Ted Henderson Post 5

As Abstract Expressionism was becoming an exceedingly popular form of art in America, a considerably heated debate surfaced concerning the distribution and public display of this art in nations around the globe. On one side of this ongoing argument the belief was asserted that to exhibit the work of this newfound American style of art on a worldwide basis was an effective way to exemplify the artistic freedom and inventiveness that was allowed by and encouraged in the United States. The opposing group in the debate found American Abstract Expressionist art to be vulgar and self-indulgent of the artist, and in fact questioned whether the movement should have even been considered a form of art at all, therefore maintaining that to parade the work of American Abstract Expressionists ‘round the world would give a false representation of American artwork. The reasons for why this type of art could have and did create such a controversy in America during its heyday are complexly rooted within the political goings-on of the time (i.e. The Cold War with Soviet Russia, McCarthyism, just to name a few), and in fact, contain seeming inconsistencies and ironies within themselves.

It has been common throughout history for artists of any kind to desire, work towards, and display artistic and visionary freedom through their work. Certainly, American Abstract Expressionist Art was a movement that displayed much expressive and stylistic freedom on the artist’s part, in most cases the paintings themselves being of nondescript, unrecognizable shapes and forms. American Abstract Expressionism was by all means a very avant-garde form of art, and thus an instant favorite of those artists, museums, patrons, and art fans who shared this vehement belief in the ability of and opportunity for an artist to freely express whatever he or she envisioned. It is of no surprise, then, that during the time of America’s Cold War with then Communist Russia, these creators and supporters of Abstract Expressionist Art felt that a sufficient way to positively compare the amount of creative freedom that America provided its artists with the apparent lack of artistic freedom given to Russian artists by their government was to exhibit the work of this up-and-coming art form in multiple nations around the world. By doing so, in the eyes of those who supported this idea, America would be killing two birds with one stone, not only making known its pride in the many freedoms its inhabitants are granted, but by comparison, making light of just how little freedom an artist had with their own work in a communist nation such as Russia. To show the work of this new American art form to the rest of the world was, thus, a way to sort of “stick it to” America’s enemies in places of high power over Russia at the time. Again, American Abstract Expressionist Art was deemed by many as the perfect tool to take advantage of with the above goals in mind because (according to Eva Cockcroft), “It was the perfect contrast to ‘The regimented, traditional, and narrow’ nature of ‘social realism,’” was, “...new, fresh, and creative,” and, “Artistically avant-garde and original…”

In stark contrast to the group that pushed for the worldwide display of American Abstract Expressionist art during the nation’s Cold War with Russia, their existed at the same time a demographic of Americans who believed that the exhibition of the works of American Abstract Expressionist artists in various nations was a false representation of the skill and vision of “true” American artists, and thus a danger to America’s cultural reputation throughout the world. In her piece, Art and Politics in Cold War America, Jane de Hart Mathews describes this more conservative group’s view of modernist art in America during the 1940s and 50s: “…they demanded that works by such artists, no matter how innocuous the subject matter, be banned from publicly supported art institutions and most especially from federally funded cultural exchanges… they attacked modern art itself as an instrument of Communist subversion in terms that blended fact with fantasy.” This group maintained that the images found in Abstract Expressionist Art were incomprehensible by the general public, and therefore useless in portraying any sort of traditional world and moral views, and in fact, because of this seeming rejection of traditional standards, were intentionally going against and, “…threatening ultimately all established norms and values,” (Jane de Hart Mathews, Art and Politics in Cold War America). In essence, those Americans who held more conservative and traditionalist views of art and culture found modern art to be a less noteworthy and less skillful form of creativity, and thus were strongly opposed to such, “incomprehensible, ugly, and absurd” (New York Journal American) art being displayed in American exhibitions throughout the world, for it would surely, in their opinion, give citizens of those nations the idea that America was proud of nursing such an artistic style. In the words of Mississippi’s John Rankin, this modernist art was, “….sent out to mislead the rest of the world as to what America is like.” There existed a blatant irony within the argument of those on this more traditionalist side of the debate concerning the distribution of American modern art during the Cold War. It should be noted that many persons of whom this group was made up were also those who held very conservative views concerning communism and the Soviets, being strongly against this political group, belief system, and its possible spread throughout multiple nations. The irony or inconsistency within the traditionalist argument is that, though they openly expressed their vast disapproval of Communists and their ways, they shared this hatred of Expressionist Art, and in fact most all modern art for that matter, with the Communist leaders of Russia. Such avant-garde styles of art were completely banned in Soviet Russia at the time, much in the same way that this group of Americans not only wished to cease all distribution and display of modern American art worldwide, but, as many of them explained, would have liked to have ceased the public display of this art in American museums and exhibits as well. Interesting.

