annshafer.com
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Consulting
  • The Curator's Choice Podcast
  • The Curator's Choice Episodes
  • Platemark Podcast
  • Platemark Episodes
  • HoP episode transcripts
  • News
  • Projects
  • CV
  • About

Musings on Art, Mostly Printmaking

Roderick Mead's surrealist engravings

7/27/2020

0 Comments

 

Ann Shafer

Last week I posted a few images of praying mantes in prints. Fascinating creatures. By the terribly scientific polling apparatus available to me—number of likes, natch—I decided to post more images by the person whose praying mantis print was most admired, Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Mead grew up in New Jersey and attended Yale University, graduating in 1925. Following art school, he moved to New York where he studied at the Art Students’ League under George Luks (and later with him privately) for several years. He also studied watercolor painting with George Pearse Ennis at the Grand Central School of Art.
 
In 1931, Mead moved to Majorca. Three years later he moved his studio to Paris and began studying printmaking at guess where? The experimental studio run by Stanley William Hayter known as Atelier 17. Actually, in 1931, the atelier was only a few years old and had yet to take up the name it would become known by. It wasn’t until 1933 that the studio moved to 17, rue Campagne Première, from which the 17 in its name derives. But you can be sure that Mead absorbed as much as he could there and as a result, the effect on his style is clear.

​At the Atelier on any given day one might be working at a table next to Joan Miró, Pablo Picasso, Alberto Giacometti, Max Ernst, Yves Tanguy, Jean Hélion, or Wassily Kandinsky. Like most of the artists there, Mead experimented with abstraction and surrealism, and one finds shared ideas, forms, and styles among the prints made there. Like most everyone else, Mead and his wife left Paris in 1939 ahead of the start of World War II and by 1941 was living in Carlsbad, New Mexico. There he was able to devote himself to creating art full time; he continued to paint and make prints until his death in 1971.
 
For me, Mead would have been one in a long list of artists working with Hayter about whom I know not a great deal was it not for my friend Gregg Most, who grew up down the street from the Meads. Gregg and I worked together at the National Gallery in the 1990s, and he has researched and collected Mead for a long time. It is Gregg’s passion for Mead that caused me to pay closer attention.
 
I love Mead’s prints because they are carefully crafted, readable yet totally surreal, and have a high sense of crispness and design that really attracts me. See if you agree.
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
The Wrecked Ship, 1936
Engraving
Plate: 197 x 251 mm. (7 ¾ x 9 7/8 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.1
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
Untitled (Matador and Bull), c. 1936
Engraving and softground etching with aquatint
Plate: 203 x 203 mm. (8 × 8 in.)
Dolan/Maxwell
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
Rope Figures, c. 1935–45
Engraving
Plate: 160 x 82 mm. (6 1⁄2 x 3 1⁄4 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1976.99.5
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
St. Michael and the Dragon, 1939
Color wood engraving
Image: 232 x 203 mm. (9 1/8 x 8 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.6
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
Creation of Eve, c. 1942
Engraving and softground etching
Plate: 200 x 199 mm. (7 7/8 x 7 13/16 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1976.99.1
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
Trojan Horse, c. 1945–50s
Color engraving, aquatint, and softground etching
Plate: 235 x 298 mm. (9 ¼ x 11 ¾ in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.2
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971)
Combat #1 (Incident), c. 1942–45
Engraving and softground etching
264 x 186 mm. (10 3/8 x 7 3/8 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.3
 
