haberarts.com
art reviews from around new york

Hope springs eternal. Each year the Governors Island Arts Center does its level best to fill the summer doldrums, and one can always hope.

At the top of stairs from the café, flags displays red roses and a message of “Yes,” while a bedsheet beside them shows what I took for a dreamer. Who would dare disturb its sleep, even for art? But then, as the show’s title has it, “Hope Is a Discipline,” just this summer through September 29. Bread and Puppet Theater, which made both works, has been at it now for almost sixty years.

A display case tells its story. It began as a cross between activism and Off-Off-Broadway (or maybe Off-Off-Off Broadway) theater without ever quite ascending to the pantheon of performance art. Books and magazines speak of puppet making, but also justice and a dance of death for the victims of “Assistant Mass Murderer” Antony Blinkin, the secretary of state. I hardly know whether to call it dogmatism or discipline. And still Adama Delphine Fawundu, another contributor, can remember When the Spirits Dance. Twin tapestries drape onto the floor with pigments from Sierra Leone, herbs from Mali, “whispers” from Africa, and shells from Cuba, South Carolina, and Maine.

Africans, she insists “built this place,” which must have taken discipline and persistence. Still, hope for the future can be hard to sustain. Maggie Wong sets out a drafting table, painted an acid red and with a red blanket trailing behind it. It could be her work table, for a work in progress, but newsprint has already filled it with devotion and anger. But then a bedsheet smeared with house paint sounds discomforting enough on its own. Who can ensure that those dreams will not be nightmares?

Hope may envision a future, but the entire show looks back, much like the display case. Suneil Sanzgiri sees his video trilogy as a conversation with his father. And it, too, is cautious when it comes to hope. Grainy footage shows a protest in India, but also seemingly purposeless walks through dim corridors and closed courtyards. A second video, an “experimental documentary” by Kyori Jeon, bears Flesh-Witness. Solitary standing figures could be proud or weary, even as others help their companions onto a platform and wave their banners to those who can see.

Hope may be more evident in a second show sharing the space. When “Tropical Frequencies” looks back, it sees a continuing tradition. It is hardly the first to focus on Caribbean art and the Afro-Caribbean diaspora, nor the most memorable. It does, though, have an insistent interplay between painting and assemblage. It becomes an interplay between African American faces and ephemera as well. Quiara Torres sets a portrait within a pearly lamp or cage, where one can feel the confinement and almost smell an unseen candle.

The portrait has its echoes in flat, earthy reds for a pregnant woman by Bony Ramirez—or a standing figure by Emily Manwaring, both with an overlay of shells. Still more shells hang from chains for Ramirez, along with coconuts. Are they relentlessly optimistic? The Kiss of Protection from Mosie Romney sure sounds reassuring, but Cheyenne Julien dots her figure with small red nails. I exited not by the main entrance, but back down those stairs toward the ferry, leaving the flowers and bedsheet behind. I might have abandoned all hope.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.

It was Christmas in July at the Morgan Library. No sooner did the small lobby gallery open with the Eveillard gift of drawings from several restless centuries than Santa was back in town. Eighty drawings from the Clement C. Moore collection are a promised gift—but more on him and Santa in a moment.

It offers a chance to assess just what the great age of Dutch art meant for the Dutch. It may not be a compendium of stellar names and stellar prints, but that seems only right for an emerging nation. It suggests a collective enterprise tied up in the Dutch republic while reaching across Europe with its influence, at the Morgan through September 22.

Moore, I can only presume, descends from Clement Clarke Moore, although the Morgan does not say so. It must wish him to stand on his own as a scholar and now donor. The older Moore, of course, wrote “A Visit from Saint Nicholas,” about “the night before Christmas,” and that seems right, too. No one did more to convert a religious holiday to a secular one—and a gift to all mankind to a bag of toys for children. (Trust me, a Jew who benefited.) And no nation did more to assert a secular purpose for art.

It stays all the truer to that purpose in drawings. In The Hundred Guilder Print (nicknamed for its one-timer cost and extravagance), Rembrandt shows Jesus preaching, healing the sick, and reaching out to all. A quick sketch isolates a sick woman and a still more haunting face. The poor really will always be with us. A boy from Adriaen van de Velde, who could easily be their companion, catches what rest he can leaning on the jug that must have helped put him to sleep and given him what small pleasures he could claim. The angel of the Annunciation for Samuel van Hoogstraten seems to have dropped by just to say hello.

