Friday, June 1, 2007

The corporate world lives


In 2001, I became the last newspaper staff art/architecture critic on the west coast of Florida. And like the sunshine state’s wild fires, the rash of firings has spread to newsrooms countrywide.

Today, another daily newspaper is zapping its arts critics. Minnesota’s Star Tribune is doing it to a classical music critic and a part-time architecture critic.
Which means that while the arts make news a lot, little commentary about it gets written. A survey conducted by the National Arts Journalism Program at Columbia University indicates that only 27 percent of art critics express judgments. Giving opinions ranked last on their list of priorities. Buildings, exhibits, concerts are noted without discussion. It’s called saving space. The corporate world lives.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

yin and yang



Some of the best architecture in my town is in the summer sky. The upper atmosphere is so artfully styled that you want to grab a camera to capture it before the wind blows it away. An experience in constant energy, the “street” above is definitely fast lane.
Let me count the ways.
One minute, the blue yonder is just that – a cerulean lake, smooth and silent, a backdrop for a street busy with cars and trucks. The next thing you know, the firmament, upstaging the traffic, gathers up its clouds – the dark woolly ones, the silken, the delicate grays - as if they were building blocks, and builds itself a street scene of its own, stately and aloof to the traffic below.
This morning, n the horizon, against a blackening sky, I thought I saw the ceramic cornice of the old courthouse. It was white, like alabaster. I could almost feel its polish. But as I peered at it, I could see a low-laying cloud that the sky had made into a cornice. Some architect, the air!
Oscar Wilde was right: Nature imitates art. Call it the art of cumulism, after the word cumulus, meaning shaped cloud puffs. Cumulus’ towered piles often are topped with capitals and cornices on the order of alpine chateaus. Or their massive pyramidal black brumes form shaggy corridors that conjure up the ruins of some massive temple.
Altostratus clouds, smooth as frosted glass, are masterbuilders that seem to pave the sky in travertine marble. And the mountainously tall cumulonimbus variety forms a metropolis of skyscrapers and tree-covered peaks that outshine any city.
Of course, I’m not the first one to see cities in skies. The poets have the corner on this subject. In “Ode to Liberty,” Shelley wrote of Athens “built from the purple crags and silver towers of battlement clouds.”
And in “When June is Come” Robert Bridges tells us “Watch the sunshot palaces high that the white clouds build in the breezy sky.”
Speaking of bards, it’s odd that the most famous one of all, Shakespeare, saw everything in clouds but buildings. Remember Hamlet telling Polonius he could make out a camel, a weasel and a whale in the stuff of skies? Maybe that’s because he didn’t have skyscrapers for comparison.
While we’re looking up, check out the star of the day, the summer sun, especially when it’s bout to retire for the evening. Here's this architect, burned out and ready to drop, and it runs from one cloud to another, washing each with aurora reds - the footprints of its journey across the sky like a strobic play of light pushing at the night.

No architect can hold a candle to summer’s daystar when it comes to painting the sky at dusk. Nothing in the long history of art can compare to the spiritual content of Old Sol's elaborate, incandescent candlepower at twilight. Picturemaking by this fireball eludes all known processes of painting.

Holman Hunt, a 19th-century English painter, sought to capture the setting sun's color and light by working in a small room with screens and curtains to create dark. Painting by natural light in another part of the room, Hunt peeked into his make-believe edge of night through a hole to render the painting "The Light of the World."

Early photographers also used elaborate methods to capture natural light, purposely wobbling their cameras during exposure so that their images trembled.

But the mighty daystar in the sky around here doesn't have to resort to tricks. It has no need to shake anything to get a vibrating effect. It just rouges everything with a throbbing redness that takes away all sense of place. And in its half-light, clouds above look so dark that you expect thunder.

And when the sun stops painting the sky, Sarasota looks like one big charcoal drawing.

Even when the sun is up for the day, the sky is still the best show in town. Maybe it's because I grew up in Manhattan, where mountains of concrete crowd out such things, but Sarasota's upper atmosphere engrosses like few pictures on exhibition.