Roderick Mead, (American, 1900–1971)
Tauromachia I, 1946
Engraving and aquatint
Plate: 114 x 182 mm (4 ½ x 31/4 in.)
Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Achenbach Foundation, California State Library loan, L543.1966
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Wrecked Ship
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). The Wrecked Ship,1936. Engraving and aquatint. Plate: 197 x 251 mm. (7 ¾ x 9 7/8 in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.1.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Matador and Bull
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Untitled (Matador and Bull), c. 1936. Engraving and softground etching with aquatint. Plate: 203 x 203 mm. (8 × 8 in.). Dolan/Maxwell.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Rope People
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Rope Figures, c. 1935–45. Engraving. Plate: 160 x 82 mm. (6 1⁄2 x 3 1⁄4 in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1976.99.5.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, St. George and the Dragon
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). St. Michael and the Dragon, 1939. Color wood engraving. Image: 232 x 203 mm. (9 1/8 x 8 in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.6.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Creation of Eve
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Creation of Eve, c. 1942. Engraving and softground etching. Plate: 200 x 199 mm. (7 7/8 x 7 13/16 in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1976.99.1.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Trojan Horse
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Trojan Horse, c. 1945–50s. Color engraving, aquatint, and softground etching. Plate: 235 x 298 mm. (9 ¼ x 11 ¾ in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.2.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Combat #1
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1971). Combat #1 (Incident), c. 1942–45. Engraving and softground etching. Plate: 264 x 186 mm. (10 3/8 x 7 3/8 in.). Smithsonian American Art Museum, Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.3.
Picture of Roderick Mead's print, Tauromachia
Roderick Mead, (American, 1900–1971). Tauromachia I, 1946. Engraving and aquatint. Plate: 114 x 182 mm (4 ½ x 31/4 in.). Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Achenbach Foundation, California State Library loan, L543.1966.
0 Comments

Viewing the Viewers: Paul Fusco's RFK Funeral Train pictures

7/22/2020

0 Comments

 

Ann Shafer

I always wanted to do an exhibition about the audience. Portraying not the main attraction—the action on stage—but the people who are watching seems ripe for capturing a slice of life. The lookers being looked at flips convention. Voyeurism is a funny thing, alternately creepy and, what’s the opposite of creepy? Oh, pleasant. There are some great prints from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that would fit in this proposed exhibition nicely like Mary Cassatt’s In the Opera Box, 1879, Reginald Marsh’s Box at the Metropolitan, 1934, Joseph Hirsch’s Hecklers, 1943. Of course, there are plenty of paintings portraying audiences, too. My favorite is Tissot’s Women of Paris: The Circus Lover, 1885.

Though these images may seem quirky and quaint now, it is possible for an image of this type to cross over into social justice and to capture the zeitgeist. For me, one of the most searing group of images of an audience is Paul Fusco’s series taken in 1968 from the train carrying the body of Robert F. Kennedy from New York to Washington, D.C., for burial at Arlington National Cemetery. The photographs capture an emotionally naked populace witnessing the end of optimism in the country. RFK’s assassination followed that of his brother, President Kennedy on November 22, 1963; Malcolm X on February 21, 1965; and Martin Luther King, Jr., on April 4, 1968. RFK was shot just two months after Dr. King’s death, on June 5, 1968. By then, the country had seen more than its share of sorrow and senseless killing.

The photographer, Paul Fusco, died last week, and it reminded me of how powerful the images are still. I marvel at how much emotion is conveyed across decades; they give me chills to this day.

It may not surprise you to know that one of the photographs, a shot up North Broadway, just before the train dips underground on its approach into Penn Station in Baltimore, is one that got away. I pitched this photograph some years ago and got enough pushback to return it to the dealer. Part of the issue was that my colleagues weren’t convinced it was Baltimore in the photograph (of course it is), and the other had to do with vintage prints versus later reprints. Many curators seek and prefer to collect vintage prints, meaning the photographs were printed at the time they were shot. The photograph in question was a later printing, and thus was less desirable. I am certain Fusco wasn’t thinking in terms of museum collections in 1968. In fact, as a member of Magnum Photos, an international cooperative agency, he was on assignment for Look magazine, which published two of the photographs in black and white. The series was unknown until Aperture published it in 2008. Hence the later printings.

In an earlier post I said I have never forgotten those that got away, and it’s true. To this day, when I see one of these works on the wall in some exhibition, I think “yes, I was right.” A few years after my failed pitch, I saw an exhibition of Fusco’s RFK train pictures at SFMoMA, and there was the North Broadway shot, front and center. Vindication.

Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020)
Untitled (North Broadway, Baltimore), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later
Danziger Gallery

Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020)
Untitled (Family), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later
Danziger Gallery

Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020)
Untitled (Western Maryland Railroad), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later
Danziger Gallery

Mary Cassatt (American, 1844–1926)
In the Opera Box (No. 3), c. 1880
Etching, softground etching, and aquatint
Sheet: 357 x 269 mm. (14 1/16 x 10 9/16 in.)
Plate: 197 x 178 mm. (7 3/4 x 7 in.)
Metropolitan Museum of Art: Gift of Mrs. Imrie de Vegh, 1949, 49.127.1

