Tuesday, April 17, 2018

Reused

Tejo Remy (designer, born 1960, Netherlands) and Droog Design (manufacturer, firm 1993 to present, Amsterdam), Rag Chair, 1991. Rags, metal strips, 39 3/8” x 23 5/8" x 23 5/8" (100 x 60 x 60 cm). Philadelphia Museum of Art. © 2018 Tejo Remy. (PMA-8493)

I read a very disturbing article recently, which stated that a large percentage of the clothes we could donate for reuse ends up in landfills. This is disturbing because a lot of the materials do not deteriorate naturally, and it causes a big problem where they are buried. Of the clothing that does get donated, much of it gets recycled for use in furniture fill and insulation manufacturing. I guess I was naïve to believe that the fashion treasures I donate end up making someone else look fabulous! I have discovered in recent years, however, that Dutch designers are, among many, very active in the area of recycled interior design. Tejo Remy (born 1960) is certainly a pioneer in this effort.

Simple solutions to structural problems are a feature of Remy’s designs. He takes everything available in the everyday world as “media” for his designs, and comes up with stunningly simple but also ingenious solutions to interior design. Imagine a living room with a set of these obviously comfortable side chairs. It sure beats the cold, soulless Barcelona furniture of Mies van derRohe (1886–1969), which has had a resurgence in popularity among those who weren’t around for the first incarnation of the style.

Although these chairs were called “rag chairs,” they are comprised mostly of discarded garments. Even though Remy no longer works for the company, Droog still markets these chairs and offers the customer the ability to add their own discarded garments as part of the chair. If this is not a comment on our throw-away society, I don’t know what is!

Remy studied at the Utrecht School of the Arts in the Department of 3D Design. Sustainability is the guiding principle behind his designs, recycling everyday objects in his interior work since the early 1990s. This was the period just coming out of the “greed decade,” as I call it, or the Reagan Era. I’m pretty sure you’re familiar with another of his landmark designs, the You Can’t Discard Your Memories chest-of-drawers from the same year as his Rag Chair. It’s simply brilliant. 

Tejo Remy, You Can’t Discard Your Memories chest of drawers, 1991. The Museum of Modern Art, New York. © 2018 Tejo Remy. (MOMA-D0490)

The only downside to “sustainability” and “recycling” is that one pays dearly for the cachet of the designer’s name. The same is true with the furniture designs of Philippe Starck (born 1949), who employs discarded industrial materials in many of his designs. Frank Gehry (born 1929) explored furniture made of corrugated cardboard, which are over the moon in price. The Rag Chair is listed on Droog’s website for €2694.21! May I just say something everyone’s probably thinking: Why is something so good for the planet (and so visually stunning) so expensive?

Monday, April 9, 2018

An Awesome “Find”


Yun Gee (Gee Wing Yun, 1906–1963, US, born China), Skull, 1926. Oil on paperboard mounted on wood, 11 1/8" x 15 ½" (28.3 x 39.3 cm). Image © 2018 Smithsonian Institution, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, DC. (SI-337)

In the annals of art history—and I mean the standard art history texts used for high school and college—obviously thousands of significant artists are left out. Well, as I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, I’m here to correct these many oversights! When we discuss early American modernism, it usually involves artists from the East Coast. Well, surprise, there were pioneer modernists from the West Coast at the same time, and Yun Gee (1906–1963) was one of them.

The paintings of Yun Gee are such a wonderful interlude between the Armory Show of 1913 and Abstract Expressionism. And yet, it seems that they are seldom included in studies of early American modernism, because he spent a lot of his time in San Francisco and Paris. He was also active in New York.

Gee was born near Canton, China to a merchant father who spent much time in San Francisco. Gee joined his father in 1921 and settled near Chinatown, enrolling in the California School of Fine Arts (now the San Francisco Art Institute). The most notable influence of Gee’s mature work was his teacher, the painter Otis Oldfield (1860–1969), whose own work reflected the influence of late Paul Cézanne (1839–1906).

