, in unprecedented ways, industrial materials and new technologies.

In 1986, Stedelijk director Wim Beeren ­invited Flavin to create a large installation for the museum. Flavin’s two-part installation untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2 was installed that year in the hall around the top of the stairs on the upper floor and was on display from October 24 to December 7 of that year. The two elements together constitute a unique piece, unlike other Flavin works in the Stedelijk’s collection, which are editioned works. From March 2 to October 9, 2011, the installation occupied the same space as part of the Stedelijk’s Temporary Stedelijk 2 exhibition, at which time it was reinstalled in collabo­ ration with the Flavin Estate.

greens crossing greens (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green), 1966 fluorescent light, first section 122 cm high, 610 cm wide, second section 61 cm high, 670 cm wide Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York. Panza Collection, 1991 Installation view of the work in the group exhibition Kunst-Licht-Kunst (Art Light Art ) Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven (NL), 1966

4

The renovated staircase on the first floor of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam, 2010

5

untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, 2011

6

A Tribute to Piet Mondrian This was not the first time Flavin’s work had been exhibited in the Netherlands, and this new installation referred back to works he had shown here in the 1960s. Shortly after his European premiere at Galerie Rudolf Zwirner in Cologne in 1966, the Van Abbemuseum in Eindhoven included Flavin’s work in Kunst-Licht-Kunst (Art Light Art), his first presentation in a European museum.5 The exhibition presented greens crossing greens (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) (1966), which was specifically in dialogue with the work of Piet Mondrian. This reference is in keeping with Flavin’s practice of dedicating individual works to family, friends, or historical figures of significance to him. The subtitle appears to be a commentary on Mondrian, who loathed the color green.

The installation at the Stedelijk consists of two elements— untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2 —that should be seen as one work. The elements are physically and conceptually linked and are therefore always presented together. Flavin first made (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) as a tribute to Piet Mondrian, but then he decided to add a second element, bringing another dimension to the relationship with the Dutch Modernist.

Though he used the same subtitle as his 1966 work, it is unlikely he intended the phrase “who lacked green” as a criticism; rather it should be seen as a contemporary reinterpretation of Mondrian’s principles of painting. Flavin considered these principles from the standpoint of his own time and position as an artist, using light instead of pigment to express them in his work. He admired Mondrian as a pioneer of abstract art and for his decision to limit his palette to unblended primary colors: yellow, blue, and red. Mondrian’s interest in primary colors was based on his conviction that they are far less “material” than mixed, natural colors.6 This capacity for “immateriality” was essential in the quest for a “pure” art that could depict the universal.

The primary colors of the light spectrum are in fact red, blue, and—instead of yellow—green, which, when mixed together, produce white light. Thus, Flavin’s title references a shift from material color to luminous color7 and can be seen as fulfilling Mondrian’s quest for immateriality by freeing color from its substance. The light fixture is positioned on a base and has a con­nection to the surrounding building, but the rays of light have no such limitations and seek out the surrounding space. Flavin’s primary colors commingle within the space of the installation, with the first element incorporating the primary colors of pigment (red, blue, yellow) and the second element bringing in the third primary color of light (green replacing yellow).

In the installation at the Stedelijk Museum, one can see Flavin placing himself in the tradition of Modernism—recalibrating Mondrian’s principles using a new medium, light. Furthermore, with his last-minute decision to expand upon untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) by adding the green work, untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, Flavin seems to have deliberately placed this installation in the context of his earlier exhibition in the Netherlands, which was of great importance to the expansion of his artistic practice.8 Although Flavin did not comment on the connection between the 1966 and the 1986 works, it is interesting to remark that he did this at a time when another Dutch institution provided him with an opportunity to realize his artistic ambitions. Following his very first “barrier sculpture,” greens crossing greens (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) at the Van Abbemuseum in 1966, Flavin evoked this seminal work in his 1986 installation, a commission which offered him an early opportunity to create a largescale architectural installation in a public institution.9 The fact that on all these occasions Flavin was a guest in a museum that held Mondrian’s paintings in its collection would not have escaped him, and the re-use of the subtitle (to Mondrian who lacked green)

could well be interpreted as a reference to his inspirational relationship with Mondrian and Dutch institutions. And with the recent reinstallation, he once again shared a roof with the esteemed Dutch artist.