Reginald Marsh American (1898–1954)
Box at the Metropolitan, 1934
Etching and engraving
Sheet: 250 x 202 mm. (9 13/16 x 7 15/16 in.)
Plate 322 x 252 mm. (12 11/16 x 9 15/16 in.)
Metropolitan Museum of Art: Gift of The Honorable William Benton, 1959, 59.609.15

Joseph Hirsch (American, 1910–1981)
The Hecklers, 1943–1944, published 1948
Lithograph
Sheet 312 421 mm. (12 5/16 x 16 9/16 in.)
Image: 251 x 388 mm. (9 7/8 x 15 ¼ in.)
National Gallery of Art: Reba and Dave Williams Collection, Gift of Reba and Dave Williams, 2008.115.2503
​
James Tissot (1836–1902)
Women of Paris: The Circus Lover, 1885
Oil on canvas
147.3 x 101.6 cm. (58 x 40 in.)
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston: Juliana Cheney Edwards Collection, 58.45
Picture of Paul Fusco photograph of North Broadway Baltimore RFK Funeral Train
Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020). Untitled (North Broadway, Baltimore), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later. Danziger Gallery.
Picture of North Broadway, Baltimore Google Maps
Google Maps shot of the median on North Broadway, Baltimore, from under the train tracks.
Picture of Paul Fusco photograph from RFK Funeral Train series
Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020). Untitled (Family), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later. Danziger Gallery.
Picture of Paul Fusco photograph from RFK Funeral Train series
Paul Fusco (American, 1930–2020). Untitled (Western Maryland Railroad), from the series RFK Funeral Train, 1968, printed later. Danziger Gallery.
Picture Mary Cassatt print In the Opera Box, collection Metropolitan Museum
Mary Cassatt (American, 1844–1926). In the Opera Box (No. 3), c. 1880. Etching, softground etching, and aquatint. Sheet: 357 x 269 mm. (14 1/16 x 10 9/16 in.); plate: 197 x 178 mm. (7 3/4 x 7 in.). Metropolitan Museum of Art: Gift of Mrs. Imrie de Vegh, 1949, 49.127.1.
Picture of Reginal Marsh print At the Metropolitan, collection Met Museum
Reginald Marsh American (1898–1954). Box at the Metropolitan, 1934. Etching and engraving. Sheet: 250 x 202 mm. (9 13/16 x 7 15/16 in.); plate 322 x 252 mm. (12 11/16 x 9 15/16 in.). Metropolitan Museum of Art: Gift of The Honorable William Benton, 1959, 59.609.15.
Picture of Joseph Hirsch print, The Hecklers, collection National Gallery
Joseph Hirsch (American, 1910–1981). The Hecklers, 1943–1944, published 1948. Lithograph. Sheet 312 421 mm. (12 5/16 x 16 9/16 in.); image: 251 x 388 mm. (9 7/8 x 15 ¼ in.). National Gallery of Art: Reba and Dave Williams Collection, Gift of Reba and Dave Williams, 2008.115.2503. ​
Picture of James Tissot painting Women of Paris: the Circus Lover, collection Museum of Fine Arts Boston
James Tissot (1836–1902). Women of Paris: The Circus Lover, 1885. Oil on canvas. 147.3 x 101.6 cm. (58 x 40 in.). Museum of Fine Arts, Boston: Juliana Cheney Edwards Collection, 58.45.
0 Comments

Fred Becker, Kaleidoscopic Organism, 1946: praying mantis and vagina dentata

7/20/2020

0 Comments

 

Ann Shafer

Come with me down a rabbit hole to where the praying mantis lives. We will look at a 1946 print by Fred Becker, who was one of Hayter’s people. He worked as a shop tech and printer at Atelier 17 in the 1940s until he left to found the printmaking program at Washington University in St. Louis. I have been looking at and researching this American artist recently; I have been mulling over Kaleidoscopic Organism, 1946, for longer then I’d like to admit. It has befuddled me. I thought today I would lay out my thinking and take you along for the ride as I pick it apart and attempt to get inside the artist’s mind. Please know this is only my thinking—no guarantee that any of it is right!