This painting, Skull, was executed during a period when Gee helped form the Modern Gallery on Montgomery Street in San Francisco with a group of avant-garde artists. It was a venue that featured the works of abstractionists and would eventually become the San Francisco Art Center. In 1927, Gee went to Paris, where he immediately became intimate with members of avant-garde art movements from Cubism and Futurism to abstraction. He exhibited often at the Salon des Indépendants—the venue for artists considered too avant-garde for the mainstream art scene.

He returned to the US, settling in New York in 1931. Despite shows at the Brooklyn Museum and the Museum of Modern Art (1932), Gee struggled through the Depression years (1929–1940), due in large part to the preference for Social Realism at the time in the US, as well as discrimination against his Asian heritage. He painted murals and taught art for the WPA during the Depression, and his painting style ultimately was honed into a combination of Cubism and a more ironic (rather than “social”) sense of realism. A second stint in Paris (1936–1939) garnered him two one-person exhibitions at the Galerie à la Reine. After his return to the US, his painting style gradually drifted toward abstraction that reflected Abstract Expressionism.

Painting was not Gee’s only creative offering. He wrote poetry, which often accompanied his paintings, that reflected both Taoist tradition and the modern poetry of people such as Gertrude Stein (1874–1946) (whom he had befriended while in Paris). He also danced, designed sets, and wrote for the stage. Although he was known best as a painter, he expanded his search for beauty in the world through bird-watching and playing numerous Chinese instruments.

Works such as the following two paintings lead me to believe he may have been in contact with either Morgan Russell (1886–1953) or Stanton MacDonald-Wright (1890–1973), two American artists in Paris who pioneered the Cubism/Orphism-inspired movement Synchronism! Am I right?

Yun Gee, Sleeping Girl, 1926–1927. Oil on linen mounted on paperboard, 14 7/8" x 19 ¾" (37.7 x 50.3 cm). Image © 2018 Smithsonian Institution, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington, DC. (SI-481)
Yun Gee, Man with a Pipe (Head of a Man), 1926–1927. Oil on paperboard, 15 3/8" x 10 15/16" (39.1 x 27.8 cm). Image © 2018 Smithsonian Institution, Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden, Washington DC. (SI-482)

Monday, April 2, 2018

A Breath of Spring


Kenneth Noland (1924–2010, US), April, 1960. Acrylic on unprimed canvas, 16" x 16" (40.7 x 40.7 cm). Phillips Collection, Washington, DC. © 2018 Estate of Kenneth Noland/Licensed by VAGA, New York. (PC-310novg)

What better way to celebrate the beginning of April than to see COLOR. Kenneth Noland’s (1924–2010) painting named for this month makes me think of blue skies with a bright sun and the smell of mown grass. (I know everyone loves that smell when spring weather starts getting better.) I’m particularly fond of this work because of the use of cobalt blue and secondary colors from it, including the outer ring with dark blue outlines that verge on violet. And we all know that blue and yellow equals green. This painting has it all—primaries, secondaries, and complements!

April is transitional to Noland's later circle paintings. While the inner rings are tightly controlled in their description, the outer circles tend toward irregular contours, with the outermost circle a painterly ring of cerulean blue. This may reflect a hangover effect of Abstract Expressionist action painting. Another source for the radiant energy of these concentric circles may be early American modernist sun paintings such as Arthur Dove’s (1880–1946) Red Sun (1935, Phillips Collection) or Georgia O'Keeffe’s (1887–1986) Evening Star III (1917, Museum of Modern Art, New York).

Color Field painting is sometimes called “post-painterly abstraction” to denote that the artists who were part of the style rejected the idea of individual brush gesture, the hallmark of action painting. Hard Edge painting evolved from Color Field, which emphasizes a total unity of surface with sharply defined forms contrasted with blank canvas, avoiding the appearance of figures on a field.

Born in the art colony town of Asheville, North Carolina, Noland studied at nearby Black Mountain College (1946–1948), working with Minimalist Ilya Bolotowsky (1907–1981) and geometric Color Field artist Josef Albers (1888–1976). After a year in Paris in 1948, he returned to the US, moving to Washington, DC in 1949. His paintings from this time reflect the all-over painting abstractions of the European counterpart to Abstract Expressionism, l'Art Informel.