The show opens with Mannerism in the late 1500s, to show the emergence of a new art and a new century, although dates jump wildly back and forth. It has an alcove for what a past show at the Morgan (also with work from Moore) called “Rembrandt’s World,” but with more of his school than the man itself. It cares more for results than for chronology or artist, in an arrangement largely by subject. That includes France and Italy, where Cornelis van Poelenburch found inspiration for Dutch landscape in towering, glistening rocks. It includes close observation of butterflies and tulips, with none of the moralizing in still life as fresh but dying for Flemish artists of the time. It includes the Flemish themselves, like Jacob Jordaens, Peter Paul Rubens, and Anthony van Dyck.

Mostly, though, it describes a land and people. It unfolds during their long war of independence from Spain, but without a battle in sight. The royal fleet puts on a show in panorama, but not half so memorably as fishermen for Hendrick Avercamp, a lone man crossing a bridge for Guercino (an Italian), or the banks of a stream for Jacob van Ruisdael. A Roman general comes home to a public welcome, but it could be just another village festival. And gatherings are everywhere, only not so easy to tell from chance encounters and private outings. Hendrick Goltzius fills a sheet with nudes, as prelude to painted myth. They might have gathered for an afternoon in the sun.

Individuals come off as smart, casual, and vulnerable, with not a touch of Flemish bravura. A man from Peter Levy, quite possibly himself, might be dreaming or showing off. He also shares his dignity with herdsmen for Paulus Potter and Jan Lievens, who also supply the herd. The nation was built on their collective labor. It was built, too, on wind power, but windmills are just one landmark in a layered landscape. Aelbert Cuyp uses lighter strokes in chalk to deepen and distinguish the layers.

You can, if you like, tease out how he and others constructed a world. Esaias van de Velde replaces the aerial perspective of Harvesters for Pieter Bruegel with a close view. Moore has continued to collect past the Baroque, too, and a postscript carries him through Thomas Gainsborough, John Constable, and J. M. W. Turner with their greater confidence and drama. Then again, you can stick with the spirit of a plainer art. When Vincent van der Vinne sketches the Grote Kerk in Haarlem, he leaves family emblems on pillars at peculiar angles. The might show a lesser artist at work, human neglect, or the ravages of war.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.

“Crafting Modernity” tells a familiar story, about a world torn apart and renewed by Depression and world war. Only one thing: this time it unfolds with a tapestry, a table, and a chair—and on another continent entirely. Make yourself at home.

You know the story, about modern life and modern art. As recovery looked more and more urgent and more possible, it brought not a revival of the gilded age, but a home life that many more could call their own. Middle-class comforts included much that could not have existed before the twentieth century. Renowned artists and designers embraced the cause, with furnishings that many more could afford, without the stifling air of Edwardian wallpaper. In no time, capitalism made that cause a consumer revolution, as craft gave way to new technologies and new pressures to spend. If it thus took back its own promises, it sound surprisingly like change today—only centered not on Asia, Silicon Valley, or Madison Avenue, but Latin America at the Museum of Modern Art, through September 22.

If you have heard this story before, it may well be at MoMA as well. In 2015 it presented the same four decades of Latin American architecture, ending around 1980. You may recognize Oscar Niemeyer and Lina Bo Bardi, whose architecture appears along with others projected on the walls, as a backdrop for what might have stood inside. Here, though, they contribute furniture—Niemeyer a low table, suitable for stacking or a communal meal on the floor. Bo Bardi brings quite an array of chairs. Roberto Burle Marx, who with Niemeyer created buildings for the new capital city of Brasilia, has a painting, like a sketch toward the new interior design.

The museum is out to extend what one even means by design. Gego appears not for her wire sculpture, but for wiry white diagonals on a huge hanging. Olga de Amaral, also with art of the Andes now at the Met, and Cynthia Sargent display fabric as well—and I also work this together with an earlier report on that show at the Met as a longer review and my latest upload. Here, though, it appears not as art for itself but tapestry for the home. The filmed architecture, in turn, sticks to homes, not to massive public projects. It is remaking modern life one family at a time.

Still, it is remaking private life in public. Chairs appear by far the most often, not bedroom furniture, and films focus on exteriors and common spaces. The International Style favored slim columns and glass houses, which allow one to look out on nature, but also allow others to look in. The curators, Ana Elena Mallet and Amanda Forment, feature just six countries, to give their distinct traditions their due. At least one artist claims to draw on pre-Colombian art, but be careful. One might just as well speak of global art in a newly global economy.

A long wall diagrams each country’s social networks, like maps of the art world for Mark Lombardi. They testify instead to interactions and displacement. Naturally they include Josef Albers, Anni Albers, and others from the Bauhaus, but also Alexander Calder, Black Mountain College in New England, and ever so much more. In the show as a whole, artists can trace their origins to a dozen European nations and the United States. But you have heard that story before, too, about refugees from fascism who helped create postwar art. No wonder furniture had an eye to portability and reassembly in the face of exile—like Niemeyer’s Modulo, a “puzzle chair,” or lounge furniture from Roberto Matta that fits neatly together as a square.

Assembly and repetition also encourage the shift from craft to brand names. Antonio Bonet, Juan Kurchan, and Jorge Ferrari Hardoy (later Grupo Austral) gave their initials to the B.K.P. chair, a descendant of the Marcel Breuer chair with its tube frame and suspended leather. They conceived it not in Argentina, but in the Paris studio of Le Corbusier—and copies quickly entered Fallingwater, the Frank Lloyd Wright house, and the Museum of Modern Art. International enough for you? MoMA provided another spur to invention with a 1940 design competition. Several of the chairs look out on the museum’s sculpture garden now.

Both threads, craft and commerce, offer surprises. Other brand names include a logo for Olivetti typewriters. Ceramics, as with Colette Boccari, may depart from a perfect circle, as if fresh from the oven, without losing their subtle color. High tech can have an industrial look, too, like flashlights by Emilio Ambasz that could pass in reproduction for pipes. Much the same red plastic enlivens a bar cart, an ice bucket, and a TV. Sit down, turn on, and pour yourself a drink.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.

For just twelve months, in a more optimistic decade, nations came together in a spirit of peace, understanding, and mass entertainment. It was the 1964 World’s Fair, and it left in its wake the New York City pavilion, today the Queens Museum.

Now the museum is once again suitable for children, with a place to add their own drawing at the end of a long brush. Thanks to Cas Holman, the paper, with a bump in the middle, doubles as a sliding pond. Childhood memories continue, along with the optimism, with Cameron A. Granger, Catalina Schliebener Muñoz, and Nsenga Knight. Together, they remember the divisions that a world’s fair must overcome. So through September 22 does Lyle Ashton Harris. His Shadow Works pick up where he left off at the Studio Museum in Harlem in 2011—and I refer you to my review then for more.

I came as a child to the World’s Fair for the rides, and I would not have settled for a slide. Still, grown-ups get to draw and to slide, too. They can also appreciate the curved wall outside the museum’s scale model of New York. As ever, the side facing out serves as a ground for large-scale work, and Caroline Kent makes the most of it. As I reported before, she mixes painted shapes with relief elements against black through December 29. They play gently but firmly with the flatness of the wall.

Not everyone looks back fondly to the fair. Barely a year ago, Charisse Pearlina Weston saw its raid on Flushing Meadow Park as coming at the expense of its neighbors and the Queens Museum as forever tainted. Perhaps, but a black community has long since given way not to state and corporate interests, but to Latin Americans and Mets fans. And the museum does its best to respond to the diversity with its artists in residence. This year’s crop does come in peace. For them all, art is a family affair as well as a global one, through January 19.

For Cameron A. Granger, it is downright childish. Remember when “I come in peace” was a stock line in approaching space aliens? A 2022 Studio Museum artist in residence, Granger sees a tool for the “liberation for black communities” in video games. I might believe it had I not seen too many gamers buried in their cell phones on the subway out. I might believe it, too, if a nook dedicated to a half-forgotten black magician had a few tricks up its sleeve.

Catalina Schliebener Muño gives her Buenos Vecinos, or “good neighbors,” a politically correct history. She also throws a party, although her painted birthday gift comes in plain brown paper. She has blob-like sculpture to brighten the affair in red and a mural featuring Donald Duck and Goofy. They serve, she swears, America’s global interests, if only for children. A second mural has a row of cartoon birds, in profile and of increasing height. Could it be her take on a much-derided image—the passage from apes on all fours to men?

Nsenga Knight mixes memories with a welcome to all. Is this a tough time to speak of peace, with the right wing in Israel and supporters of Hamas out to wipe out their enemies? Knight notes that the United Nations met in this very building when it settled on states for both sides. A 2017 Drawing Center artist in residence, she recreates settings in which she has lived, including a table set for a meal and cushions for eating while seated, Islamic style, on the floor. Both lie past glass patio doors looking out and looking in. Painted paper floats overhead as paragliders and parachutes.

Knight calls herself an Afro-Caribbean American Muslim. She cannot speak for both sides in a bitter war, and she does not pretend otherwise. She could easily have denounced the UN and its resolutions. She might see bitter echoes of Palestinian refugees in community displacement for the World’s Fair. Instead, she takes the UN’s motto, “Peace Through Understanding,” as her own. Art takes understanding, too.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.

Ask an artist about what went into a work, and you may hear quite a story about myths and memories. You will have your own stories at that—of what you have experienced, seen in the art you love, heard from your parents, and read. And curators attuned to matters of gender and culture eat it up.

Ask again, though, about what the artist had in mind, and you may hear something far more modest. I just want to make art, some might say, to see its color and the light. The seven artists in “Overflow, Afterglow” get to have it both ways, the stories and the light, and the Jewish Museum wants it all. It sees, as the show’s subtitle has it, “Chromatic Figuration,” through September 15, and it sees a trend. With two artists in their mid-twenties and just one much past forty, it hopes to lead the way to the future. But will the afterglow fade all too quickly, and is the overflow a bit much?

Chromatic figuration may sound more like color charts and color wheels than an afterglow. It may not, in fact, sound much like figuration. Yet the wall between abstraction and representation has been crumbling for years now, as geometry has given way to excess. With “Overflow, Afterglow,” regular shapes are nowhere in sight, but everything else is, and the break with Minimalism’s white cube begins with the installation. Each artist gets a bay of angled walls, each at a different angle and painted a different color. Together, they fill a single room, with sightlines from one to next.

Figuration, too, can be elusive, although Rosha Yaghmai insists that sheer color is figurative. Portraits by Sasha Gordon look conventional enough, but notably short of joy or affection. Others may tell stories, but the stories are hard to hear. Sara Issakharian includes hands, snakes, charioteers, and an eastern goddess in mortal combat, but who knows who is winning this war? Austin Martin White throws in a “hypothetical” African sculpture, but his heart is in chaos. Sula Bermúdez-Silverman promises a take on colonialism, but it never extends beyond work with actual rubber and sugar.

Color itself enters in different ways. It comes brushed on wildly, layered on beeswax, and squeezed through a nylon mesh. It can have what the museum calls “supernatural color” or the paleness of skin tones. It comes shining from resin and uranium glass. It all but bleeds out of a silicon trans figure by Chella Man, with the scars of multiple operations in its crotch. It lies nude on its back, ready for more.

The artists do share strategies. Ilana Savdie imagines narratives of hunters and their prey, while Gordon’s women train their rifles on a bird, the only thing separating or connecting them. Issakharian has her scenes of combat and celebration, White his Bacchanalia. Rosha Yaghmai paints on cotton and organza, creating moiré patterns, much like White’s nylon mesh. These are Yaghmai’s “afterimages,” and they appear and vanish before one’s eyes. The curators, Liz Munsell and Leon Levy, see “uncanny luminescence” everywhere, and at last they get it.

Not all the artists are Jewish, and those that are come with hyphens, like Issakharian, an Iranian Jewish immigrant, and Man, Jewish Chinese. For Bermúdez-Silverman, a hyphenated name and her dollhouse alike speak of home. They suit a time of pride in shifting identities. They are also new to New York museums (although one has showed with an upscale dealer and museum veteran, Jeffrey Deitch), but are they the future? They occupy the same exhibition space as “New York: 1962–1964” in 2022, which looked back to a time when the Jewish Museum introduced an entire generation, from Pop Art to formalism. Can it happen again?

The artists, the museum argues, “take on and take in the oversaturation of our contemporary moment,” but do they merely succumb to it? When “color is flexible and amorphous,” can it stand for anything at all? To think back to 1962, more than one critic looked at the dizzying designs of Bridget Riley and saw a movement. It must have seemed the next big thing, where in retrospect it was the field of play for little more than a singular talent. Could “chromatic figuration,” with all its failed narratives and optical activity, be the Op Art of today? It could be just as passing and a lot tackier.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.

Everything for Frank Walter was a throwaway—and everything a discovery of who and where he was. At his death in 2009, the black artist left thousands of paintings and drawings on top of hundreds of hours of tapes.

That is just for starters. His two thousand photographs run mostly to Polaroids, because what could come more quickly, with no chance for second thoughts? A stack of paper, a single manuscript, reaches easily to one’s waist. Who would dare to turn its pages even if one could touch? Who would dare, too, to call it a memoir, a fiction, or a lecture on art? And still he sought, as the show’s title puts it, “To Capture a Soul.”

To be sure, there is hardly a soul in sight at the Drawing Center, through September 15. An African woman in pencil may not count as a portrait, no more than a young Fidel Castro nearby on the wall. They are emblems of something more lasting than a lifetime, much like his carved wood after African sculpture. If they are also suspiciously generic, he could live with that. Like all of nature, they respond to him—and, together with a recent report on another freewheeling black artist, Della Wells, it is the subject of a longer review in my latest upload. Does that make him an outsider artist, and what about Wells?

For so undisciplined an artist, Walter stuck to a task long after another would have moved on. He could well have been high-functioning autistic in his embrace of ritual, his refusal to hide anything, and his absence of confession. If there is a self-portrait anywhere in his work, apart from the body of work itself, it lies in an otherwise anonymous man up a tree. Yet he left his native Antigua in 1953, still in his twenties, to find the other half of his heritage, and he remained in Europe until 1961. Another artist might have spent those years in museums, to claim their tradition as his own, or immersed himself in white, African, and Caribbean communities for their humanity and culture. Walter headed for the library.

Or rather he headed for libraries, that marvel of English cities, because he could do nothing singly. And there he turned out one family tree after another. Naturally they are dense to the point of illegible, their words covering entire sheets. Who can say what sprang from library research, what from a remembered oral history, and what from an active imagination? They have a curious echo in drawings of actual trees, their leaves a splatter of red and black akin to an explosion. This artist’s god does and does not lie in the details.

Back home, he pursued the same uncanny mix of the obvious and unexpected. Maybe you know Antigua for sunlight and white sand. Walter sees rippling water in a dark wood, even as it emerges into the light. The sun rests on a mountain peak, like the product of a volcano. Animals are sketchier (and awfully cute), but they tend to one another when they are not looking at him. A cow jumps over a fence, if not the moon.

If they border on nursery rhymes, Walter wrote music, too, in typically sloppy but mostly accurate notation. Anything can go into the mix, and anything can as a ground for oil—including photocopies, disks of auto insulation, backs of unsold Polaroids, and boxes of film. The curator, Claire Gilman, arranges things roughly by subject, because she has no choice. Work from nearly sixty years is almost entirely undated. It may not be consistently great either, but he never have cared for greatness. He wanted only to see himself as part of a larger world.

If Walter leaves things a bit sketchy, Josh Smith embraces the charge. “This is how it is,” he writes—and it has to be, because it finds completion in what is yet to come. “It refers forward,” he claims of his work, but for once it also looks back, and he conceives his show in the Center’s back room as an homage to Walter, as “Life Drawing.” Is this real life? Since his debut in the 2009 New Museum “Generational,” Smith has become an art-world favorite for what another group show called “everyday abstraction.” Here, though, he tends to leaves, fish, birds, and palms as well.

If Walter makes art his fever dream and culture his library, Smith has appeared in a show of “The Feverish Library” as well, and he still piles it on. I have dismissed him more than once as slapdash, glib, and cheesy. There is no doubting, though, his facility and charm. Even the Grim Reaper looks anything but grim. Can he make Walters self-conscious childishness look downright grown-up? Maybe, he seems to say, there are limits to adulthood.

Read more, now in a feature-length article on this site.