University of South Carolina Libraries
Errteptainmer Major exhibit opens at J O' Keeff e an By Mark Chevalier Art Crttlc Realism is always better when it is more than a picture of someining. wnen 11 concerns liseu wun more man inai which is before the eye, or with simple craft, technique or style. Realism is exciting when it absorbs, puzzles and confuses. When it extends what our eyes have never seen to what minds can only imagine.lt is great when it orchestrates all of this without pretension, gimmick or manipulation. It is magic when someone like Georgia O'Keeffe embraces such variables and funnels them to the point of her brush, never sacrificing the essence of her form nor the individuality of her spirit. What separates O'Keeffe and selected commrades such as Arthur Dove, John Marin and others from the lot of the eternal conv/realists is simnlv flexahilitv. and the desire to grow, evolve and change. At a time when most realists were finding themselves threatened by the emergence of the abstract, O'Keeffe and others at Alfred Stieglitz's Gallery 291 were enlivened by it, and saw in the abstract a new way to evaluate and project their images. O'Keeffe says in the Viking Press Studio Book (a format in which the illustrations 7f is surprising to me to see how miini/ nonn/p c&naratf* thf? nhmntiwG * t from the abstract. Objective painting is not good painting unless it is good in the abstract sense.' ? fZanrnia (1 J? of an artist's work are accompanied by their own text); "It is surprising to me to see how many people separate the objective from the abstract. Objective painting is not good painting unless it is good in the abstract sense. A hill or tree cannot make a good painting just because it is a hill or a tree. It is lines and color put together so that they say something. For me that is the very basis of painting. The abstraction is often the most definite form for the intangible thing in myself that I can onlv clarifv in naint " That desire to define "the intangible thing in myself" combined with the notion that all work must be "good in the abstract sense" elevated both these artists and the entire scope of objective work. Suddenly, a new expressionism was returning to realism on the coat-tails of abstraction. Such sensibilities as they emerged in the early 1900s can be seen in an important exhibition currently on display at McKissick Museums, entitled Georgia O'Keeffe and Her Circle. The exhibit, which was organized by curator Lynn RAhflplcAn 1\/I * mrc qnH Rom; 14 Rncori faohirnc 11 JiVUk/Vl IOV/1I 4fAJ \/l O OHU Uii \zVW4 JUU1 1 J AX. A VV/UVII, IVUIVU VO 11 works by O'Keeffe, and eight others by contemporaries Charles Demuth, Marsden Hartley, Arthur Dove, John Marin and Arthur W. Dow. The title of the show is somewhat of a misnomer, for it seems to imply that O'Keeffe was the central force within the group. Actually they were a "circle" in that, for a period, their activities centered around Stieglitz's Gallery 291 in New York City. Stieglitz's gallery played an important roll in i ucuf yiu u ncc I $ By Mark Chevalier sne invisionea during tnose Artcrttks early years. From the early Georgia O'Keefe was born Saturday afternoon art on November 15, 1887 near lessons in Sun Pririe to her Sun Prairie, Wisconsin. In first experience with the her Viking Press Studio professional art world in 1905 Book, she notes that she at the Art Institute of decided to become an artist Chicage, O'Keeffe saw in the eighth grade, although possibilities that extended she is still unclear where the far beyond the pallet of the idea came from: "I don't portrait. know where I got my artist At 20, O'Keeffe left idea. The scraps of what I Chicago for a year at the Art remember do not explain to p 1,1 me where it came from. I V * only know that by that time it was definitely settled in ?v,d\f.?? miuiK f/?' m/i I na\/nr BraS! " ^ .^o^B^B^l^" , r.--'.; ' -'-'^ 1, Georgia O'Keeffe never became the portrait painter O'Keeffe's 'Yeilou Xfr.Kififiirlc id'circle'ext fostering both the careers and the (then) radical styles of the artists he assopiat?d with Of his inflnonrp Arthur Dovp wrote; "I do not think I could have existed as a painter without that super, encouragement and the battle he has fought day by day for 25 years. He is without a doubt the one who has done the most for art in America.'' Stieglitz's relationship with O'Keeffe advanced beyond the O 'Keeffe's 'Veliow Ca/la ? Green Leaves' ffe: 82 art years Students League in New terest him, the paintings ha York City, which was to be alive with paint and followed by a summer at the kind of dash and "go" th; Chase Still Life Class on kept us looking fc Lake George. O'Keeffe something lively, kept i recalls the energy William pretty well keyed up." Merritt Chase stimulated in There is a bit of irony i her; "There was something the fact that after th fresh and energetic and energizing stimulus < fierce and exacting about Chase, O'Keeffe stopp* him that made him fun. His painting for the followir love of style-color- paint as five years, from 1908-1912. paint-was lively...To in- was perhaps the stage th tbc^^n vCactus' (detail) . ,?OK~ft. P,? end