Noland frequently returned to Black Mountain for visits. In 1950, he met Helen Frankenthaler (1928–2011), an artist who was experimenting with staining raw canvas. He also met art critic and champion of Abstract Expressionism Clement Greenberg (1909–1994). Through them, Noland became aware of Abstract Expressionism.

Noland immediately began experimenting with Frankenthaler's staining style for his own brand of Color Field works, abstract canvases saturated with pure color. Returning to Washington, he encountered a group of painters known as the Washington Color School Painters, among them Morris Louis (1912–1962), who, like Frankenthaler, stained raw canvas with pure color.

Noland's first completely unique statements of Color Field lasted from the mid-1950s to about 1962, after he had discovered the center of the canvas as a focal point for his compositions. This resulted in paintings where the principal image of concentric circles is exactly centered on the square canvas. In emphasizing concentric circles, Noland eliminated the time-honored method of looking at a painting from left to right.

Monday, March 26, 2018

National Women’s (Art) History Month II


Kajiwara Aya (born 1941, Japan), Red Clouds, 1998. Madake bamboo and rattan, 15 ¾" x 8" (40 x 20.3 cm). Philadelphia Museum of Art. © 2018 Aya Kajiwara. (PMA-6730)

I like to feature pioneering women during National Women’s (Art) History Month. The arts are obviously no exception to the fields in which women have pioneered and excelled. This is as true in Japan as it is in Western Europe and America, where art history texts are not liberally sprinkled with the names of women artists. And, just as in the West, women artists have existed since the earliest cultures, many forging lifelong careers in the arts. In 2016, I blogged about contemporary bamboo art, and somehow overlooked Aya Kajiwara (born 1941). Since there are 400 to 500 species of bamboo in Japan, and it has been a revered art medium since ancient times, I think bamboo art worth a second look.

The art form of weaving and plaiting bamboo for storage baskets in Japane dates back to the Jomon Period (ca. 3000–200 BCE). Many varieties of bamboo in Japan are still used in household construction and utilitarian objects. Traditionally, bamboo baskets were made to store rice and saki, as flower holders, and harvesting tea. When the tea ceremony (chanoyu) and flower arranging (ikebana) became popular among the elite classes, the focus on proper etiquette and tools for preparation led to an expansion in the type of bamboo objects made.

The tradition of bamboo weaving and plaiting continues in contemporary art. Japanese bamboo artists undergo strict apprenticeships that can last as long as ten years. Bamboo is a time-consuming medium due to its straight, coarse, and stiff qualities. Apprentices have to learn how to manipulate it before they can start developing their own individual style.

Kajiwara is the first and only woman admitted as a full member to the Japan Art Crafts Association. Her interest in working with bamboo evolved when she married the renowned bamboo artist Koho Kajiwara (born 1935), at first assisting in his studio. She ultimately attended the Beppu Occupational School, the foremost art school with a bamboo curriculum. There she studied with teachers who themselves were pupils of Living National Treasure artists (those certified as Preservers of Important Intangible Cultural Properties), such as Shono Shounsai (1904–1974). Like many artists dedicated to the stringent training process in bamboo, she had to take part-time jobs while studying. She graduated from Beppu in 1980 and began winning awards soon after. Starting in 1992, Kajiwara has been admitted to the prestigious Traditional Craft Arts Exhibition many times.

Kajiwara titles her bamboo pieces because, like most bamboo artists, the weaving of the material is not meant simply to produce utilitarian objects. Her work follows the tradition of the hanakago, the baskets made for holding flower arrangements from the special ceremonial Ikebana. In the Ikebana, these baskets are viewed as sculptures, rather than utilitarian objects. Many of her titles allude to landscape or parts of nature.

Red Clouds shows the skill required to tightly weave bamboo. Madake is the most common type of bamboo in Japan. It has large-diameter stalks with a very straight grain that is easy to split into finer strands. Just take a look at the incredibly fine strands that compose this object. You’ll become a new fan of bamboo art as I did in 2016!

Kajiwara Aya, Red Clouds, detail, 1998. Madake bamboo and rattan, 15 ¾" x 8" (40 x 20.3 cm). Philadelphia Museum of Art. © 2018 Aya Kajiwara.