Kaleidoscopic Organism is an engraving and etching (both hard and softground) and is sizable at 17 5/8 x 14 3/4 (plate size). The image is wacky. An amoeba-like mass occupies the center around which swirl discs that hold open said amoeba to reveal its innards. In the background are radiating lines that create either a halo or a vortex. Within the mass’ interior we find (from the bottom moving upward): a balustrade or railing that is being built or repaired, a casement window handle, a keyhole holding the center of the being but there’s something going through it (a little Dr. Seussian figure, n’est ce pas?), and assorted architectural wire forms surmounted by what I see as a praying mantis. Praying mantis, hmmm. These majestic but aggressive insects were a shared subject among artists making surrealist prints at Atelier 17. I’ve included several prints of mantes by Atelier 17 artists for your viewing pleasure.
 
With angular rear legs, triangular pivoting head, bulging eyes, and large, weirdly human forearms, mantis anatomy translates easily into line and action on the plate and offers interesting stand-ins for humans. But more to the point, the female mantis devours the male mantis after copulation (yikes!). They are also known to attack other insects (delightful). [For a good discussion about the Surrealists’ obsession with praying mantes, see William L. Pressly, “The Praying Mantis in Surrealist Art,” The Art Bulletin 60, no. 4 (December 1973): 600–615. And Ruth Markus. “Surrealism's Praying Mantis and Castrating Woman.” Woman's Art Journal 21, no. 1 (2000), 33–39.
 
So, what about that praying mantis in Becker’s organism? I think we’ve got ourselves a vagina dentata, reflecting myths about fierce lady bits and male castration fears. Becker’s form is not toothed like Hayter’s Ceres, 1947–48 (image below), but its head that is just at the apex of the cavity cannot be overlooked. I will leave it there.
 
Then, we must look at the bulk of the organism itself. At its bottom we find two feet, one with a shoe so worn that a big toe pops out of it. Until this moment, I could still believe we were dealing with a microscopic look at teeming life or a celestial big bang in process, but the feet snap us back to the immediate, visible world. What the heck?

Ok, so here are my theories/questions about each element, which often have opposing possibilities. They are many and still swimming around in my brain. I welcome any thoughts that may clarify or further confuse the issues.
 
1. Is the background radiating to highlight the subject like a halo or is it a vortex we might fall into?

2. Are the discs holding the form open or running around its edges? Are they swirling like wheels or symbolizing something else? I see variously eyes, lemon slices, stained glass windows, military medals of honor, kaleidoscope parts. But could they be railway car wheels or shower heads—you see where I’m heading here, don’t you?

3. The interior elements are structural, manmade, and mechanistic (even the mantis). They are linked together like a Rube Goldbergian contraption. What’s up with the balustrade, the keyhole, and those wire apparatuses? I find it curious that the exterior discs read as organic while the interior elements read as mechanistic. There is something there just out of reach, but it will come to me.

4. The feet read as either comical (a hobo or circus clown), or as deadly serious (a wounded or dead soldier).
​

5. The title cannot be overlooked: Kaleidoscopic Organism (although I hate it when artists rely on titles to explicate the work—shouldn’t it hold up on its own?). The dictionary tells us that a kaleidoscope can symbolize one’s escape in times of difficulty and self-doubt; that it constantly generates changing symmetrical patterns from small pieces of colored glass and therefore symbolizes anything that changes constantly.
 
Here is where I’ve ended up on meaning in Kaleidoscopic Organism. The title and the aforementioned definition of kaleidoscope bring me to World War II and its aftermath. At first glance, the print (made in 1946, the year after the war ended) looks comical: those gargantuan feet, the toe poking out of the shoe, the whirligigs and deeley boppers. What a smart way to pull us in. But then the praying mantis at its core turns it dark; the radiant, glowing halo turns into a vortex; the feet become those of a dead soldier; the organisms holding open the form reveal man’s mechanistic world symbolizing war, its machines, and their enabling of unbelievable cruelty and death. I suppose that contemporaneous viewers might read this work more quickly, but I believe it is imperative that we know and learn from history. It also serves to remind us that when looking at a work of art, it must be considered in context since artists can never be disassociated from the time in which they are working.
 
Becker’s print is still stewing in my brain. If I come up with a better answer, I’ll let you know.
 