1.)http://www.poster.net/pollock-jackson/pollock-jackson-composition-7900450.jpg

The above link is to an image of Jackson Pollock’s Composition. Pollock was a prominent American Abstract Expressionist in the 1950s, and Composition is a prime example of his very abstract, avant-garde work. The piece is composed (no pun intended) of a myriad of bright colors and rather amorphous shapes/designs. It is a painting that was undoubtedly praised by those who believed in and fought for the public and international display of artwork that exemplified artistic freedom and a sort of stretching of arts traditional norms, as this is quite precisely what Pollock’s work did. It is equally assumable that those who more firmly believed in an artist’s conforming to traditional standards found this piece, as well of much of Pollock’s work, to be a diversion from that which makes art beautiful, and thus unworthy of being displayed in art exhibits, either domestic or foreign, for the possibility of it giving a false representation of the quality of American art.

3.) http://www.yale.edu/publicart/images/full/calligraphgee.jpg

This is a link to an image of a sculpture by Abstract Expressionist, Herbert Ferber. The sculpture is titled Calligraph Gee III, and understandably so, being that the sweeps and contours of the shapes which comprise it are visually similar to calligraphy. The sculpture might have been considered beautiful for its stylistic grace by supporters of Abstract Expressionism. On the opposing side of the fence, the work may have been looked upon scornfully by those who fancied more traditional forms of painting and sculpture for the piece’s lack of realism (the shape did not represent anything which could be pointed out in the “real world”). Such differentiating views of modern art were not reserved only for canvas paintings, but in fact could have been, and were debated over with equal conviction even in the case of sculptures such as Ferber’s.

3.) http://z.about.com/d/gonyc/1/0/k/F/moma-31.JPG

The above painting, Woman 1, a work of Willem de Kooning’s, is another noteworthy example of American Abstract Expressionism. The painting, like Jackson Pollock’s Composition, is made up of drastically contrasting colors and decidedly abnormal shapes and brush strokes, and thus would most likely have received a similar reaction from both sides of the modern art debate as described previously in the case of Pollock’s work. One major difference between Woman 1 and Composition is that the latter displays only shapes unrecognizable in reality, while de Kooning’s painting, holding true to its title, displays the image of a woman, distorted as she may appear. Though it may be assumed that, because of its being at least a little closer to reality than Pollock’s Composition, Woman 1 might have received slightly less severe criticism from those belonging to the traditionalist school of thought, the fact that de Kooning’s painting depicted an image recognizable in reality (a woman), might have actually caused it to have to endure stronger criticism, at least by some. As opposed to being deemed a “childish doodle,” a flattering title which Wheeler Williams so eloquently labeled Pollock’s Cathedral with, a painting such as Woman 1 might have been instead assessed as a grotesque artistic disfigurement of the human form, and worthy of nothing less than sincere disdain for its display of a human figure in an intentionally imperfect, and perhaps, at least in the opinion of some, degrading manner.

4.) http://www.borghi.org/images/MBNB002.jpg

Norman Bluhm’s 1961 painting, Untitled, is of the same breed of works as those by Jackson Pollock with its rough, seemingly unrefined and undeniably abstract nature. Often, in their personal judgment of paintings such as Bluhm’s Untitled, those who found such modern art styles to be unworthy of being called “true art” made the assertion that anybody could create this type of artwork, regardless of their level of natural skill or training. Obviously, those of the era who supported, studied, and created Abstract Expressionist Art would scoff at such a claim, maintaining, though the “untrained” eye might see such modern art as thoughtlessly created, that in fact, to painters such as Bluhm and Pollock, every stroke (or drip in Pollock’s case) had distinct meaning, and was carefully pre-planned by its creator.