Monday, March 19, 2018

National Women’s (Art) History Month


Florence Knoll (born 1917, US), Chair, 1955. Chromed steel, wool upholstery, 31" x 29" x 24" (78.8 x 73.7 x 61 cm). Philadelphia Museum of Art. © 2018 Florence Knoll/Knoll. (PMA-3533)

It took a heck of a lot of work, but after World War II (1939–1945) a group of artists yanked the US away from the love of “all things past” toward modern design. Many of these artists were influenced by Bauhaus artists who had emigrated to the US because of the war, such as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (1886–1969, born Germany) and László Moholy-Nagy (1895–1946, born Hungary). Others were influenced by the prevalent European modernism of émigrés such as Finland-born father and son Eliel (1873–1950) and Eero Saarinen (1910–1961).

The overriding concern of these modernist European designers was the function of architecture and utilitarian arts over ornament. They incorporated the sleek, industrial lines of modern machinery into everyday household design. The aesthetic of these designers found inspiration in the Arts and Crafts Movement of the late 1800s and early 1900s, which pioneered the integration of fine art and miscellaneous arts.

Florence Knoll, née Schust, was born in Saginaw, Michigan in 1917. She showed an interest in architecture at an early age and studied at the Kingswood School in Bloomfield Hills, adjacent to the Arts and Crafts-oriented Cranbrook Academy. The close friendship she developed there with the Saarinens, who taught at Cranbrook, impacted her mature design style. Especially influential were her visits to Finland, where she met pioneering modernist architect Alvar Aalto (1898–1976). Aalto recommended that she study under the great Bauhaus architects Walter Gropius (1883–1969, born Germany) and Marcel Breuer (1892–1981, born Hungary), who were teaching at Harvard, and Mies van der Rohe, who had opened a branch of the Bauhaus in Chicago at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

When she moved to New York in 1941, she met Hans Knoll (1914–1955, born Germany), who was then building a modern design company. Their marriage united two unique, progressive design minds that would revolutionize US interior, utilitarian, and furniture design that lasts to the present day. In heading the Knoll Planning Unity, Florence set the standard for modern corporate interiors that harmonized with the revolutionary International Style in architecture, which became the rage after the war until the 1970s.

As part of the Planning Unity, Knoll contributed equally to furniture design and interior design. This side chair reflects primarily the influence of Mies van der Rohe’s “Barcelona” style side chairs that were omnipresent in the lobbies of all of his buildings. Knoll’s design strips away the x-bar stretchers. In many of her furniture designs, the emphasis was as much on comfort as it was on the stripped down, unornamented aesthetic of Bauhaus designers. This emphasis made her furniture infinitely more approachable to US consumers than some of the barely-essential Mies designs.

Friday, March 9, 2018

National Plant a Flower Day

Margherita Caffi (ca. 1650–1710, Italy), Still Life with Flowers, ca. 1680. Oil on canvas, 16 15/16" x 3 3/16" (43 x 59 cm). Private Collection. Image © 2018 Davis Art Images. (8S-21985)

Not only is it National Women’s [Art] History Month, but Monday is National Plant a Flower Day. Due to the two major nor’easters that have rocked the Northeast, I would like to feature a hope for spring on flower planting day. No one needs to see works of art about snow right now!

Little is known about Margherita Caffi’s life (ca. 1650–1710). Caffi was the daughter of Francesco (or Vincenzo?) Volo, who was a still-life painter, and Veronica Volo. She also married a still-life painter, Ludovico (Lodovico?) Caffi (ca. 1641–1695), in Cremona in 1668. She may have apprenticed in Vincenzo Volo’s—either her father or another relative—workshop as “Vicencina” or “Vincencina” are added to her signature in some paintings. She was patronized by the Medici in Florence and the Hapsburg rulers in Madrid, Spain and Innsbruck, Austria. She is thought to have lived in Innsbruck for a time. Thirty paintings are firmly attributed to her. Caffi died in Milan and was awarded a funeral that celebrated her life as an artist.

Compared to Francesco, Caffi’s still-life works are infinitely more dramatic and interesting compositionally. Her still-life works often include two arrangements of flowers in an open, asymmetrical composition. The extreme tenebrism (stark contrasts of dark and light) often obscures the vessel holding the flowers.