One minute, the blue yonder is just that - a cerulean lake, smooth and silent - a backdrop for a landscape busy with flowering. The next thing you know, the sky, upstaging even the showiest plants, gathers up its clouds - the dark and woolly ones, the silken and the delicate grays, as if emptying a closet - and puts on a show.

Once, on the horizon against a blackening sky, I saw a statue. It was white, like alabaster. I could almost feel its polish. It looked like the frenzied animal in George Stubb's famed painting, "Lion Attacking a Horse." But I could see it was a low-lying cloud that the sky had carved into a horse.

Some whittler, the sky.

Once in a while, the shifting mass looks like sand dunes soft against the gray sky in Eugene Boudin's "Normandy Women Spreading Wash on the Beach."

The paintings of romantic painters show up a lot in the Sarasota sky.

My favorite novelists also have seen the light and compared clouds to other things.

In "The Witches of Eastwick," John Updike saw plantlife: "At the base of this cliff of atmosphere, cumulous clouds, moments ago as innocuous as flowers, afloat in a pond, had begun to boil."

In "Karain: A Memory," Joseph Conrad saw animals: "Ragged edges of black clouds peeped over the hills, and invisible thunderstorms circled outside, growing like wild beasts."

It makes you wonder what Conrad and Updike would have written had they visited Sarasota. Everything you can think of shows up in the sky here if you watch it long enough.

Just don't let it know you're expecting anything. That's when the best pictures come on. I saw my long-gone grandfather that way. He was laughing about something, but I wasn't in on the joke. He was just standing on the air, laughing.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

FYI: Artworks seen on this site are by my hand.

thought on painting nudes


Wearing two hats today, painter and critic. Painting nudes is a ticklish subject, especially female nudes. Get them right, and you get stories that are psychologically charged. Get them wrong, they can look like ads for feminine hygiene products - too pink, too posed, too prop-like.

Introduction to my book Art: Behind the Scenes (see below for details)

Introduction

When I was a child, my grandfather gave me Hendrik Willem Van Loon's
history book, The Arts, and the preface, especially, stayed with me.

Van Loon wrote of a train ride through farm country where he saw
two small children coming out of their house: A girl carrying a portfolio
and the boy a fiddle case. For twenty years Van Loon said he wanted to
write a book on the arts, but couldn’t decide on a “fixed point” (xxii) -
the reader to write for - until he saw those children.

My “fixed point” for Behind the Scenes is not only the student of
art, but also those who think of art as a remote subject. The book aims
to avoid the dry-as-dust information found in many art histories.

If you think of an old photo album in the attic and nearby letters
that relate to them, you have the idea of Behind the Scenes. Besides
describing old and modern masters, this book aims to make known the
hearts and minds of painters by their own word or through the eyes of
those who knew them.

An art critic by trade, I routinely speak for artists’ work, interpreting
and assessing it. But a statement in landscape painter John
Constable's lecture to the Royal Institution of Great Britain in 1836
haunts me: "I am anxious that the world should be inclined to look to
painters for information on painting." (qtd in Goldwater and Treves
270).

He’s got a point. How else to know that Peter Paul Rubens'
signature show of fleshy females does not reflect his personal tastes,
that he was a physical fitness fanatic who railed against excessive
eating? (qtd in Goldwater and Treves 149). Or that Giulio Romano's
macabre paintings have nothing to do with his personality (Vasari. Vol
2, 233)? Or that Alonso Cano, an ordained priest who painted pictures
of supreme serenity, was an ill-tempered man suspected of murdering
his wife (Chilvers 77)?

Such contradictions testify to the purpose of past art, and self-
expression wasn't it. These stories make clear that while art's purpose
has varied over the years, artists have suppressed their natures to fulfill
the need. Pablo Picasso said as much in an interview given to Lettres
Francaises in 1945:


Joan B. Altabe 15

What do you think an artist is? An imbecile who has
only his eyes if he's a painter... On the contrary, he's at
the same time a political animal, constantly alive to
heart-rending or happy events, to which he responds in
every way. (Wein and Gelman 33).

To the one hundred artists in this book and to those who read it,
this one’s for you.

Joan B. Altabe

Fall 2003

my publisher's url

http://www.windstormcreative.com

Art Behind the Scenes by Joan Altabe

Available

230 pages * First edition

ISBN 1-883573-06-8 * SRP $14.99

5.5 x 8.5 trade paperback

Cover design by Buster Blue

Nonfiction

Your price: $11.99 US (20% off)
Art Behind the Scenes: One Hundred Masters In and Out of Their Studios is an invigorating introduction to one hundred artists of the last five centuries. Brief discussions of their work, their place in art history and a peek into their private lives makes this a fascinating book.


"This guidebook should be tucked under the arm of every museum-goer…. It's like walking through the museum with the artist by your side."

--Sara Quinn, Design Faculty,
The Poynter Institute for Media Studies



Ms. Altabe's books is "an invaluable sourcebook for students, artists, curators and lovers of history…. Accessible, engaging hybrid of gossip and historical fact…an entertaining addition to any arts library."

--Christopher Skura, Chief Exhibits Preparator,
New York University/Grey Art Gallery

art book published by Windstorm Creative

straight talk

Monday, May 28, 2007

Letters to the Editor

As a newspaper critic, I don’t answer reader complaints in ``Letters to the Editor.'' After all, they're not written to me. Besides, everyone's entitled to sound off. Even when letter writers make their opinions sound like fact, I hold back. Everyone's also entitled to be wrong.

But I made an exception one time because readers who objected to a column I wrote unwittingly raised a larger issue that warrants discussion. In the column, I said that a sculpture called “Nobody's Listening” fronting a City Hall in Florida - which shows five hunched figures - reflects badly on the five city commissioners.

The sculptor took exception. He the sculpture deals with the racial strife and dissension about the Vietnam War in the '60s, when the work was created.

City officials also wrote letters to the editor, saying I hadn't done my homework because I didn't take into account Cartlidge's intention.

But here’s the thing. Since when are art lovers obliged to see a work according to an artist's dictate? Wouldn't such a thing mean that an explanation needs to accompany every work made? And wouldn't that make art nothing more than an illustration of a thesis?

In that sense, I also question the wisdom of titling an artwork. I'm thinking of Art Spiegelman's New Yorker magazine cover drawing of a crucified rabbit a few years ago, which had the Catholic League for Religion and Civil Rights up in arms.

The drawing might have been defensible if he hadn't titled his work, ``Theology of the Tax Cut Cut,'' making reference to a rabbit in the drawing dressed in a suit with empty pockets pulled out against a background of Form 1040A.

Spiegelman said he drew inspiration from the fact that April 15 - the tax deadline - came the day before Easter.

But if he hadn't given an explanation or title, it could have been defended as a visual pun. After all, crucifixions are not exclusive to Christianity. The Romans used them as a method of capital punishment on their slaves. Apply the ancient concept of crucifixion to paying wages to the IRS and you've got slaves being punished by the capitol.

Spiegelman's drawing could have been defended this way, especially since, unlike Christ's wounds on the cross, the rabbit showed no crown of thorns and no sword-pierced side.

Artists who insist on explaining their symbology not only create problems for their work, but they also miss the point of art. It's not math. There's no one answer.

Andres Serrano made the same mistake when he called his photograph of a cross submerged in urine ``Piss Christ.'' If he hadn't named it, if he hadn't told us that the golden fluid was urine, the image could have been a pictorial of Christianity engulfed: in crassness, in commercialism.

Artists who narrow the range of interpretation reduce art to a visual aid. Picasso was guilty of this narrowing. Even though he said, ``Paintings are not done to decorate apartments, but are instruments for war for attack and defense against the enemy,'' he insisted that the bull in ``Still Life With a Bull,'' painted in 1938, was not political.

Imagine all those who suffered under facism who might have seen the bull's brutality as an appropriate symbol of bullies and taken comfort in that, had Picasso not dissuaded them.

If artists insist on answering questions that their art poses, we may as well stay home.
Art shouldn't have to come with answer sheets. It ought to generate dialogues, not soliloquies, to stand on its own.

And on its own, a five-figure work called ``Nobody's Listening'' in front of a City Hall suggests the five commissioners who work inside ignore their constituents.

So this is my plea. Either stop complaining when people find their own meaning in your titles or stop titling.