Fred Becker (American, 1913–2004)
Kaleidoscopic Organism, 1946
Etching, softground etching, and engraving
Plate: 451 x 378 mm. (17 3/4 x 14 7/8 in.)
Annex Galleries
 
Stanley William Hayter (British, 1901–1988)
Cruelty of Insects, 1942
Engraving and softground etching
Sheet: 230 x 288 mm. (9 1/16 x 11 5/16 in.); plate: 202 x 250 mm. (7 15/16 x 9 13/16 in.)
Baltimore Museum of Art: Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Robert Paul Mann, Towson, Maryland, BMA 1979.367
 
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1972)
Praying Mantis, c. 1940s
Engraving and softground etching
Plate: 394 x 279 mm. (15 ½ x 11 in.)
Smithsonian American Art Museum: Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.4
 
Werner Drewes (American, born Germany, 1899–1985)
Praying Mantis, 1944, printed 1975
Engraving and softground etching
Plate: 200 x 302 mm. (7 7/8 x 11 7/8 in.)
Annex Galleries
 
Clinton Blair King (American 1901–1979)
Praying Mantis, c. 1945
Etching and aquatint
Plate: 277 x 200 mm (10 7/8 x 7 7/8 in.)
National Gallery of Art: Reba and Dave Williams Collection, Gift of Reba and Dave Williams, 2008.115.2866
 
Stanley William Hayter (British, 1901–1988)
Ceres, 1947–48
Engraving, softground etching, and scorper
Printed in black (intaglio), and yellow (screen, relief)
605 x 390 mm. (23 7/8 x 15 3/8 in.)
Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes, Buenos Aires
Picture of Fred Becker print Kaleidoscopic Organism
Fred Becker (American, 1913–2004). Kaleidoscopic Organism, 1946. Etching, softground etching, and engraving. Plate: 451 x 378 mm. (17 3/4 x 14 7/8 in.). Annex Galleries.
Picture of Stanley William Hayter, Cruelty of Insects
Stanley William Hayter (British, 1901–1988). Cruelty of Insects, 1942. Engraving and softground etching. Sheet: 230 x 288 mm. (9 1/16 x 11 5/16 in.); plate: 202 x 250 mm. (7 15/16 x 9 13/16 in.). Baltimore Museum of Art: Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Robert Paul Mann, Towson, Maryland, BMA 1979.367.
Picture of Roderick Mead's Praying Mantis
Roderick Mead (American, 1900–1972). Praying Mantis, c. 1940s. Engraving and softground etching. Plate: 394 x 279 mm. (15 ½ x 11 in.) . Smithsonian American Art Museum: Gift of Mrs. Roderick Mead, 1974.122.4.
Picture Werner Drewes Praying Mantis
Werner Drewes (American, born Germany, 1899–1985). Praying Mantis, 1944, printed 1975. Engraving and softground etching. Plate: 200 x 302 mm. (7 7/8 x 11 7/8 in.). Annex Galleries.
Picture of Clinton Blair King Praying Mantis
Clinton Blair King (American 1901–1979). Praying Mantis, c. 1945. Etching and aquatint. Plate: 277 x 200 mm (10 7/8 x 7 7/8 in.). National Gallery of Art: Reba and Dave Williams Collection, Gift of Reba and Dave Williams, 2008.115.2866.
Picture of Stanley William Hayter Ceres
Stanley William Hayter (British, 1901–1988). Ceres, 1947–48. Engraving, softground etching, and scorper; printed in black (intaglio), and yellow (screen, relief). Plate: 605 x 390 mm. (23 7/8 x 15 3/8 in.). Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes, Buenos Aires.
0 Comments

Voguing with Rashaad Newsome

7/7/2020

0 Comments

 

Ann Shafer

Here’s another one that got away. And at my very last opportunity before leaving the museum, too. Rashaad Newsome’s 2016 set of lithographs were front and center in Tamarind’s booth at the 2017 Baltimore Contemporary Print Fair. The five lithographs are part of a larger project that begins with a performance of five dancers voguing, which was captured by an Xbox Kinect the artist reprogrammed. Five classic voguing dance forms were performed. The energetic swirls of their movements were captured digitally and subsequently translated into both sculptures and prints. Check out this video of Tornado Revlon.
 
In the performance, each dancer—all of whom are well known in the voguing world—performs a different move: a catwalk is performed by Star Revlon; rapid hand movements are performed by Tornado Revlon; duck walking is performed by Justin Monster Labeija; spin dips are performed by Davon Amazon; and floor work is performed by Jamel Prodigy. For the Tamarind lithographs, the digitally tracked movements are printed in different colors, and a tiny plastic body part that indicates which part was tracked is collaged onto each print. They are 29 ¾ x 42 inches each. I knew they would both have wall power and draw people in.
 