5.) http://americanart.si.edu/images/1971/1971.259_1b.jpg

Above is another untitled work, this time by the abstract expressionist painter, Franz Kline. This painting, of the five mentioned, perhaps is the most seemingly arbitrary by nature. Its overall feel is quite messy, and its contents include a background consisting of stark yellows, reds, blues and greens, while its “centerpiece” seems to be a black figure which could be loosely labeled as a rectangle. Certainly, a piece such as Kline’s Untitled goes to the extreme of artistic freedom in its abstraction, and is therefore supporting the visionary freedom of artists, no matter how abnormal or edgy that vision may be. On the other hand, it is somewhat understandable why one with more traditional beliefs regarding art form might see Kline’s painting and find in it nothing more than the purposeless slapping of paint onto a canvas in its creator’s hopes of creating something “unique” or avant-garde. Thus, work such as Franz Kline’s Untitled raises the infinitely debated, and perhaps equally unanswerable question, “What is art?” That is to ask, how far can one digress from the structural formalities of visual art before he/she is no longer creating a piece of artwork, and is instead acting entirely out of theoretical and philosophical self-indulgence? There is certainly no clear cut line that can be drawn (again, no pun intended) between these two possibilities, and thus the debate which was prominent in America during the Cold War, and has been equally fussed over in many other time periods in many other cultures, will forever be argued over by art critics, observers, fans, patrons, and artists alike. Those who believe in absolute artistic freedom of expression will err on the side of art being whatever the artist envisions and creates, while those who hold the traditional and realist aspects of art in higher value will be more likely to scrutinize and judge art based on the formal and technical training/style that was utilized in its creation.

Citation:

1.) Abstract Expressionism, Weapon of the Cold War, Eva Cockcroft

2.) Art and Politics in Cold War America, Jane de Hart Mathews

3.) Smithsonian American Art Museum, http://americanart.si.edu/search/search_artworks1.cfm?StartRow=1&ConID=2661&format=short&db=onlyart&LastName=&FirstName=&Title=&Accession=&Keyword

4.) Mark Borghi Fine Art Inc., Available Works: Norman Bluhm, http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.borghi.org/images/MBNB002.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.borghi.org/american/MBNB_index.htm&h=587&w=429&sz=55&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=EalRQYDa5h4lLM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=99&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dnorman%2Bbluhm%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

5.) About.com: New York City for Visitors, Heather Cross, copyright 2007 About, Inc., A part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved. http://z.about.com/d/gonyc/1/0/k/F/moma-31.JPG&imgrefurl=http://gonyc.about.com/od/photogalleries/ig/The-MoMA-Collection/Woman-1-by-Willem-de-Kooning.htm&h=500&w=391&sz=256&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=AwOZyE2KxOAQoM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=102&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwillem%2Bde%2Bkooning%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

6.) Postershop.co.uk, http://www.poster.net/pollock-jackson/pollock-jackson-composition-7900450.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.postershop.co.uk/Pollock-Jackson/Pollock-Jackson-Composition-7900450.html&h=500&w=390&sz=59&hl=en&start=5&tbnid=2prI0OE3BwH3fM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=101&prev=/images%3Fq%3Djackson%2Bpollock%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

7.) Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, NY, www.brooklynart.org, A Voice of Conscience: The Prints of Jack Levine, curated by Marilyn Kushner, http://www.tfaoi.com/newsm1/n1m114.htm, Copyright 1996-1999 Traditional Fine Art Online, Inc. All rights reserved.

8.) Public Art at Yale, http://www.yale.edu/publicart/images/full/calligraphgee.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.yale.edu/publicart/calligraphgee.html&h=355&w=251&sz=38&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=79V1spGt98r_AM:&tbnh=121&tbnw=86&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dherbert%2Bferber%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN