Back to me

The Seattle PI's sharp art critic Regina Hackett takes me to task for my description of Jacob Lawrence a few days ago while I was in the process of delivering an irate and foul-mouthed rebuke on how Lawrence was labeled. Read her post here.

And in retrospect, that description obvioulsy delivered more than intended, which wasn't a character attack on Lawrence, but simply my recollections, observations and opinions from the perspective of a young art student about one of his teachers. All in a handful of words selected at the speed of light to be complimentary, or so I thought!

The comments about Lawrence as a teacher - especially coming from me, and let me tell you I was a beauty of an asshole student: demanding, combative, loud-mouthed, challenging, feh! - would essentially be how (unfortunately) I would describe practically any of my art professors at the time and somehow still translating to 2007 - from the eyes and memories of a juvenile art student - not just to Lawrence but probably could apply also to Alden Mason, Frances Calentano, Everett DuPen (who was very gentle) and others from that lively period at the UW.

Perhaps I should have used the adjective "difficult" (in fact I have corrected my post to say just that). I did say that he was also a "brilliant teacher" to others, as a way - I thought - of showing that I was relating my own biased experience and perspective as a student about a faculty member.

Are there any art students out there who don't think that some of your prefessors are assholes difficult?

All it takes is a B minus and you're doomed, partner!

I also described him as a good drinking buddy - that's a good thing - I think.

I also described him as an opinionated bastard - That was meant as a compliment - I certainly consider myself an opinionated bastard, and Lawrence's opinions, especially when translated to canvas or paper, were what made his work earn him the title of a great artist.

And Hackett is correct: he was also a very generous person; especially with his time and opinions, and even with his artwork (which as I recall used to drive his art dealer crazy).

And a great artist.

PS - Here is an earlier 2007 post on Lawrence where I wrote: "He is/was of one of the most influential and courageous American artists who's never been given a show at the National Gallery of Art."

And here in 2004 I also question why the NGA has ignored Lawrence for so long.

Big changes

I hear that there are big changes coming to the Washington Post. Stay tuned.

It only took them 17 years

A previously unknown painting by Amadeo Modigliani has been discovered.

The "Portrait of a Man" dates back to around 1918, said a Modigliani expert Christian Parisot. It was authenticated after 17 years of expert checkup, Parisot, the director of Modigliani's Rome-based archives, said.

Read the AP story here. Something in the article raised my eyebrows a little: "The canvas measures 46 x 38 cm (18 x 15 inches) and shows an unknown young man. Experts said the oil colors had been watered, a sign that the artist was poor at the time of the work."

I was not aware that oil colors could be "watered." In fact, I'm not aware of any technique where this is even possible.

An oil paint can be stretched and diluted by using a paint thinner, such as turpentine, which is usually the cheapest (and nastiest) thinner around, but unless I missed something in art school, one can't add water to oil paints (especially at the turn of the last century) to stretch the oil paints.

Some "new" modern oil paints can now be diluted with water, and there are some odorless paints thinners out there, but nothing that Amadeo would have had available during his lifetime.

I suspect that the AP article meant to say "diluted" rather than "watered."

Pedantic me.

Moves

Stand by early next week for a major announcement from an important DC area arts venue which is not only relocating but also somewhat re-inventing itself by going back to its solid and independent roots.

This Friday in Philly

Pentimenti Gallery opens its fall season this year with two solo exhibitions of works by Rachel Bone and Kevin Finklea. The exhibitions run through October 27, 2007 and the reception is this Friday, September 28 from 6 - 8 p.m.

Zinger!

Thanks to those of you who brought to my attention Seattle Post-Intelligencer's art critic Regina Hackett's irate post on the exact same point on Jacob Lawrence that made me so exasperated and foul-mouthed here.

Hackett writes:

"The disgrace belongs to the Post. Staff writer Jacqueline Trescott identified Lawrence as "one of the greatest African-American artists of the 20th century."

Aren't we past this? I look forward to the day the Post identifies Jackson Pollock as one of the greatest white artists of the 20th century. Because white appears to be this writer's assumed context, she notes only difference, black as a special case. (Diversity trainers: The Post needs you!)"

But it gets better, after making a good point about using an image of the painting in question for the WaPo article (and a rather weird comment on Mrs. Bush eyeliner), Hackett then writes:

"A smart newspaper would have printed a clear image of the painting and accompanied it with a sidebar by an art critic, covering the information Dangerous Chunky had about its market history as well as an assessment of its merits and its maker's place in history.

Oh wait. I forgot. The Post doesn't have an art critic. It has Blake Gopnik. Jaunty, arrogant and uninformed, he's easily the worst art critic at a major newspaper in the country."

Mamacita!

Did an art critic from a major metropolitan newspaper just call the Washington Post's chief art critic "jaunty, arrogant and uniformed?"

Did she also rank him as "easily the worst art critic at a major newspaper in the country?"

I'm going to have to mull on that for a while.

Trescott Blows It

I started writing this commentary a week ago, when the story was first published in the WaPo, and somehow I didn't publish it as soon as I wrote it, as I was traveling.

And today I came across it again, and it pissed me off even more.

I tend to criticize the WaPo mercilessly for their crappy fine arts coverage, and they generally deserve it. But one constant source of light and enlightment in their shitty fine arts coverage is Jacqueline Trescott.

Trescott usually writes savvy, intelligent words for the WaPo's precious few fine arts Illuminati.

But, in my pedantic view, she really fucked up in this article almost a week ago.

Why?

If you've read my ramblings long enough, then you know that I am not a big fan of artistic segregation.

I don't think that there should be an arts museum just for women, or African-Americans, or Latino/Hispanic Americans.

I think that museums should be driven to include meritable art by artists, regardless of race or ethnicity, who deserve inclusion in a museum collection -- and which should be open to all artists, not just artists of a certain geographic or ethnic presence.

Not guided by percentages or demographics or numbers, but merit, and regardless and in spite of skin color, skin hues, last names, or religion.

And this is where Trescott blows it.

In the article she refers to one of my art school professors and influences as "In its recent renovation of the Green Room, the White House has given a place of honor to a newly acquired masterpiece by Jacob Lawrence, one of the greatest African American artists of the 20th century."

Jacob Lawrence, pen and ink, circa 1980 by F. Lennox Campello
In an Private Collection
In my own personal experience, Jacob Lawrence was pretty close to an asshole difficult as an arts teacher (which sometimes means that he was also a brilliant teacher to students other than me), a pretty good drinking buddy, and an opinionated bastard. But Lawrence and his artwork was also without a doubt (in my opinion) one of the greatest American contributions (and artists) of the 20th century.

Period.

Not "one of the greatest African American artists of the 20th century."

And Mrs. Bush shows some remarkable insight in selecting this work:

It was purchased for $2.5 million at a Christie's auction in May by the White House Acquisition Trust, a privately funded branch of the mansion's historical association. Mrs. Bush had wanted a Lawrence work since a personal friend lent her Lawrence's "To the Defense." It hangs in the Bushes' private dining room. "And because it's on the wall that I look at from my chair in the dining room, I just grew to like Jacob Lawrence more and more," she said.

Bravo to Mrs. Bush - she went with her guts and feelings; Boo-Hoo to Trescott - she went with her hard-wired "formation" in always trying to label Americans.

And I'll keep my own original Jacob Lawrence on my walls, as I have for years since I acquired it in Art School, and refer to him as a great American artist when people ask me about it.

Period.

---

Update: Below is an image of the painting in question - with thanks to Dangerous Chunky.