Newsome’s work looks at agency and privilege, asking who gets it, when, and why. Vogue balls, events that became widely known through the 1990 film Paris is Burning, is currently the subject of an FX series called Pose, which is streaming on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and elsewhere. I imagine that people in the voguing world have mixed feelings about being put under a microscope and portrayed by actors, particularly since vogue balls have always been recognized as safe spaces for Black and queer people. But that moniker “safe space” implies outsiders aren’t welcome. What do you do when Hollywood comes calling?
 
Newsome’s performance regains agency for the performers themselves (Newsome is a part of the community) and brings it to the fine art world. Just as balls are safe spaces, I would postulate that artmaking is a safe space, too. In their need to investigate themes, problems, and ideas deeply, artists must have their own safe spaces where ideas are put through the conceptual sausage grinder and are transformed into something that starts conversations and spurs thinking and feeling. I like the parallels.
 
You may recall I love the idea of taking dance/movement to the walls of a gallery (see my post about Trisha Brown). Works that cross disciplines have always interested me. But also because performance art is difficult to collect because of its ephemerality, I appreciate creative ways of capturing it. Just as Stan Shellabarger’s walking book (see earlier post) was the product of its own creation, Newsome’s prints capture performance through digital tracking technology. I am not particularly interested in performance art through documentary photographs. Newsome’s tracked movements translated into a jumble of frenetic energy are more evocative of the performance than any photograph could ever be.
 
I thought it would be a great fit for the collection. Truthfully, I can’t recall which straw man quashed the acquisition. While I got used to disappointments over the years, I can still conjure the feeling of frustration. I used to always say: “I should have been a collector.” Oh well, guess I’ll just keep writing about it.
 
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Five multi-color lithographs with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet (each): 29 3/4 x 42 inches
 
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
Catwalk (Star Revlon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 
Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches

Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
Hands (Tornado Revlon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 
Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches
 
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
Duck Walking (Juston Monster Labeija), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 
Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches
 
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
Spin Dips (Davon Amazon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 
Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches
 
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979)
Published by Tamarind Institute
Floor Performance (Jamel Prodigy), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 
Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting
Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's prints, FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. FIVE SFMOMA, 2016. Five multi-color lithographs with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet (each): 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's print from FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. Catwalk (Star Revlon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 . Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's print from FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. Hands (Tornado Revlon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 . Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's print from FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. Duck Walking (Juston Monster Labeija), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016. Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's print from FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. Spin Dips (Davon Amazon), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016 . Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
Picture of Rashaad Newsome's print from FIVE SFMOMA, 2016
Rashaad Newsome (American, born 1979). Published by Tamarind Institute. Floor Performance (Jamel Prodigy), from the portfolio FIVE SFMOMA, 2016. Color lithograph with 3D-printed and collage elements; and silver-leaf or pearlescent dusting. Sheet: 29 3/4 x 42 inches.
0 Comments

From the streets of Ferguson, All Hands on Deck by Damon Davis

7/4/2020

0 Comments

 

Ann Shafer

Recently I was google-alerted to an ARTNews article about the Baltimore Museum of Art’s recent round of contemporary acquisitions, which, during its “year of the woman,” are all by women, mostly of color. Most of the artists are likely unfamiliar to you—they were to me. Let me be clear: I applaud the effort; it’s all good. But it made me think back to all the acquisitions meetings during which I proposed works of art only to be turned down because the artists were unknown to my colleagues. That reason to say no, “I’ve never heard of them,” made me mentally design a pie chart. There is a narrow slice of pie that represents contemporary artists my colleagues were interested in, and then there is the rest of the pie filled with artists making meaningful work. They just aren’t represented by Hauser & Wirth, Gagosian, or David Zwirner. I once was told: “There is a difference between contemporary art and art made today.” I always felt this was seriously shortsighted.

This points to the beauty of prints and other works on paper since they are considerably more affordable than paintings, sculpture, installations, video art, and such. The price point of paintings, etc., is often a stretch for all but the best endowed museums, and the ability to acquire these kind of objects is limited. Whereas the curators in these areas must choose VERY carefully, curators of works on paper have it easier in collecting outside the sliver of pie that the contemporary curators are held to. The print curator is always thinking about the content and usefulness of a particular object rather than whether it’s by a superstar artist (at least I am).