Notes 1. J. Fiona Ragheb, “Dan Flavin,” on http://www. guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/show-full/piece/?search=flavin&p age=1&f=quicksearch&cr=2.

2. Jeffrey Weiss, “Light trap for Dan Flavin,” in Dan Flavin: The 1964 Green Gallery Exhibition (New York: Zwirner & Wirth, 2008), 12–13.

3. See the interview with Dorine Mignot here.

4. Only two reviews were published. Anna Tilroe dismissed Flavin’s installation in De Volkskrant as predictable and boring, adding: “With its rich ornamentation, the architecture of the hall of the upper floor of the Stedelijk is typically 19th century.[...] The rather cluttered walls acquire the bright orderliness for which Dutch interiors have been famous for centuries. Flavin must have felt that he could disrupt this prim bourgeois image by doing something entirely unexpected. And installed an edge of pink along a ledge high in the roof beam, and an edging of green fluorescent tube lights just below the skylight. Which have the effect of transforming the grand staircase into a display cabinet – of opportunism and ineffectuality.”

Anna Tilroe, “Flavin maakt trappehuis tot uitstalkast,” De Volkskrant (Amsterdam), November 8, 1986.

The critic of the Amsterdam newspaper Het Parool compared Flavin’s work to the two works already in the Stedelijk’s collection, which did not turn out well for his new installation: “the neon lighting is not deployed as an image-former but functions as a bluntly prissy decorative addition to the architectural singularities of the upper hall. The colorful neon rods and circles proffer an embarrassing image of contemporary fatuity, of inertia and of the notion that modern art is devoid of morals and capable only of delivering aesthetic pleasure.” Peter Yvon de Vries, “Het valse licht van honderd tl-buizen ,” Het Parool (Amsterdam), November 5, 1986, 5.

5. An overview of Dan Flavin’s exhibitions in the Netherlands can be found on here.

6. Els Hoek, “Piet Mondriaan” in De Beginjaren van de Stijl 1917–1922 (Utrecht: Reflex, 1982), 63.

7. Michael Govan, “Irony and Light,” in Dan Flavin: A Retrospective (New York: Dia Art Foundation, 2004), 58.

8. Paula Feldman argues that the 1966 exhibition Kunst Licht Kunst at the Van Abbemuseum

(and the 1968 Minimal Art exhibition at the Gemeentemuseum Den Haag) “provided Dan Flavin with the impetus, space and financial support to create the first to variations of his so-called ‘barrier’ sculptures”. Paula Feldman, “Dan Flavin: Site-Specific Installations in the Netherlands 1966-68,” Burlington Magazine 145 (October 2003), 721-24, id. 721.

9. The New York City gallery of Heiner Friedrich, together with Dia Art Foundation, provided Dan Flavin with commissions for large-scale works from the mid-1970s onwards. Dia also sponsored several permanent installations.

See Michael Govan, “Irony and Light”, Dan Flavin. The Complete Lights 1961-1996, 80.

Flavin made some of his largest and most ambitious architectural installations in the1980s and 1990s.

7

Technical crew working on the installation under the supervision of Dan Flavin, 1986

8

In 2011, the installation of the work was executed under the supervision of Steve Morse, conservator for the Dan Flavin Estate

9

1986 versus 2011: Reinstallation Twenty-five Years Later Britte Sloothaak Dan Flavin developed his works by exercising his mastery of light and color in large public spaces, usually museums, on a progressively larger scale.1 The relationship created between his work and the surrounding architecture, including doorframes and corners, became an increasingly important consideration in his art.2 His two-part installation, untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, above a stairwell in the Stedelijk Museum is a good example. Since the museum’s architecture profoundly influenced this site-specific work, reinstalling it twenty-five years after its debut in 1986, in the renovated Stedelijk, required careful thought and preparation. untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, 1986

untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, 2011

Untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2 were made for the hallway around the top of the stairs on the upper floor of the historic building. This space has a high, barrel-vaulted ceiling and the walls are decorated with blind arcades, pilasters, and a simple cornice. On the north side of the hallway, the arches of the arcades lead to a small lobby and the museum’s loggia, while on the south side, the central arch provides access to the Hall of Honor; the arches on the east and west sides lead to the other galleries. The top sections of the arches contain circular panels, large round wall decorations dating back to 1895 when the building was first constructed.

The first part of the installation, untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue), is situated in the blind arches, the circular wall ornaments, and on top of the cornice molding of the hall. The work consists of a series of two-foot fluorescent tubes installed vertically up the wall in the colors red, yellow, and blue. Mounted to the right of each of the colored lamps are round 16-inch diameter white fluorescent tubes. The vertical lamps extend from the

circular wall ornaments to the ground, their base reaching down to the architectural molding about two feet from the floor. Also included in this work are four-foot yellow and pink fluorescent tubes that are fixed above the cornice molding, framing the rectangular hall.

The second part, untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, is made up of a series of fixtures that hold two green fluorescent tubes each and run horizontally around the ceiling.

Changes to the Material One initial issue that had to be resolved, one that is inherent to Dan Flavin’s oeuvre, was sourcing the right material. When he created his light installations at the museum, Flavin used fluorescent tubes and fixtures that were standard and widely available at the time. However, changes in the market and developments in electricity and fluorescent lighting since 1986 meant that these items were no longer easily obtained in 2011. This situation was at odds with Flavin’s working methods, as he liked to purchase his materials from local dealers.3 So a reinstallation of the work meant searching for similar fluorescent tubes and fixtures.

This process was undertaken in close consultation with the Dan Flavin Estate in New York and in collaboration with Steve Morse, the estate’s conservator. Following research in both Amsterdam and New York, the decision was made to use contemporary Sylvania fixtures and lights, which at first look are identical to the fixtures and lights used in 1986. However, there are some small differences in the round fixtures used in the current installation: they were produced in the United States specifically for this purpose out of steel rather than plastic, which is the standard material nowadays, and the fluorescent tubes are not as deeply inset into the fixtures as those used in 1986.

This means that the newly produced circular fluorescent lamps protrude a bit more from their fixtures, making them slightly more raised than the straight tubes. The knob for closing the top of the fixture also sticks out a little more than in the 1986 fixtures.

10

A closer look at Flavin’s working methods reveals how to deal with these conventional art-historical notions of authenticity. Flavin rejected traditional notions of uniqueness and permanence: not only were the light works in his early career made as editions, but particular configurations of lamps were also often produced in editions using different-size fixtures and colors.4 As Tiffany Bell remarked, “Flavin’s way of leaving certain things to chance—the availability of fixtures or the sensibility of the fabricator—did lead to differences in the way things looked.”5 But although he delegated the fabrication of the objects to others, he never relinquished authority over the overall presentation. The placement on the wall, height, color, and the relationships of the works to their contextual surroundings were determined by his vision,6 which brings us to our next point, research and preparation.

Changes to the Architecture The second complication for the reinstal­ lation involved changes to the architecture of the museum. Since Flavin designed the installation in 1986, the historic building of the Stedelijk Museum had recently been renovated, resulting in some changes in the hall above the stairs. In 1986, the walls of the space mirrored each other: the outer arches on the north side were bricked up, exactly like the outer arches on the south side. Only the central arch was open, ser­ ving as a doorway to the museum shop.

This meant that the hallway appeared symmetrical; all four walls had blind arches with one or two doorways. In addition to this, all of the doorways, which are now open archways, had glass doors. In the archways ­leading to the museum shop, the Hall of Honor, and the other exhibition spaces, panels had been added in the area between the lintel over the doorway and the arch above. The only asymmetrical element in the room was the difference in the height of the doors.

