(An Appropriate Distance)

 

FROM THE MAYOR'S DOORSTEP

Mar 20, 2014 12:07 PM EDT

About Poons and history: I have never understood the obsession to associate one artist with another from the past. Certainly, it is relevant from time to time. But all the time? Art historians have managed to confuse their discipline with getting art.

- John Link

Mar 20, 2014 12:27 PM EDT

I think it has to do, on the one hand, with perceiving how "original" the artist is (or isn't)--and on the other, with perceiving how distinguished is (or isn't) his or her lineage. In the first case it is (or can be) a subtle form of attack, and in the second,with a subtle form of praise. With Poons, I think it is mostly meant as compliment, by suggesting analogies with artists we all admire, but sometimes (as with Roberta) I think it's a suggestion that he has become too "familiar."

- Piri Halasz

Nov 24, 2012 2:36 AM EST

color is so important, and difficult. as well as being very personal. thank you for devoting so much attention to it.

- Jay Zerbe

Nov 24, 2012 3:11 AM EST

Reading this article is extremely timely and interesting as in the U.K. Abstract Critical is dealing with similar issues ,redefining Abstraction.I would particularly agree with the view that Frankenthaler,Louis,et al ,in their best pictures are superior to experience than much done since. Thank you for such refined responses.

- Patrick Jones

Nov 24, 2012 4:23 AM EST

Good essay because it raises issues that were never fully resolved, especially in the nature vs. culture aspect of abstraction. Hofmann remains problematic but compelling, too. Was it his allegience to "School of Paris" aesthetics that kept him tied to cubism and avoiding -- or not getting -- the rawness of others, like deKooning in the late fifties? I think Greenberg commented on that.

- William Conger

Nov 24, 2012 6:31 AM EST

Analysis, context, and commentary all very much appreciated here. That it's all clearly stated is a bonus.

- Carl Belz

Nov 24, 2012 8:59 AM EST

Many thanks to all you nice people for reading my thoughts & responding to them so congently . But, William Conger, I don't see Hofmann as tied to "School of Paris esthetics" -- his surfaces are just as raw and beautiful as those of Pollock or Gottlieb or any of the other Yanks (it's artists like Soulages and Hartung who remained committed to the "finished" look of Paris). And de Kooning (not Hofmann) was the one who remained in a vein of late cubism--Hofmann's compositions by the mid-40s were already frequently (if not always) purely abstract, while de Kooning didn't stop drawing lots of shapes onto his canvases--even the abstract ones-- until the later 50s (then he goes whole hog in the opposite direction and simply starts slapping the paint around).

- Piri Halasz

Nov 24, 2012 9:13 AM EST

Always glad to see the color field painters get their due. They pushed color to color and made art that did not need 'issues' for validation.

- David Raymond

Nov 11, 2012 4:20 PM EST

I just came across this, great stuff. I think Hofmann's gotten better and better with each decade that's passed since the 1960s. I think he's underrated (pardon the expression) because he's hard to market--how can you market a great teacher, how can you market work that's just plain joyous about art and life, how can you market an artist who wasn't a "character"? I heard via friend Darryl Hughto about a panel coming up--Frank Stella, Bill Agee, Darby Bannard, Karen Wilkin. Is that in connection with the show? Will you be there? If so, please report. Cheers, Carl

- Carl Belz