Over the years, there have been quite a few works I failed to get into the collection. I have never forgotten them.

One of the ones that got away was close enough that we brought it into the museum for consideration. (Usually if it was a no, the no came long before we brought works in.) It was a portfolio of prints by Damon Davis called All Hands on Deck, 2015. Here’s the backstory. Davis is a native of East St. Louis. Following the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, on August 9, 2014, and events that followed—peaceful protests that turned ugly—Davis took photographs of the hands of a variety of protesters up, in a turnabout of gesture. Rather than hands up as surrender, they are hands up in protest. The photographs were printed out on large sheets and wheat pasted onto the boarded-up storefronts along West Florissant Avenue (with the permission of the store owners), which had become ground zero of the protests.

Subsequently, Davis worked with Wildwood Press’ Maryanne Simmons to create a fine art edition of seven pairs of hands. The moment I saw the announcement of its publication, I fired off an inquiry about the portfolio. It seemed like a no-brainer for the Baltimore Museum given the city’s unrest following the death of Freddie Gray in April 2015, less than a year after Michael Brown’s death. Talk about parallels. (Susan Tallman wrote an excellent article on Davis’ portfolio in Art in Print, which you can find here.)

When the prints arrived, my colleagues took issue with the quality of the images. Davis had retained the pixilation and choppiness of the edges from the wheat paste posters. I explained that Davis had photoshopped the images quickly in an effort to get them up on storefronts and had decided to retain that same look in the fine art edition. I had absolutely no doubt that they would look fantastic on the wall—in curator parlance we would say they have wall power. Even better, they are both specific to Ferguson and universal. They stand as a monument to protests against police brutality across the country and they are as powerful today as they were in 2015.

I regret my failure for the collection. And even worse: we had full funding for the portfolio from a donor.

Damon Davis (American, born 1985)
Published by Wildwood Press
All Hands on Deck, 2015
Portfolio of seven lithographs
Sheet (each): 813 x 1232 (32 x 48 ½ in.)
Picture of Damon Davis, All Hands on Deck, 2015
Damon Davis (American, born 1985), published by Wildwood Press. All Hands on Deck, 2015. Portfolio of seven lithographs. Sheet (each): 813 x 1232 (32 x 48 ½ in.).
Picture of Damon Davis in Ferguson, MO, 2014.
Damon Davis in Ferguson, MO, with wheat-pasted posters.
Picture od Damon Davis' posters in Ferguson, MO, 2014.
Damon Davis' wheat-pasted posters in Ferguson, MO, 2014.
Picture of Wildwood Press' booth at Seattle Art Fair.
Wildwood Press' booth at the Seattle Art Fair.
Picture of Damon Davis' portfolio on view at the Mitchell Museum at Cedarhurst, 2016.
Damon Davis' portfolio on view at the Mitchell Museum at Cedarhurst, 2016.
0 Comments

    Ann's art blog

    A small corner of the interwebs to share thoughts on objects I acquired for the Baltimore Museum of Art's collection, research I've done on Stanley William Hayter and Atelier 17,  experiments in intaglio printmaking, and the Baltimore Contemporary Print Fair.

    Archives

    May 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    August 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020