In 1986, Flavin used the walls and the ­panels above the doors as a base for his fixtures. This meant that the lines of light extended a little farther down than they did in the 2011 installation. The wall of the

museum shop, for example, had a blue vertical lamp on the left and a yellow one on the right, with the accompanying illuminated white circles. The middle arch contained the door to the museum shop. Above the door, a red vertical lamp extended from the circular wall ornament over the added panel and down to the door. On the other side of the hall, in the blind arches on the wall of the Hall of Honor, Flavin installed a red vertical lamp on the left and a blue one on the right, also with white circular lamps, almost down to the ground. Because the door in the middle arch leading to the Hall of Honor was taller than the door to the museum shop, the yellow line from the circle was shorter, featuring only one lighting element on the panel above the door.

When the museum reinstalled Flavin’s work twenty-five years later in the same space in its historic building, the museum shop on the upper floor had moved as part of the recent renovations, and the arcade on the north side had been opened up entirely, as was the case in the original design from 1895.7 The glass doors in the archways leading to the Hall of Honor and the other exhibition spaces had now been removed, as had the panels that closed off the arches.

A decision was made to base the reinstal­ lation on the new situation, rather than resto­ring walls and panels to use as bases for the fixtures. Hence, the lines of vertical lamps on the missing walls have been shortened. The 2011 version featured twenty-five two-foot straight fluorescent tubes and twenty-five 16-inch diameter round fluorescent tubes less than the 1986 version. In addition, the hall was adjacent to an open space with daylight on its north side, instead of the enclosed museum shop.

Until the reinstallation was completed, it was not possible to anticipate what affect all the renovations on the space would have on the work. Would it be a problem if there were fewer tubes installed? Would the room be too bright? During prior research and consultation with the Dan Flavin Estate, it was felt that the architectural changes were relatively minor and did not appear to be overly problematic for the installation. The renovations had caused no major changes

to the space. Its overall dimensions were still the same, and the color of the walls, as well as the ornaments, remained untouched.

Even the holes in the walls where the 1986 lights were installed were located and reused. The fact that the glass doors were removed—thus no tubes could be installed on the panels added in the area between the lintel over the doorway and the arch above— was no real cause for concern. Compared to the situation in 1986, with doors of different heights, the new layout was in fact more ­balanced. The space in the circular wall ornaments above the open archways was consistent, and the additional panels above the doors no longer disturbed the lines.

Small, but important features of Flavin’s work remained intact, such as the way the green lamps on the ceiling run from left to right and never quite meet at the corners to close the frame. Taking all this into consideration, it soon became clear that the reinstallation in the renovated space brought with it an opportunity to reinforce the rhythm of the work. Fortunately as well, the light from the exposed window section on the northern side proved not to have a detrimental effect on the colors or the intensity of the light in the installation. Contrary to certain assumptions, Flavin even sometimes preferred to allow natural illumination from windows or skylights to blend and complicate his fluorescent light—to “respect the architecture,” as he put it.8

4. Tiffany Bell, “Fluorescent Light as Art,” in Dan Flavin: A Retrospective (New York: Dia Art Foundation, 2004), 114.

5. Ibid., 117.

6. Ibid., 114.

7. See map in Jansen van Galen, J. and Schreurs, H., Een kleine historie van het Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1895–1995 (Naarden, The Netherlands: V+K Publishing, 1995), 16.

8. Michael Govan, “Irony and Light,” 96.

Despite the changes to the architecture of the hallway, the 2011 installation lost none of its impact and remained true to the building without the use of any artificial additions. The recreation of the work used the new architecture as a starting point, just as Flavin did for each of his site-specific situational installations.

Notes 1. Michael Govan, “Irony and Light,” in Dan Flavin: A Retrospective (New York: Dia Art Foundation, 2004), 96.

2. Ibid., 73.

3. The Stedelijk archive contains a fax, dated July 1, 1986 and sent by Christine Najdzionek from Dan Flavin Ltf, requesting a lighting catalogue from a local supplier before Flavin came to Amsterdam.

11

The 1986 installation: a conversation with Dorine Mignot This conversation between Stedelijk Museum curator Bart Rutten (BR) and Dorine Mignot (DM), who served as curator here from 1974 to 2006, took place in the temporarily opened museum building on the Paulus Potterstraat on September 8, 2011. Mignot was responsible for overseeing the 1986 installation of Dan Flavin’s two-part work untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2. In preparation for the ­recent re-installation, Mignot was consulted about her experiences in 1986. The conversation that follows was intended to elucidate a number of issues that remained after reviewing the literature and the archive.

BR: Shortly after Wim Beeren took the helm as director, Dan Flavin was invited to create an intervention in the hall of the upper floor, in the space surrounding the grand staircase. Was it a project initially conceived by the previous director Edy de Wilde, or was it Beeren’s idea?

DM: It was Wim’s project entirely. Wim want­ed to commission a number of artists to create work for the grand staircase and the hall of the upper floor. He wanted a series of pieces created specifically for that situation. The famous vellum painted by Keith Haring was part of the same series.

Dan Flavin and Dorine Mignot in 1986

BR: Flavin was not the first artist to make a work as part of this series. A year earlier, the artist/designer Loes van der Horst had designed a work for the staircase in the entrance hall. Was Beeren thinking specifically of Flavin when he devised this series of commissioned artworks?

DM: Yes, at the start of the project Wim had a number of artists in mind, and Flavin was definitely one of them. This was also because when Wim was a member of a public art committee in Rotterdam he had lengthy discussions with Flavin about creating an installation for a tunnel there. He developed the project with Flavin over a long period of time, during which they were in close contact. Unfortunately, the tunnel project was eventually scrapped. It was actually an

incredible project and long fluorescent bulbs were even installed as tests. But there was so much negotiation with the authorities on the costs and whether to go ahead with it or not, in the end it didn’t work out.

BR: So in a certain sense the Stedelijk commission was a sequel to this project, a continuation of their previous collaboration?

DM: Yes, because they had actually known each other for some time. Wim had been very involved with Minimal art. He had known Flavin since the 1970s and had become a close friend.

BR: Did Flavin get carte blanche to create a piece for the hall?

DM: Absolutely.

BR: Can you describe how that came about?

I found a fax from Flavin asking for a sales catalogue of commercial fluorescent lighting widely available here.

DM: Yes, those lighting units were hard to find. We ended up working with a small lighting store on the Raadhuisstraat—it was the only place that really understood what Flavin wanted. A number of extra fluorescent lights were needed at the last minute, and they were able to provide them.

BR: So Flavin was given the commission, had seen the space, and knew the kind of lighting available. Did he make sketches for the piece beforehand in the United States, or did he make plans when he came here to install it?

DM: I think he made sketches beforehand and sent all his plans over together. When he arrived in 1986, it was simply a matter of taking another look and hanging the fluorescent fixtures. He knew the measurements, of course, and worked with great speed and precision. The only prolonged discussion was about the semicircular recessed architectural features above the door and whether or not to install a circle inside them.

The entire operation leading up to the actual installation—getting everything organized— was far more of a challenge.

BR: During the process, he decided to extend the work he had devised beforehand, untitled (to Piet Mondrian through 12

his preferred colors red, yellow and blue), to include untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2. Can you remember how that happened?

DM: I think it was a flash of inspiration.

There was nothing in the upper space.

During the times I was there and as far as I can remember, it wasn’t originally part of the design. Once he said to me, “It’s a pity that it stops so abruptly, don’t you think?

After all, it is an installation so it’s not only the wall.” He must have talked to Wim about it but not when I was around. The ceiling space was so empty; I understood exactly why he wanted to include it.

the way that it flows with the preexisting situation. Or did he follow his system and implement it in situ?

DM: He clearly had a system and worked accordingly, though he also talked of the space as a whole. For him it was a hall he was thrilled to be working in because up till then he hadn’t had many opportunities to have an entire space all to himself. He was very excited. He already had the circle and rod shapes and, as already stated, that’s how the system was structured. Working within that system, he followed the phenomenology of the architecture—that was absolutely a given.

BR: And then you ordered extra fluorescent lights in green?

DM: Yes. Just a couple at first, to see if it interfered too much with the lighting of the initial section. But Flavin was happy with them and decided to go ahead with the rest.

BR: What was the response to Flavin’s work in 1986? By then, using electric light in an artwork had lost its novelty, but even so, there were very negative reviews of the work in the Netherlands. It was dismissed as decorative.

