Tag: Art

  • Painting From Memory, Salman Toor Conjures Passion and Freedom

    Painting From Memory, Salman Toor Conjures Passion and Freedom


    Salman Toor needed a better perspective.

    Backing slowly away from his easel, the 42-year-old artist closed one eye and raised a thumb. He arched his back to gain a few more centimeters of distance and then snapped upright. Exasperation led to acceptance. He buried any doubts and raised a paintbrush, once again, to the emerald-green portrait of his mystery man in heart-shaped sunglasses.

    On a morning in March, the walls were covered with dozens of new drawings, paintings and etchings that Toor has created over the last few years in anticipation of his largest exhibition to date, “Wish Maker,” which opens May 2 across Luhring Augustine’s two galleries in Manhattan. The show aims to reintroduce the artist — who was born in Lahore, Pakistan — as one of the most fascinating painters of his generation, capable of remixing old European techniques into contemporary scenes of queer desire and the immigrant experience.

    This was Toor’s first chance at seeing everything in one room to decide which pictures he is comfortable exhibiting at a time when his work has become more politically conflicted and emotionally raw.

    “There is a lingering question,” the artist said. “What am I doing here in America?”

    Receiving his United States citizenship in 2019 and committing to life in New York felt like he was leaving his family behind to some degree. His parents remained supportive but distant; they have never seen one of his major shows in person because, he suggested, of the frank depictions of queer sexuality that run counter to their conservative community in Pakistan.

    “It is too long of a conceptual distance to be comprehended,” Toor explained of his parents.

    Those boundaries have remained fixed, even as Toor’s celebrity has grown in international circles on the heels of last year’s Venice Biennale, titled “Stranieri Ovunque — Foreigners Everywhere.” In an exhibition, he presented a septet of paintings that he said was “about feelings of empowerment, the humiliation of sometimes moving from one culture to another, and, I guess, the cost of that freedom for someone like me.”

    Adriano Pedrosa, the biennale’s curator, said that Toor had a singular style. “I think it is very duplicitous work,” he said. “It’s not very straightforward. It is sexy; sometimes it is even violent. But on the other hand it is gorgeous painting.”

    But along with his global fan base has come a new level of pressure on himself to exceed expectations.

    “My life used to be very small,” said Toor, whose soft features and calming voice make stepping into his studio feel like entering the nicest therapist’s office in Brooklyn. “I didn’t have my own room until I was 21 years old.”

    Toor’s initial breakthrough came in 2020 when a solo exhibition at the Whitney Museum of American Art introduced audiences to his unique style, self-effacing humor and autobiographical scenes. The show was a hit, its 15 works bathed in emerald tones that have become the artist’s signature. Writing in The New York Times, the art critic Roberta Smith said, “The mood in these paintings is introspective yet ever-so-slightly comedic even when things turn sinister.”

    Two years later, his painting called “Four Friends” sold for nearly $1.6 million at auction.

    Then, he became nervous about overexposure and becoming another young artist whose career gets caught in the boom-and-bust economics of art speculation. Toor largely retreated from the commercial side of the art world, focusing on painting in his studio and a makeshift space in Lahore when visiting family in the sun-drenched city. His color palette became more varied, including more ocean blues, acid yellows and scabby reds. His line work got looser as he became increasingly frustrated by his own conventions.

    “My hand was tracing the same sort of face and the same sort of body,” Toor said. “At some point, I had to undo the exercise of copying myself. Every now and then I have to take a step back and ask what I am doing?”

    Back home last summer, Toor remembered why he left Pakistan. The country still criminalizes homosexuality with potential fines and sentences ranging from two years to life imprisonment for sexual acts, though the law is not strictly enforced. And despite being a famous artist, and in a long-term relationship with the Pakistani singer Ali Sethi, he feels discouraged from expressing his identity there.

    “Going home is deeply rejuvenating,” said Toor, who painted four canvases during his last summer visit, including scenes of a Grindr hookup and a memento-mori skull.

    When he graduated from Pratt Institute in Brooklyn in 2009, Toor was painting as if he was an apprentice of the Italian Renaissance artist Giovanni Bellini. He had started making classical portraits of friends that included a strange scribble of paint above their heads. That is when Catherine Redmond, his painting professor at Pratt, knew something was about to change. His brushstrokes were becoming less about the Renaissance and more about him.

    “Then the green paintings came,” she said. “Green is a very difficult color to use because it automatically has red in it — its opposite on the color wheel — and it’s such a raw color. It is hard to control. So when you’re looking at one of his green paintings, you don’t even know that your brain is actually seeing red.”

    A darkness that once simmered below the surface of his paintings was now starting to seep through the canvas. You can see it in one of his most haunting pictures, which currently sits in the brightest corner of his studio: Titled “Night Cemetery,” it depicts an Islamic graveyard floating in the blackness of space. It has taken two painful years to complete the work, which Toor said gained new relevance in response to the war in Gaza.

    “I wanted to retreat to this peaceful, ghostly space,” Toor said. “Where there was this presence of ancestors. I wanted to escape to this place of twilight and think about the idea of death.”

    Bigger paintings than this one have vexed Toor, who prefers to work on a more intimate scale. He missed a deadline to include a large work in the 2024 Venice Biennale and must hold back another uncompleted behemoth — a New York street scene of brownstones and hunky construction workers — from his upcoming exhibition.

