Last Sunday, I went a little north to the Katonah Art Museum to see the exhibition “Lichtenstein in Process.” (That's the cover for the catalog, left.) I’ve never been a fan of Lichtenstein (hereafter “RL”), but the KAM always has something a little off-beat and interesting so I trust that if they’re presenting something, it’s more than worth 45 minutes of driving and the modest admission. And, well, “wow” is about all I have to say.True to the title, the exhibition features the process the artist used to create his paintings. There are sequences of sketch-drawing-collage for paintings (and one finished painting) and some of the pieces have clippings of the source material as well. The walls have interesting quotations from RL – one that particularly struck me is: “All abstract artists try to tell you that what they do comes from nature, and I’m always trying to tell you that what I do is completely abstract.”
It’s an interesting insight into the mechanics of his work, and into the thought process of a very thoughtful artist. I don't know much about art -- and oftentimes don't know what I like, especially with contemporary art -- but the more I look into the 20th-century folks, the more I understand that it really does help to know what they were thinking about and what they were after in the work. RL's Benday dots, for example, "refer" to chiaroscuro without being chiaroscuro, they're kind of a painting of chiaroscuro rather than a use of it in support of another element in the image. And the minimalist in me is very intrigued with how stripped-down the images are.
If you’re in the neighborhood, go. The show is up until June 28. If you’re not in the neighborhood, the Roy Lichtenstein Foundation web site has posted an interesting interview with RL by Michael Kimmelman, excerpted from his book, PORTRAITS, Talking with Artists at the Met, The Modern, The Louvre and Elsewhere.
3 comments:
Vivien and I went to see this exhibit, and we concur... wonderful even if one is not a fan of RL...
I've heard he was a bad plagiarizer, taking EXACT comic artists figures, not just 'in the style of' and using them in his paintings. I have to investigate more, but if it's true, I just want to dismiss his work, at least what he was most famous for. Maybe it's a touchy area for me, because I have friends who are illustrators and cartoonists and they work hard to be original and just work hard period. All that art appropriating and smug satire by gallery artists just gets my goat.
Ellen, I do always roll my eyes when the gallerists "discover" -- and thereby exalt and, to some extent, legitimize -- the things that other categories of serious working artists have been doing for generations. And I do still think the art is cheesy (however technically adept) but I'm impressed with how thoughtful he was about what he was doing, how he addressed the great metaphysical questions in any art form -- "what to put in and what to leave out," and "how do you know when you're done?"
And this is the wonderful thing that the museum does especially well. Several of the exhibits I've seen there provided windows into how the artist thought and worked, not just a display of polished results.
Post a Comment