Between the 1400s and 1700s, education and training of women did not markedly improve. Women with the drive to be artists had to train under fathers or male relatives who were established artists. Women were denied membership in the guilds, which ensured continual patronage to artists. Because of the restrictions in their training as artists (such as studying anatomy), many women artists specialized in still-life and portrait subjects. The rise in status of still life as a stand-alone genre in painting coincided with the increased education of women artists and their establishing successful careers as painters.

And, for those of you who miss snow because we had two nor’easters within a week, here’s a beautiful work by American Impressionist Helen Hamilton (1889–1970): 

Helen Hamilton (1889–1970, US), Winter Afternoon. Oil on canvas, 18 1/8" x 24" (46 x 61 cm ). Image courtesy of R.H. Love Gallery, Chicago. © 2018 artist or artist’s estate. (8S-27000)

Hamilton was active in New York and New England. Her father, Hamilton Hamilton (believe it or not) (1847–1928), was a pseudo-American Impressionist. At age nineteen, her family moved to Pasadena, California, and her father trained her in the Impressionist technique on the spot in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. By 1910, the family was back in New York, and Helen took part in the active American Impressionist art scene, including the Silvermine art colony in Connecticut. In 1913, she discovered the work of Vincent van Gogh (1853–1890) at the famous Armory Show. After that, her paintings became active surfaces with slashing brushstrokes of pure color. She delighted in the depiction of rushing water and waterfalls.

Correlations to Davis programs: Explorations in Art Grade 4: 6.36; Explorations in Art Grade 5: 2.8; A Personal Journey: 2.6; Discovering Drawing 3E: 4; Experience Painting: 9; Discovering Art History 4E: 7 Activity 2

Monday, March 5, 2018

The Receptive Eye

Francis Michael Celentano (1928–2016, US), Gamma, 1970. Acrylic on canvas, 60" x 96" (152.4 x 243.8 cm). Collection of Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo, NY. © 2018 Estate of Francis Michael Celentano. (AK-3172)

Every now and then one comes across an artist who tends to get bypassed in art history books. Obviously, those books can’t cover every artist that participated in significant art movements. So, that is my job! Francis Celentano (1928–2016) was part of The Responsive Eye, a landmark show at the Museum of Modern Art, New York in 1965. That exhibition, which is seen by many art historians as the “launching point” of the Op Art stylistic movement, featured such renowned Op Art artists as Bridget Riley (born 1931), Richard Anuszkiewicz (born 1930), and Yaacov Agam (born 1928). Celentano’s work is absolutely gorgeous!

Francis Celentano was born in the Bronx and graduated from New York University in 1951 with a BA in Art History and Psychology (what a dual major!). In 1957, he achieved an MA in Art History. As an undergraduate, he took courses with Philip Guston (1913–1980), who introduced him to Abstract Expressionists and other members of the New York avant-garde art circle. He was initially drawn to the spontaneous and intuitive nature of Abstract Expressionism’s action painting.

A year’s study in Rome (1957–1958) reportedly changed his inclination toward the New York “school.” Celentano was struck by the illusionism of Renaissance artists such as Piero della Francesca (1415–1492) and Andrea Mantegna (1431–1506). This led to a Hard Edge period—a style in which abstract shapes are given the illusion of three-dimensions—and then Op Art, which ultimately led to his inclusion in The Responsive Eye.

The color lyricism and rational schematics of Celentano’s work are hallmarks of the visual movement evinced by Op Art. This meticulous approach to painting is the antithesis of the action painting wing of Abstract Expressionism, which is one reason I find Celentano’s work is so compelling. Instead of his painting being a conscious rejection of Abstract Expressionism—as Pop Art and Minimalism were—Celentano’s evolution as an Op artist seems completely understandable. His exploration of color theory, which he began to study seriously in 1968, produced paintings such as Gamma, in which the optical structure coincides with dramatic color interactions.

In later life, he experimented with computer manipulations of color, enabling him to produce large-scale paintings in his signature style of vibrating color and meticulous construction. Celentano once equated “perceptual” (Op) art with the distortions of perception provided by nature and culture. These are distortions I can live with!

Correlations to Davis programs: Explorations in Art Grade 5: 3.15, 3.16; Discovering Art History: 17.2