    “It has been hellish,” Toor said, explaining that large paintings exact a physical toll that requires painting from his elbow while balancing on ladders.

    Smaller images allow him to concentrate on singular themes like belonging, memory, failure, sex and comedy. But the artist requires greater complexity in his larger paintings to plumb the entire depth of human experience — a standard of perfectionism that drives his ambition.

    Six years ago, Toor was still transporting his paintings around New York in trash bags, waiting for the art world to take notice. Now his paintings sell in galleries between $50,000 and $300,000 or more, depending on the size. According to his gallerist, Donald Johnson-Montenegro of Luhring Augustine, the drawings will sell for anywhere between $20,000 and $90,000.

    But the artist still remembers his struggling start, as he built a community of queer artists in New York, including Doron Langberg and Somnath Bhatt.

    Glimmers of those friends appear in his paintings; for example, the mystery man wearing heart-shaped sunglasses has the same curly hair and wide eyes as Langberg, who traded paintings with Toor in 2019 and bonded over their approaches to figurative painting.

    “It’s funny when I visit Salman’s studio,” said Langberg, “because he will show me a painting that I think is completely stunning, and he would say that he was going to repaint half of it. Then I would come back a few months later and he had completely reworked it.”

    Langberg continued: “He has a very specific idea of what he wants from his paintings. I don’t think it is motivated by perfectionism — it’s just that he has so much freedom and familiarity with this imaginative world that he is creating.”

    A few weeks after our studio visit, Toor revealed that he had returned to the mystery man, adjusting his sunglasses and adding a white scarf.

    The new paintings evoke feelings that ricochet between intimacy and alienation. One azure picture recalls Toor’s recent trip to Paris, where friends brought him to a restaurant that seemed more like a tourist trap than haute cuisine. While they laughed themselves to tears, the wait staff glared in frustration.

    “It was like a fake fantasy space,” Toor said. “And they wanted us out of there. We were these three brown guys who were getting drunker and drunker.”

    Toor enjoys a good laugh; his preoccupation with absurdity is manifested in the pink clown noses that appear throughout his paintings on certain male characters. “I wanted them to be sort of sad and funny and pathetic,” he said. “There’s something really sweet about them, which makes me feel like I want to help this clown.”

    He relishes the clown’s tragicomic sense of timing, his ability to absorb anxieties and release them as laughter. That is part of why he rolls one of the clown’s bulbous noses down the floor in a recent paintings from his “Fag Puddle” series, which feature globule assemblages of body parts, theatrical costumes and technology melting together like wax candles in the microwave.

    An earlier example in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, on view in the contemporary art galleries, is more explicit. It features a man embracing another man’s groin as a swirl of body parts, feather boas and pearls surround them. “Heaps of fabulousness,” as the artist explained. The image serves up a jumbled expression of queer desire and failure — and the strangest part of this dreamy tableau is the smartphone painted onto its periphery, as if the scene was being recorded.

    Toor explained that his own desire for security comes from the intense feelings of vulnerability growing up in Pakistan. Art history was a refuge in those times. Pictures of time-tested masters like Caravaggio and Peter Paul Rubens became aspirational, and tracing those images allowed Toor to feel like he was part of something greater.

    But the new paintings indicate that Toor doesn’t need the old masters. His painting has moved on with newfound confidence, rendered in a distinct style.

    “I’m part of that story now,” he said.

    Wish Maker

    Through June 21, 2025, at Luhring Augustine Chelsea, 531 West 24th Street, and Luhring Augustine Tribeca, 17 White Street; luhringaugustine.com.



    Source link

  • In the Heart of Washington, Adam Pendleton’s Work Demands Deep Thought


    This article is part of our Museums special section about how artists and institutions are adapting to changing times.


    When Adam Pendleton begins preparing for an exhibition, his first step is always the same: build a model of the space.

    Pendleton, who lives and works in New York, has employed this process for years, as he has prepared for shows in New York, London and Los Angeles. He finds that it allows him to visualize and refine his approach before and during installation.

    His first solo exhibition in Washington, D.C., “Adam Pendleton: Love, Queen,” at the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden was no exception. It opened April 4 and runs through Jan. 3, 2027.

    Pendleton, 41, had a very clear vision for the show from the start.

    He noted that, to him, the unique thing about art was its ability to function both within a particular moment and outside of it, offering a timeless reflection.

    “What I want this work to do is to actually make people more conscious of how they spend their time and what they’re doing with it,” Pendleton said in an interview at the museum in March, as preparations for the show were underway. “And so I hope the exhibition is an opportunity to slow down and actually just, if only for a moment, exists outside of the dynamics or the pressures of any given moment.”

    Evelyn C. Hankins, the Hirshhorn’s head curator, and the organizer of “Love, Queen,” explained that the show — a major retrospective — was years in the making.

    She recalled that she and Pendleton started talking about the show in early 2022. Since then, she said that she visited his studio in New York every few months.

    “Every time I’d go to the studio, there were these little scaled images of the paintings moving around,” Hankins explained in an interview at the museum. “I think he spent so much time looking at the model, thinking about the building and what he wanted to do in here.”

    The show comes at a big moment for the institution, during its 50th anniversary year (it was founded in 1974). Aptly, “Love, Queen” speaks very directly to the Hirshhorn, taking inspiration from both the museum’s architecture and its location, right on the National Mall.

    “For us, this project is very much part of our mission, which is about reflecting the art of our time, and Adam does that in his painting practice especially,” the Hirshhorn’s director, Melissa Chiu, said in an interview.

    Pendleton explained that “the exhibition is a kind of a retrospective of the way in which I thought and moved through the discipline of painting for about 20 years.”

    He said the show presented an argument about what painting can be — exploring its possibilities within the context of the 21st century, while also reflecting on its history and role in the early 20th century.

    “Love, Queen” features 35 of Pendleton’s paintings, displayed in the museum’s second-floor inner-ring galleries. The paintings represent five different bodies of work: Some of the canvases are from three of Pendleton’s ongoing series — “Black Dada,” “Days” and “WE ARE NOT” — while others are from two new series, “Composition” and “Movement.”

    Through “Black Dada” — the name of Pendleton’s evolving conceptual framework, as well as the title of one series of paintings — Pendleton explores the relationship between Blackness and abstraction.

    His process begins on paper, where he builds compositions through paint, ink and watercolor, often incorporating stenciled text and geometric shapes. These works are then photographed and transformed through screen printing, blurring the lines between painting, drawing and photography. The final works reflect his belief in paintings as a powerful force.

    “I think that’s unique, because particularly in contemporary life, or just in general, we’re always thinking, thoughts, thoughts, thoughts. But are we present?” Pendleton said while walking through the circular space on the second floor of the Hirshhorn where his works were being hung. “Painting is, for me, a way to be my most present self. I hope that aspect of the act of painting, the act of making, of doing, is not necessarily understood by the viewer, but felt.”

    A centerpiece of the exhibition is “Resurrection City Revisited (Who Owns Geometry Anyway?),” a nine-minute video installation exploring Resurrection City — an encampment erected on the National Mall in the spring and summer of 1968 as part of the Poor People’s Campaign.

    Planned by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and carried forward by the Rev. Ralph Abernathy after King’s assassination, the campaign brought together thousands of people in a call for economic justice across racial lines.

    Pendleton became interested in Resurrection City after encountering photographs by Jill Freedman who, after King’s assassination, took up residence in a plywood shantytown erected in Washington by the Poor People’s Campaign, documenting the encampment’s structures and daily life.

    Pendleton said that, “in those photos, there’s these lush blacks, these muted whites, but also there were the primary structures that existed within the context of the encampment.”

    He added, “I became interested in them because I’m obsessed with triangles, circles, squares.” Pendleton studied Freedman’s photographs for about four years before deciding to engage with them artistically.

    “I’ve been mining Resurrection City as an example of a radical avant-garde,” Pendleton said of the encampment on the Mall. “If I had to define the avant-garde, it’s this drive to move forward — intelligently, willfully, joyfully. And that’s really what Resurrection City is.”

    The video’s score, composed by the multi-instrumentalist Hahn Rowe, weaves together a reading by the poet and playwright Amiri Baraka with rich orchestration of brass, woodwinds and drums.

    Pendleton is not just revisiting a historical moment, he is navigating a visual space where art stands on its own. “It’s a feeling you can’t find anywhere else,” he said. “This idea of deep looking and letting something resonate in an unexpected way.”

    This concept extends into his video installation. Like each of his paintings, the video is designed to offer a rich viewing experience, in which the visitor discovers something new each time they revisit it.

    “It drives you to look and think deeply, so that things are actually seen, felt and heard,” Pendleton explained. “And I think that’s what really resonates — how the video functions in relation to the paintings.”

    Throughout “Love, Queen,” Pendleton extends his exploration of the relationship between history and form. His large-scale paintings — layered with bold strokes and fragmented text — defy singular interpretation, instead prompting viewers to actively construct meaning.

    “I think that’s one of the really beautiful things about painting,” Pendleton reflected. “It marks time in a very human and humanistic way. And that’s why it has spoken so deeply to us as human beings for so long, because it articulates something very specific about our humanistic potential.”



    Source link

  • How Hauser & Wirth Took Over N.Y.C.’s Museums This Spring

    How Hauser & Wirth Took Over N.Y.C.’s Museums This Spring


    Earlier this month the Whitney Museum of American Art celebrated the opening of an exhibition by the painter Amy Sherald — Michelle Obama’s official portraitist — with a champagne toast over lush arrangements of daffodils and yellow ranunculus.

    At the Museum of Modern Art, another recent blowout event honored an ambitious retrospective of the revered painter and sculptor Jack Whitten, who died in 2018.

    Further uptown, the multimedia art star Rashid Johnson took over the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum with a solo show of almost 90 works and live performances. And next month, the conceptual artist Lorna Simpson will debut a major show of paintings at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

    What these in-demand artists have in common is their deep-pocketed Swiss dealer, Hauser & Wirth. The gallery’s artists are so dominant in New York’s leading museums this season that some in the art world are calling it “Hauser spring.”

    Hauser & Wirth’s prominence comes at a time when the most powerful dealers in the commercial art world play an increasingly large role in helping support the city’s ambitious museum shows. A New York Times analysis of solo exhibitions since 2019 shows that out of 350 exhibitions by contemporary artists, nearly 25 percent went to artists represented by just 11 of the biggest galleries in the world.

    And within that tiny slice of the art market, the most exhibitions came from Hauser & Wirth artists, with 18 shows over the last six and a half years, outpacing even established names in the American art world like Larry Gagosian and David Zwirner.

    Some experts said the overlap between mega-galleries and major museums is to be expected, considering both groups are eager to spotlight the field’s most influential figures. “These mega-galleries obviously approach artists who are in some ways established,” said Antwaun Sargent, a director at Gagosian.

    But others warn that such closeness can raise questions of conflicts of interest, since museum shows typically lift the reputations of artists and the prices of their work — and these exhibitions can help their galleries profit handsomely.

    It represents a shift for museums, which receive their tax-exempt nonprofit status to collect and study art, and present what they believe is important work to the public. For many decades, these institutions were wary of partnerships with the commercial art world.

    But arts organizations suffered financially during the pandemic. Overhead costs have risen, attendance and corporate funding have fallen, and activists have scrutinized longtime donors, including parts of the Sackler family linked to opioids. For many museums, receiving logistical and, at times, financial support from a major gallery is no longer seen as unpalatable.

    “The museums are subsidized by the galleries and the collectors who support those galleries, and it’s hard to elbow your way into the lineup if you aren’t already included in that circle,” said Robert Storr, a former curator at the Museum of Modern Art.

    Asking art dealers for money “used to be taboo,” according to Michael Darling, a curator who founded Museum Exchange, a platform matching prospective art donors with museums. But the old norms have continued to shift. “These museums are just so desperate to find funding sources, and the galleries are one of the first things they think of,” he said.

    Since touching down in the United States in 2009, Hauser & Wirth has evolved into a global juggernaut with 19 locations, including three in Manhattan. Its influence has grown by helping fund exhibitions, recruiting museum curators into key positions and luring top artists from rival galleries.

    This season, the gallery provided logistical and financial support to the Met, Guggenheim and Whitney shows of its artists, securing loans of artworks from collectors. That translated to credit for its participation on museum websites, alongside foundations and board members.

    It did not underwrite MoMA’s current show by Whitten — that museum, unlike others, said it does not accept funding from art galleries — but it raised his visibility by transporting 40 of his sculptures from the Greek island of Crete, where he had a summer home and studio, to the U.S. nearly a decade ago, so that curators could see them.

    It was part of the gallery’s long-term strategy to promote its artists, which helped lead to Whitten’s 2018 retrospective at the Baltimore Museum of Art and ultimately to the new MoMA show, according to Marc Payot, president of Hauser & Wirth, who runs the gallery alongside its co-founders, Iwan and Manuela Wirth. (The Wirths, who are married, also operate Artfarm, a hospitality group with a luxury hotel and restaurants around the world; Manuela is a daughter of the art collector Ursula Hauser and heir to a Swiss retail fortune.)

    “Having an institutional presence is the most important aspect for the longevity of an artist’s career,” Payot said. He added that financial support was secondary to the logistical help that Hauser & With provides museums, which includes helping curators secure funding and loans from wealthy collectors, organizing parties and funding the production of luxe exhibition catalogs.

    Museums have different policies that determine what kind of assistance galleries can provide. While MoMA said it does not accept any funding from galleries, institutions including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Whitney Museum and the Guggenheim do.

    Ann Bailis, a spokeswoman for the Met, acknowledged that the museum accepts some financial support from galleries though she declined to provide details. She said that “the museum arranges for loans from institutions and collectors, and occasionally an artist’s gallery can be helpful in this process.” (The Met’s website for “Lorna Simpson: Source Notes” cited the “support” of Hauser & Wirth, among its sponsors.)

    Ashley Reese, the Whitney’s communications director, said that exhibition choices are made independent of possible funding sources. (In addition to providing support to “Amy Sherald: American Sublime,” Hauser & Wirth is also a co-chair of the Whitney’s upcoming gala, its most important fund-raiser of the year.)

    Payot said it was a coincidence that so many artists on the gallery’s roster were having museum exhibitions this spring in New York.

    “It is way less about our influence but really a testament to the artists,” he said, noting that the artists had their own relationships with each of the institutions. “It’s easy to be cynical, but it’s sincere.”

    Other museum leaders agreed. “It wouldn’t be fair to accuse the museum-gallery relationship of pure transactionalism,” said Madeleine Grynsztejn, director of the Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago, where Rashid Johnson’s show will travel as part of its national tour. She added, “what we have in common is supporting the outcome that benefits the artist.”

    But some art historians said the relationship between museums and galleries has shifted in recent decades.

    Veronique Chagnon-Burke, a chairwoman of the International Art Market Studies Association, said that most modern art museums were founded in the early 20th century and built on relationships between institutions and commercial galleries. Solo exhibitions weren’t so important, however, as dealers were more focused on ensuring their artists made it into the permanent collections then taking shape. She said that recently, as corporate funding for exhibitions decreased, wealthy galleries have helped close the budget gaps.

    Mega-galleries represent a tiny but elite share of the art world: Thousands of working artists do not have any gallery representation, and there are more than 760 galleries in New York City alone, according to a 2020 analysis.

    But artists associated with these behemoth art corporations are more likely to get a prominent platform at New York museums. The Times found that more than half of all solo exhibitions of contemporary artists since 2019 at the Morgan Library & Museum, and 40 percent of similar shows at the Guggenheim Museum, featured artists represented by the largest galleries. At the Met the figure was almost one-third, at MoMA almost one-quarter, and at the Whitney about one-fifth.