    Categories

    All
    Albrecht Durer
    Alison Saar
    Alternate Realities
    American Modernism
    Amy Cutler
    Amze Emmons
    Andrew Raftery
    An-My Le
    Annalise Gratovich
    Ann Hamilton
    Ann Shafer
    Antoine Masson
    Ants
    Aquatint
    Art
    Art History
    Artist's Books
    Asa Cheffetz
    Astrid Bowlby
    Atelier 17
    Atelier Contrepoint
    Baltimore Museum Of Art
    Baptiste Debombourg
    Bill Thompson
    B.J.O. Nordfeldt
    Carolina Nitsch
    Carrie Mae Weems
    Caspar David Friedrich
    Cassandre
    Catalyst Contemporary
    Charles Demuth
    Charles Gaines
    Charles White
    Chitra Ganesh
    Claude Flight
    Claude Mellan
    Claude Monet
    Clinton Blair King
    Crown Point Press
    CRW Nevinson
    Curator
    Curator's Choice
    Cyril Power
    Damon Arhos
    Damon Davis
    Dario Robleto
    David Avery
    Deb Sokolow
    Denise Tassin
    Derrick Adams
    Desiree Hayter
    Diana Scultori
    Diane Victor
    Diego Velasquez
    Drawing
    Drypoint
    Durer
    Earthworms
    Edgar Allen Poe
    Edouard Manet
    Edward Hopper
    Elisabetta Sirani
    Ellen MacNary
    Engraving
    Enrique Chagoya
    Ernst Ludwig Kirchner
    Etc
    Etching
    Etching Revival
    Evan Lindquist
    Excudit
    Félix Bracquemond
    Felix-Hilaire Buhot
    Fiona Banner
    Force: Upsetting Rape Culture
    Fred Becker
    Full Circle
    Gabor Peterdi
    Gallery Neptune & Brown
    Geertruydt Roghman
    Grosvenor School
    Harry Belafonte
    Hector Saunier
    Hendrick Goltzius
    Horst Janssen
    Intaglio
    Iona Rozeal Brown
    Jacob Hashimoto
    James Barry
    James Siena
    James Stroud
    James Tissot
    Japonisme
    Jed Smalley
    Jim Dine
    John Alexander
    John Baldessari
    John Taylor Arms
    John White Abbott
    Jonathan Novack
    Joscelyn Gardner
    Joseph Hirsch
    Kathe Kollwitz
    Landscape
    Las Meninas
    Leo Katz
    Letterio Calapai
    Lill Tschudi
    Linoleum Cut
    Lithograph
    London
    London Original Print Fair
    Louis Auguste Lepere
    Lovis Corinth
    Ludovic Lepic
    Marchel Duchamp
    Marion MacPhee
    Mark Thomas Gibson
    Martin Lewis
    Martin Mazorra
    Martin Wilner
    Mary Cassatt
    Maurice Sanchez
    Max Beckman
    Max Klinger
    Michael Waugh
    Mixografia
    Monoprint
    Multiples
    Nicola Lopez
    Nicolas Mignard
    Oil
    Oil Painting
    Pace Prints
    Painting
    Parastou Forouhar
    Paul Fusco
    Paulson Fontaine Press
    Peter Blum
    Peter Milton
    Photograph
    Photogravure
    Picturesque
    Piet Mondrian
    Poster
    Press
    Print
    Printmaking
    Rachel Perry
    Raphaelle Peale
    Rashaad Newsome
    Raven Chacon
    Raymond Pettibon
    Reginald Marsh
    Rembrandt
    Richard Diebenkorn
    Richard Long
    Robert Hills
    Roderick Mead
    Romanticism
    Sascha Braunig
    Sculpsit
    Sculpture
    Sebastian Black
    Shahzia Sikander
    Sherrie Levine
    Shu-lin Chen
    Simultaneous Color Printing
    Slavery
    Stanley William Hayter
    Stan Shellabarger
    Steve DiBenedetto
    Sue Fuller
    Susan Harbage Page
    Susan Sheehan Gallery
    Tamarind Institute
    Tandem Press
    Tauba Auerbach
    Terron Sorrells
    The Multiple Store
    The Old Print Shop
    Thomas Thistlewood
    Toshio Sasaki
    Transferware
    Trenton Doyle Hancock
    Trisha Brown
    Tru Ludwig
    Turner
    Ursula Fookes
    Victoria & Albert
    Victoria Burge
    Viscosity
    Vladimir Cybil Charlier
    Walton Ford
    Wangechi Mutu
    Watercolor
    Watercolour
    Werner Drewes
    West Coast Print Fair
    Western Exhibitions
    Whitfield Lovell
    Wildwood Press
    William Kentridge
    William Villalongo
    Wingate Studio
    Woodblock Print
    Woodcut
    Wood Engraving
    Works On Paper
    Yinka Shonibare MBE
    Yukinori Yanagi
    Zilda

    RSS Feed

    GO TO TOP OF PAGE

      Sign up here for alerts.

    Subscribe to Newsletter

What our Platemark listeners are saying

Way up there in the podcast Top Ten, IMHO.  A great series and engaging leaders.
----- M.A.D.

Contact Us

    Subscribe Today!

Submit
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Consulting
  • The Curator's Choice Podcast
  • The Curator's Choice Episodes
  • Platemark Podcast
  • Platemark Episodes
  • HoP episode transcripts
  • News
  • Projects
  • CV
  • About