DM: They may have called it that because people were still having trouble accepting light as a fine art material. Calling it decorative was a way to express this disbelief, but the people who really looked carefully and were willing to see past its materials really appreciated the work for its daring.

I think many mistook the size of the work as compensating for a conceptual weakness. Nowadays audiences are more used to ­projects of this size, and it is easier to see this work as consistent with Flavin’s entire oeuvre. It was then and is now a tremendous work of art.

BR: While working on this second part, did he mention the earlier piece with the same title that he had made for Eindhoven?

DM: I didn’t discuss the title with him— though I had seen the exhibition KunstLicht-Kunst (Art Light Art). Eindhoven is my hometown and I recall that the entire city, where Philips had its headquarters, was very impressed by the fact that you could make art out of light! Everyone who worked for Philips came to take a look, and everyone had an opinion about it.

BR: I’d like to ask a couple of technical questions. The visual material we have of the 1986 installation is perhaps a little misleading because the photos were taken at night and the lights in the nearby galleries were off, but it looks as though the hall was darker then. Had something been used to cover the skylight? And was the floor a different color than the light terra cotta it is today?

DM: As far as I know, the skylight was open as usual, though there was a different floor covering—a darker kind of nonreflective linoleum.

BR: Can you remember whether Flavin mentioned anything else about the decorative architectural elements on the walls? The reason I ask is because his work is often about

13

WALL 3

WALL 4*

These diagrams were created in 2009 by David Zwirner Gallery, New York, in conjunction with These diagrams were created in 2009 by David Zwirner Gallery, New York, the Flavin Estate, New York, to establish clear guidelines for the installation of this work. in conjunction with the Dan Flavin Estate, New York, to establish clear guidelines Courtesy of David Zwirner, New York. for the installation of this work. Courtesy of David Zwirner, New York. * Far left archway of Wall 4 is undocumented in the archival material pertaining to this piece; diagram is an approximation and installation details are subject to further research.

14 16

Never before published letter by Dan Flavin, describing the work and thanking the Stedelijk Museum staff for their support during the 1986 installation in Amsterdam.

Undated, archive Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam.

15

16

The 1986 installation: a conversation with Dorine Mignot ¶ As I have heard, and, perhaps, you have, too, those who tease constantly, can rarely be teased.

I confess that I am such a “deplorable” person. To compensate humanely for my funny fault, I try often to tease gently. ¶ The dedication for the utmost part of this lofty fluorescent lighted installation of the high, upper hall of your Stedelijk Museum is my second tease of your duly famous modern painter, Piet Mondriaan, about his mature abhorrence of green. (Tthe first one related to a criss-crossing barrier of fluorescent light described as “green crossing greens (to Piet Mondriaan who lacked green)” in a room within the “kunst-lichtkunst” exposition in the Stedelijk Museum, Eindhoven, in 1966.) ¶ This installation is staged at three levels. It is structured and colored to compliment and to contrast within itself and with all of the old decorative brickwork of the walls, now coated white and the perimeter of riveted steel cross members which partially support the skylight. ¶ What I have just mentioned is best observed in the photographs of this publication. ¶ The color system of the paired straight strip lamps and the circular ones on the flat side and end walls, alternating red, yellow and blue with cool white, is adopted from obviously from the master’s oft painted primary colors and black and white. This assymmetrically applied – off-centered to the right. ¶ The in-between At the top of the walls, the in-between pink and yellow, is positioned symmetrically to contrast with the opposite use of the light below and above. ¶ Although green light alone twice covers and parallels the riveted steel cross members which help to sustain the skylight, it is put tight into the left corner and extended until not another fixture with tubes could fit to the right. This structural deployment of a single color completes the scheme of symmetry between assymmetry. ¶ By the way, with so much vividly colored light all over the high hall, optical effects occur incidentally.

¶ I hope that such a simply, vastly impressive and readily understandable exposition of fluorescent light will satisfy you, its individual receptors, almost as much as it has me, its personal purveyor. ¶ Now I sense obliged to thank the Director, Dr. Wim Beeren, and his staff of your grand old Stedelijk Museum for exemplary cooperation, from the invitation to exhibit to the final illummation of opening evening and Dr. Beeren’s reception and dinner for me and our guests in the Amstel Hotel preserved his reputation as a designer and provider of extraordinary parties. ¶ At last, I most especially thank the generously expert curatorial women of this suss successful project, Rini Dippl and, steadily, devotedly day after day on the job, my dear guide to very best efforts, Dorine Mignot.

Dan Flavin West Hollywood, California Editor’s Note: All errors are present in the original document.

17

Selected Exhibitions in the Netherlands 1966 greens crossing greens (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green), in Kunst Licht Kunst (Art Light Art), Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven. September 25 – December 4.

1968 An artificial barrier of blue, red and blue fluorescent light (to Flavin Starbuck Judd), in Minimal Art, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag. March 23 – May 26.

1975 Dan Flavin, Museum Boymans van Beuningen, Rotterdam. October 10 – November 16. (Solo exhibition) 1985 Dan Flavin: “monuments” for V. Tatlin 1964– 1982, Museum Kröller-Müller, Otterlo. December 23, 1985 – January 12, 1986. (Solo exhibition) 1986 untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors red, yellow, and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2, in Dan Flavin, lichtinstallaties, Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam.

October 25 – December 7.

1994 Dan Flavin in de Zonnehof, De Zonnehof, ­Amersfoort. December 4, 1994 – January 22, 1995 (Solo exhibition)

Bibliography Selected Exhibition Catalogues and Monographs Flavin, Dan. “monuments” for V. Tatlin from Dan Flavin, 1964–1982. Chicago: Donald Young Gallery for the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles, in collaboration with the Leo Castelli Gallery, New York, 1989. Exhibition catalogue.

———, and Brouwer, Marianne, Dan Flavin: “monuments”for V. Tatlin 1964–1982. Otterlo, The Netherlands: Rijksmuseum Kröller-Müller, 1985. Exhibition brochure.

———, and J Fiona Ragheb. Dan Flavin: The Architecture of Light. New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum and Harry N. Abrams, 1999. Exhibition catalogue.

Govan, Michael, Dan Flavin, Tiffany Bell, Brydon Smith, and David Gray. Dan Flavin: The Complete Lights 1961–1996. New York: Dia Art Foundation; and New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004. Exhibition catalogue.

Dan Flavin and Minimalism Ann Goldstein. A Minimal Future? Art as Object, 1958–1968. Los Angeles: The Museum of Contemporary Art; and Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2004. Exhibition catalogue.

Develing, Enno, and Lucy R. Lippard. Minimal Art. The Hague, The Netherlands: Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, 1968. Exhibition catalogue.

Dan Flavin in the Netherlands Coumans, Paul, et al. Dan Flavin in de Zonnehof.

Amersfoort, The Netherlands: De Zonnehof, 1994. Exhibition catalogue.

“Dan Flavin.” Bulletin Museum Boymans van Beuningen 19 (December 1975), 148–49.

De Vries, Peter Yvon. “Het valse licht van honderd tl-buizen.” Het Parool (Amsterdam), November 5, 1986.

Feldman, Paula. “Dan Flavin: Site-Specific Installations in the Netherlands 1966–68.”

Burlington Magazine 145 (October 2003), 721–24.

Kunst Licht Kunst (Art Light Art). Eindhoven, The Netherlands: Stedelijk van Abbemuseum, 1966.

Exhibition catalogue.

18

Tilroe, Anna. “Flavin maakt trappehuis tot uitstalkast.” De Volkskrant (Amsterdam), November 8, 1986.

Artist’s Writings and Interviews “Dan Flavin Audio Interview” (1973), The Pulitzer Arts Foundation, http://flavin.pulitzerarts.org/#/ interviews/2/.

Flavin, Dan. “some remarks … excerpts from a spleenish journal,” Artforum 5, no. 4 (December 1966), 27–29.

———, Donald Judd, and Barnett Newman.

“Reflections of a Friendship: Notes and Essays by Dan Flavin, Donald Judd, and Barnett Newman on Dan Flavin, Donald Judd, and Barnett Newman.

Chronologically from 1962 to 1975.” Chinati Foundation Newsletter 5 (September 2000), 10–25. This issue of the newsletter also features an interview with Flavin by Tiffany Bell (pages 26–35).

Online resources “Dan Flavin.” Artist entry on website of David Zwirner Gallery, New York. http://www.davidzwirner.com/danflavin. Features a chronology, list of exhibitions (solo, group, and permanent), bibliography, and image gallery.

Dan Flavin: A Retrospective. Exhibition website of The National Gallery of Art, Washington. http:// www.nga.gov/exhibitions/2004/flavin/introduction/introduction.shtm.

Dan Flavin: Constructed Light. Exhibition website of the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts. http:// flavin.pulitzerarts.org/#/interviews/. Features interviews with Steve Morse and Tiffany Bell on the posthumous installation of works by Dan Flavin and an audio interview with Flavin from 1973.

Ragheb, J Fiona. “Dan Flavin: greens crossing greens (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green).”

Artist entry on collection website of Guggenheim Museum, New York. http://www.guggenheim. org/new-york/collections/collection-online.

Stockebrand, Marianne. “Pink, Yellow, Blue, Green & Other Colors in the Work of Dan Flavin.” Chinati Foundation website. http://www.chinati.org/ visit/collection/danflavinadditional.php.

On Piet Mondrian and De Stijl Hoek, Els. “Piet Mondriaan.” De Beginjaren van de Stijl 1917–1922. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Reflex, 1982, 47–82. Translated in English as De Stijl: The Formative Years, 1917–1922.

Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1986, 39–75.

On the Stedelijk Museum and its Architecture Jansen van Galen, John, and Huib Schreurs.

Een kleine historie van het Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam 1895–1995. Naarden, The Netherlands: V+K Publishing, 1995.

Credits The Stedelijk Museum gratefully acknowledges the support of the Dan Flavin Estate, especially Stephen Flavin, in preparing for and realizing the reinstallation of untitled (to Piet Mondrian through his preferred colors, red, yellow and blue) and untitled (to Piet Mondrian who lacked green) 2 on the occasion of Making Histories, Temporary Stedelijk 2, March 2 – October 9, 2011. In producing both the exhibition and the publication, we have drawn on the extensive knowledge of Steve Morse, the estate’s conservator, to whom we extend our deepest thanks. The Stedelijk also sincerely appreciates the support of David Zwirner Gallery, which has officially represented the Flavin Estate since 2009 and provided essential support for this endeavor on many levels.

The Stedelijk Museum is thankful to its colleagues at the Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven, and Museum Boijmans van Beuningen, Rotterdam, for searching their archives to provide us with information on their exhibitions of Dan Flavin’s work.

We are also indebted to former Stedelijk Museum curator Dorine Mignot, who provided invaluable insight into the 1986 installation process.

The Stedelijk Museum thanks Lisa Gabrielle Mark, whose editorial skills brought the English manuscript to a higher level, and Sophie Tates, Stedelijk Museum traffic manager/editor, who ably handled the Dutch manuscripts and shepherded the publication through its various stages. Designing the Stedelijk’s first-ever online publication, Marc Hollenstein and Eva Heisterkamp at Mevis & Van Deursen brought text and images together in a wonderful, lucid design.

Project management for the publication was in the very capable hands of the Stedelijk’s Sophie Cramer.

Ann Goldstein, Director Bart Rutten, Curator Britte Sloothaak, Curator-in-training

19

Colofon Texts Ann Goldstein Bart Rutten Britte Sloothaak Translation Laura Watkinson (D–EN) Lisa Holden (D–EN) Arjen Mulder and Maaike Post (EN–D) Editing Lisa Gabrielle Mark (English) Sophie Tates (Dutch) Project Management Sophie Cramer Graphic Design Mevis & Van Deursen Art Copyright credits © Dan Flavin, c/o Pictoright Amsterdam 2012 Photography credits All photographs courtesy Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam, with the exception of p. 4, below: courtesy Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven, photograph by Van den Bichelaer; and p. 9: photograph

by Britte Sloothaak

Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam is supported by Mainsponsor

Sponsors

Subsidized by

20