    Smaller institutions, as well as those outside Manhattan, tended to focus on artists with less commercial clout; for example, less than 10 percent of the Brooklyn Museum’s contemporary solo exhibitions featured a mega-gallery artist. More than 30 percent of its solo exhibitions were devoted to artists with no gallery ties at the time.

    Some experts have questioned whether museums are doing enough to introduce audiences to a diverse pool of artists beyond the art stars.

    As institutions cut back on travel budgets, their curators have fewer opportunities to encounter artists outside of the commercial art world, who can also be a harder sell to museum executives.

    “I look at it as miniature acts of heroism by curators who are prepared to say, ‘I know this isn’t in line with current fashion or this artist isn’t going to turn the turnstile widely, but I believe their work merits a fair hearing by our audience,’” said Maxwell Anderson, a former director of the Whitney Museum and the Dallas Museum of Art, and president of the Souls Grown Deep Foundation, which promotes the work of Black artists from the American South.

    Against the odds, these shows are still happening: Contemporary artists without gallery representation made up 20 percent of all solo exhibitions at top New York museums since 2019, the Times found.

    But over the last 15 years of the art market’s expansion, American museums have become more comfortable working hand-in-hand with galleries, said Ylinka Barotto, a former museum curator who now leads museum relations at Perrotin gallery. “We don’t work in silos anymore,” she said.

    John Elderfield, MoMA’s former chief curator of painting and sculpture, began working with Gagosian in 2012, a few years after leaving the museum, and Ingrid Schaffner of the Chinati Foundation joined Hauser & Wirth in 2023. David Zwirner has operated its own department for museum partnerships since 2022.

    “There is no evident line separating commercial galleries and art museums,” Anderson said. “Galleries have become extremely adept at creating thoroughly researched experiences that museums can’t really afford.”

    With deflated ticket sales and a dwindling list of donors, museums are eager to find alternative sources of capital, said Sally Yerkovich, who teaches museum anthropology at Columbia University and leads revisions for the code of ethics at the International Council of Museums. When deciding who to accept money from, the pre-eminent concern is “that the sponsors for an exhibition share the values of the museum,” she said.

    Hauser & Wirth executives said they wanted to cultivate the artistic legacies, and even in a challenging art market, the gallery’s influence — as well as that of a select few competitors — shows no signs of waning.

    In September, one of the newest artists on the dealer’s roster, Jeffrey Gibson, who represented the United States at the last Venice Biennale, will unveil a new commission on the Met Museum’s facade. The American painter George Condo is getting a solo exhibition at the Musée d’Art Moderne de Paris in October. And in South Korea, there are three major museum shows opening for three artists it represents: Mark Bradford, Lee Bul and a 20th-century master of sculpture, Louise Bourgeois.

    Forget Hauser spring. It may be more accurate to say: It’s a Hauser year.


    Our Methodology

    To report this story, The New York Times analyzed more than 350 solo museum exhibitions of contemporary artists held at the 12 largest New York museums since 2019. “Contemporary artist” was defined as an artist active after 1950 in any medium other than architecture, design or fashion. Shows that closed in 2019 but opened in a prior year were not included in the analysis, nor were virtual exhibitions. Shows scheduled for 2025 that were announced by April 1 but had not yet opened were included. “Mega-gallery” was defined as an art gallery with five or more locations in 2025. Artists who joined a mega-gallery after the start date of a particular museum show did not count toward that gallery’s total. Museum size was determined based on the most recent annual expenditure figures publicly available.



    Source link

  • He Built the Frick Collection With Passion, Patience and Bargaining

    He Built the Frick Collection With Passion, Patience and Bargaining


    This article is part of our Museums special section about how artists and institutions are adapting to changing times.


    In the Gilded Age, when newly wealthy Americans sought to advertise their social status here and abroad, several of them turned to what had long been a practice of the established rich: art collecting.

    Henry Clay Frick, who made his fortune in coke and steel, had appreciated art even as a young man, particularly prints and sketches. “Some of them he made himself,” said Colin Bailey, director of the Morgan Library and Museum and an expert on Frick.

    But Frick’s interest ultimately turned toward higher-profile works by Europe’s old masters, such as Rembrandt and Vermeer, as well as the creations of more modern geniuses like Manet and Degas. Over decades he acquired one of the finest private collections in the world and exhibited them in a Fifth Avenue mansion that is now a major museum. The Frick Collection’s home, newly renovated, reopened in April in New York.

    With the competitive zeal that fueled his success in business, Frick vied for works of art against others who enjoyed tremendous wealth: the banker J.P. Morgan; Peter Widener, a founding organizer of United States Steel and the American Tobacco Company; and Isabella Stewart Gardner, founder of the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston.

    “He hated losing a painting he wanted,” said Ian Wardropper, who resigned earlier this year after 14 years as director of the Frick Collection, the museum that Frick created.

    Frick’s passion for showing off extended to the Fifth Avenue mansion he began building in 1913. In Wardropper’s book, “The Fricks Collect: An American Family and the Evolution of Taste in the Gilded Age,” he recounts some of Frick’s interaction with another collecting competitor, Benjamin Altman, founder of the B. Altman department store in New York City.

    Wardropper writes that Frick was envious of Altman’s 90-foot art gallery in his new house on Fifth Avenue and asked Roland Knoedler, the New York art dealer, to tell him the room’s dimensions. “When Frick’s gallery was completed in 1914,” Wardropper wrote in his book, “it was 96 feet long, the largest private gallery in New York. “

    Before he died in 1919, Frick bequeathed his mansion, where he had lived with his wife, his two surviving children and his art, to create a museum and provided a $15 million endowment to finance its maintenance and improvements. The museum opened in 1935. Nearly half of its 1,800 works were originally acquired by Frick.

    Five years ago, the museum closed for an extensive renovation; its collection was temporarily moved to the former Madison Avenue home of the Whitney Museum of American Art, now located Downtown on Gansevoort Street.

    During the renovation, the Frick mansion lost its 149-seat, oval music room. But it gained, among other amenities, a 220-seat auditorium built beneath the 70th Street Garden (which had to be replanted); new entry points; a two-level reception hall, coat check and cafe; and Special Exhibition galleries, among other additions.

    The original, first-level galleries were given makeovers, while the living spaces on the second floor, which had long been used as office space and were off limits to visitors, were transformed into new galleries to show off a collection of significant portraits, clocks and other works and treasures.

    The expansion and refurbishment, which cost $220 million, was led by Annabelle Selldorf of Selldorf Architects, with Beyer Blinder Belle Architects and Planners and the garden designer Lynden B. Miller.

    Master craftspeople took care of many of the details, like creating a new cantilevered marble staircase to the second floor (Wilkstone of Paterson, N.J.); restoring woodwork (Craftekt of West New York, N.J.); recreating the green silk velvet wall coverings in the West Gallery (Prelle of Lyon, France); cleaning and updating lighting (Aurora Lampworks, Brooklyn); and making new tassels, fringe, cords and other frills used throughout the house (Passementerie Verrier Paris).

    In building his collection, Frick had often been persistent in obtaining the works of art he desired, experts said. He negotiated for months in 1906 before buying a star of his collection, a Rembrandt “Self-Portrait” from 1658. He had competition from the Metropolitan Museum of Art and J.P. Morgan, the museum board’s president, but they couldn’t agree on a price with the seller. Subsequently, the painting was bought by Knoedler, the head of Knoedler & Company, and another dealer who offered it to Frick for $225,000.

    Frick ultimately cut a deal to pay the $225,000, but made up the last $25,000 by returning a painting by Jules Breton that he had bought 11 years earlier, according to Cynthia Saltzman, author of “Old Masters, New World: America’s Raid on Europe’s Great Pictures.”

    “Frick had bought the painting for $14,000 and calculated that it was now worth $25,000,” Saltzman said in an interview. “He paid the $200,000, returned the Breton and got the Rembrandt.”

    Wardropper said that Frick had traditional tastes, favoring landscapes and portraits of famous men and beautiful women, over anything edgy. He typically passed on nudes or religious paintings, except for Giovanni Bellini’s “St. Francis in the Desert.”

    Frick was born in 1849 in West Overton, Pa., 40 miles southeast of Pittsburgh. His father was a farmer. His mother’s family owned the Old Overholt whiskey distillery.

    Frick attended “one term of college and worked as an accountant in the distillery and as a clerk in a hardware store in Pittsburgh,” Wardropper said. Then he joined a cousin as a partner in a business that manufactured coke, a fuel created by heating coal.

    “Starting with family loans he eventually bought out his partners and within a decade had a monopoly on the world’s supply of coke and was a millionaire,” Wardropper said. Later he would become partners with Andrew Carnegie, the American industrialist.

    Though devoted to family and friends and charitable to the public at large, Frick was known to be ruthless in business. He brokered no leniency in 1892, when the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers voted to strike at the Carnegie company’s plant in Homestead, Pa.

    Frick hired Pinkerton detectives to convince the strikers to back down. Eight people were killed and many wounded in a gun battle. Frick was widely condemned.

    Later that month, Alexander Berkman, a Russian professed anarchist, tried to assassinate Frick in his office. Frick was shot twice — in the shoulder and neck — and stabbed. But he dictated a memo to his mother and to Carnegie that read: “Was twice shot, but not dangerously. There is no necessity for you to come home. I am still in shape to fight the battle out.”

    From prints, Frick moved on to begin buying works by French painters of the Barbizon school such as Corot and Daubigny, said Wardropper. Then, possibly influenced by the tastes of other wealthy collectors, he moved on to pursue old masters.

    From 1900 to 1909 Frick returned many Barbizon works and bought paintings by Vermeer, Salomon van Ruysdael and Hobbema, as well as Rembrandt and English painters such as Gainsborough and Reynolds. In 1914, he bought paintings by Manet, Renoir and Degas.

    Wardropper said that one of Frick’s daughters, Helen Clay Frick, who died in 1984 and managed the collection after his death, was responsible for acquiring many of the early Italian Renaissance paintings, including works by Duccio, Cimabue and Piero della Francesca. She also bought Ingres’ painting, “Comtesse d’Haussonville” (1845), one of the Frick’s most admired works.

    Henry Frick acquired French and Renaissance furniture through the dealer Joseph Duveen who also sold him a set of Fragonard paintings entitled “The Progress of Love,” which are now in the renovated Fragonard Room at the Frick. The price was $1.25 million, Frick’s costliest purchase.