realism professional level, and in 1924 the two were married. Although their marriage was cut short by Stieglitz's death in 1946,0'Keeffe gives much credit to the influence her husband had on her, both in terms of ideas and the sensitive photographic work he produced. The O'Keeffe paintings in this collection at McKissick can serve as a good introduction for the unindated, and will surely rekindle interest by those who have previously enioved her work. The oldest Daintine here is 'From the Plains I', done in 1919. Nearly abstract, a slight hint of mountains cut across the bottom of the work, almost forced from view by the oppressive clouds that loom above. Lightning slashes cut the upper atmosphere, and with the lower mountain range, form a kind of frame from which the clouds recede. O'Keeffe has suggested that the work arose from a stay in Texas, in which the sound of cattle pens lowering day and night 'haunted me.' The work possesses such an audible quality. The churning clouds almost rumble as they scrape across the mountains, and the lightning slashes, less like those of a storm, are like spurts of sound penetrating the Hnrlrnpcc Thnc tho u/nrlf attainc a IrinH nf Hictinoo r?r detachment, as if the world has pulled away from us, leaving 'At a time when most realists were finding themselves threatened by the emergence of the abstract, O'Keeffe and others at Alfred Stieglitz's, Gallery 291 were enlivened by it...' us entranced by a redundant, alienating sound. "At the Rodeo" is similar, utilizing swirling forms and color to suggest sound and movement. It is perhaps the lassoing rope as it closes upon its prey, or perhaps, it is something entirely different. "Morning Glories, New Mexico, II"and "Yellow Calla, Green Leaves" are both beautiful examples of O Keeffe's flower paintings. The former is a small work depicting two flowers, one from the top, the other from the side. It is wonderfully simple, an almost frail depiction that gains much from her scratchy yet sensuous handling of paint. One painting that is somewhat out of character for -O'Keeffe is "My Shanty, Lake George," done in 1922. She says she painted it to prove that she could "...paint one of those dismal-colored paintings like the men..." If "My Shanty" relates to any other work in the exhibit, it ic A rt hnr HAirn'o ^PIaii/^c '' A ciHa Cf inrtlit? io vii/ai ij nt iiiui ivuvt o viuuuo. rwmt uuui uuu^uu-, O'Keeffe was closest to Dove. She notes that when she first saw a reproduction of Dove's work, she "trekked the streets looking for others." Dove differs from the other artists here, being that he was considerably more experimental in terms of medium. In fact, much of Dove's later work became more assemblage than painting. Note in "Clouds" the sandpaper mountains. Georgia O'Keeffe and Her Circle is an important regional show, and one that I strongly recommend you spend some time with. The show here at McKissick will continue through Sept.25, at which time it will travel to Charleston for a run at the Gibbes Art Gallery from Oct. 10 through Nov. 9. j I O'Keeffe omitted" e i trom art riistory ; id By Mark Chevalier 3 An Critic at Georgia O'Keeffe hasn't made the history books. >r Arthur Dove? Sure. Charles Demuth. Marsden is Hartley, John Marin? Of course. But not O'Keeffe. It's puzzling with such a "circle" of artists, that one-one j in that many consider to be the best of the lot-is excluded. ie What could separate O'Keefe, is she so different...oh of no, could she be the reason? id If you've ever taken an art history course chances ig are very good that your instructor had you buy one of It two books that virtually monopolized the art history at field; Janson's The History of Art, or Gardner's Art X/ T*f !_ a. I a a C s-k?wv r* flint*** ! A" i nruugn ine nuw n unc wcic iu tuuiuiuc mtov "d two volumes, that span more than 2000 years of art, re how many women have found print upon their pages, ^n Fifty? Twenty-five? Ten? As incredible as it sounds, al there are absolutely no women artists in either Janson rt or Gardner. ; The feminists art journals are crying sexism. And as who can blame them, for clearly there have been he significant women artists. Aside from O'Keeffe, Mary er Cassatt comes to mind, or Kathe Kolwitz or Bridget on Riley, or Louise Nevelson. Not only are none of the at above in Janson and Gardner, but Klsen's Purposes of ? Art, E.H. Gombrich's The Story of Art and Robb and | i's Garrison's Art in the Western World also fail to i a mention them-or any women artist. ig Whether or not the basis for such neglect is rooted in Y\t\ nvnlnoiAn Kqo Krtffiin A Kn imrlnrnut vii limuv iiuoiu, nit ^aviuoiuii uao iu mv wiiuv i v.ui uj tto new women-encompassing texts and by instructors on themselves. Nearly every art historian, male or 5. female, inserts women artists into their lectures, ler O'Keeffe comes up as often as any other 20th century | in- realist. And new books, such as Canaday's Mainis, streams of Modern Art, mentions five women; Koos' z's An Illustrated Handbook of Art mentions four; and ne, Stubbs' Graphic Arts in the 20th Century mentions a : ?6 staggering ten. I