    Wardropper said in his later years Frick enjoyed strolling downstairs in the evening, cigar in hand, to admire his collection. He recalled that Helen Frick said that a week before her father died, she discovered him lying on a couch in one of the galleries facing two works he loved: Velazquez’s “King Philip IV of Spain,” and Goya’s “The Forge.”

    Frick said that it made sense to keep some of your wealth in art that surrounds you, not just invested in bonds. With the former, he said, “you can draw your dividend daily.”



    Source link

  • Rosa Barba Lights Up MoMA With Her Love of Cinema

    Rosa Barba Lights Up MoMA With Her Love of Cinema


    Several art forms have been intersecting in Barba’s life since her childhood near Stuttgart, in southern Germany, where she took classes in dance, flute and guitar before settling on cello. At 14, she got interested in photography and started taking portraits and landscape shots, which she developed in a school dark room or at home in the bathroom.

    “I really loved this kind of alchemy,” she recalled, “making the image come out, and also manipulating it.”

    She was also watching a lot of movies back then, and was drawn to the work of Italian auteurs like Pier Paolo Pasolini and Federico Fellini, who thought of his own films like paintings. When she received a Super 8 camera as a gift, she began to experiment with making her own moving images.

    She studied at the forward-thinking Academy of Media Arts in Cologne, Germany — one of the first schools where you could basically study film and art in the same space,” Barba said — and her teachers there included the experimental filmmaker Harun Farocki and the Austrian performance artist Valie Export.

    Postgraduate studies then took her to the prestigious Rijksakademie in Amsterdam and to the Malmö Art Academy in Sweden, which awarded her a Ph.D. for a dissertation, “On the Anarchic Organization of Cinematic Spaces,” which ranges across astronomy, art history, color theory and the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze.

    These days, she spends a lot of time on the move. Though she has lived in Berlin since 2009, Barba estimated that she was traveling for about six months each year: researching projects, filming, or installing shows. Berlin was “a good place to think and to work,” she said, “but on the other hand, I guess I get most of the mental work done being on the road.”



    Source link

  • Ai Weiwei Installation Coming to Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island

    Ai Weiwei Installation Coming to Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island


    The Four Freedoms Park Conservancy announced on Thursday that it has commissioned the Chinese artist Ai Weiwei for a monumental installation on Roosevelt Island that will kick off a new public art initiative by the conservancy.

    The artist’s work will be on view starting in September at the state park, where President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s famous speech on human rights is memorialized in bronze and granite. Ai plans to cover sections of the park under camouflage netting and metal scaffolding, which the artist said in an interview “is my personal commentary on what is unfolding politically and culturally in our time.”

    The project is the artist’s first major public artwork in New York since 2017 and is the first piece in an initiative, Art x Freedom, that provides an annual budget of about $250,000 for works transforming the park. (In addition to having their art realized, each artist will receive a $25,000 prize.)

    “We are really excited about turning a presidential memorial that is typically backward-looking into something that is very much forward-looking and continuously relevant,” said Allison Binns, a venture capitalist who is chairwoman of the program alongside the philanthropist Agnes Gund. Binns said the project would be timed to coincide with the 80th session of the U.N. General Assembly and the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.

    Selecting Ai for the inaugural commission was an easy choice, the chairwomen said, because he is one of the most politically outspoken artists of his generation. The 67-year-old left China in 2015 after years of pressure by the government for criticizing its record on human rights and has since maintained studios all over the world in cities including London and Berlin. He is currently the subject of a large retrospective at the Seattle Museum of Art that includes 130 works created over the last four decades.

    Ai’s last public artwork in New York was during the first Trump administration, when he installed cages to protest the White House’s immigration policies. Ai said that the new commission in Four Freedoms Park would invite visitors to think about the current administration’s efforts to shape public discourse, which he described as “shockingly outrageous.”

    But the camouflage has a lighthearted touch. It was created with a pattern of cats — and one dog for eagle-eyed spectators to find.

    “I didn’t want to use conventional military camouflage, because I find it personally repulsive,” the artist said. “We’ve all seen too much harm associated with that pattern — it’s essentially a uniform that negates life.”

    Instead, he chose an animal pattern to honor a cat rescue shelter near the park. “I believe you can judge a society’s humanity by how it treats animals,” Ai explained.



    Source link

  • Museum Told to Surrender Schiele Drawing to Heirs of Man Killed by Nazis

    Museum Told to Surrender Schiele Drawing to Heirs of Man Killed by Nazis


    A judge in New York ruled on Wednesday that the Art Institute of Chicago must surrender a 1916 drawing by Egon Schiele to investigators who plan to return it to the heirs of a Jewish cabaret entertainer from Vienna who was murdered in a Nazi concentration camp in 1941.

    The drawing “Russian War Prisoner” was purchased by the Art Institute in 1966, but investigators for the Manhattan district attorney’s office had asserted that it and other works once owned by the entertainer and art collector Fritz Grünbaum had been looted by the Nazis during the Holocaust.

    Many of the works created by Schiele, the Austrian Expressionist, that Mr. Grünbaum owned ended up in the hands of museums and collectors around the world. Mr. Grünbaum’s heirs have spent years working to reclaim them.

    In her ruling, New York Supreme Court Judge Althea Drysdale said she agreed that the work had been stolen from Mr. Grünbaum by the Nazis. “‘Russian War Prisoner’ has been stolen property for the last 86 years,” she said in a 25-minute reading of her order from the bench.

    Over the past two years, other museums and private collectors had returned Schiele works to the heirs after being presented evidence by the investigators that they had been seized by the Nazis. But the Art Institute disputed that evidence and challenged the jurisdiction of the Manhattan district attorney to bring what in fact was a criminal proceeding that treated the museum’s Schiele as stolen property.

    In hearings last year, the district attorney’s office accused the Chicago museum of ignoring evidence of an elaborate fraud undertaken to conceal that the artwork had been stolen from Mr. Grünbaum by the Nazis on the eve of World War II.

    For its part, the museum insisted there was no evidence to suggest the work had been stolen, and it challenged the authority of the investigators to lay claim to a painting that had been located beyond New York for 60 years, arguing that disputes like this are civil matters and that New York criminal law has no place in the discussion. Instead, it said, the drawing had legitimately passed from Mr. Grünbaum to his sister-in-law, who had sold it to a Swiss dealer after the war.

    Its refusal of the art unit’s claims represented a sustained and very public battle threatening to undercut the trafficking unit’s authority in this case — and by extension, many others. But in her 79-page ruling, Judge Drysdale agreed with the investigators on all points.

    She found that the work could still be considered stolen property under New York law, that the criminal laws applied and that New York investigators had jurisdiction over the matter. The Manhattan investigators had argued they had jurisdiction because the Schiele works were owned by a New York gallery before being sold on to other owners.

    She also found that the Art Institute had failed to make reasonable inquiries about the work’s provenance when it acquired the work and did not live up to its own standards for provenance research.

    “We are disappointed with the ruling,” Megan Michienzi, a spokeswoman for the museum, said in a statement. “We are reviewing the court’s decision and will look at all available options for appeal.” These options include applying for a stay on the handover of the work to investigators.

    Raymond Dowd, the lawyer for the Grünbaum heirs, welcomed the decision. “This judge wrote a clear warning call to any people in the world who are hiding Nazi looted art that you had better not bring it anywhere near New York. Ever,” he said.

    The Art Institute routinely displayed the work during its many years at the museum until it was seized in place by investigators in 2023 on the basis of a warrant signed by Judge Drysdale.

    In her decision, she not only discussed the law but also the history of the work, of Mr. Grünbaum and of the artist who created the drawing.

    “Throughout his storied career, Grünbaum was an outspoken critic of the treatment of Jews in Austria,” she wrote. “This advocacy, coupled with his Jewish heritage and his fame within Vienna’s performing arts industry, would lead to his capture, imprisonment at Dachau Concentration Camp, and murder at the hands of the Nazis during World War II.”

    At the center of the dispute was the question of what happened to the drawing and other Schiele works when they were deposited by Mr. Grünbaum’s family at a storage facility in Vienna in 1938. Investigators in the Manhattan district attorney’s art trafficking unit maintained that this was tantamount to surrendering them to the Nazis, who they say controlled the warehouse.

    The museum said that while the storage company had been “affiliated” with the Nazi regime, it “also provided lawful storage and moving services to Jewish families” including to Mr. Grünbaum’s sister-in-law, Mathilde Lukacs, who the museum argued had inherited the drawing and others from the entertainer’s collection.

    The dealer who brought “Russian War Prisoner” and other Schieles once owned by Grünbaum to the New York art market in the 1950s, Eberhard Kornfeld, said he had bought them from Ms. Lukacs. The museum said it believed his account to be credible.

    But the New York investigators worked to compile evidence that the judge embraced as a convincing rebuttal of Mr. Kornfeld’s account. She noted that investigators dismissed as forgeries the several invoices that Mr. Kornfeld produced as evidence of his transactions with Ms. Lukacs. On some the signature for her name was misspelled, for example.

    “It’s highly improbable that Mathilde Lukacs ever obtained proper title to ‘Russian War Prisoner,’” Judge Drysdale said, and she suggested the museum needed to have done more to investigate the work’s ownership trail.

    “They instead relied upon the assurances of a discredited art dealer with an obvious self-serving agenda,” she wrote in her ruling.

    Before Manhattan investigators entered the debate, the Grünbaum artworks had already been the subject of considerable civil litigation in which other courts have come to varying conclusions.

    In 2018, a New York Supreme Court judge ruled in the case of two other Schiele drawings that Mr. Grünbaum never sold or surrendered any works before his death, and that they were indeed looted by the Nazis, making his heirs their true owners.

    In another civil case, a federal court ruled on procedural grounds that the Grünbaum heirs came forward too late to lay claim to the works and described Mr. Kornfeld’s account as credible. “Russian War Prisoner” is also the subject of a separate civil case in federal court in New York in which the Art Institute is arguing it has good title to the drawing.

    Mr. Dowd, who represents the Grünbaum heirs, said that he did not think “the federal procedure survives” Judge Drysdale’s decision.



    Source link

  • A.I. Action Figures Flood Social Media (Accessories Included)

    A.I. Action Figures Flood Social Media (Accessories Included)


    This week, the actress Brooke Shields posted an image of an action-figure version of herself that came with a needlepoint kit and a pet terrier. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, imagined her own figurine accompanied by a gavel and a Bible.

    These hyper-realistic dolls are nowhere to be found in toy stores, at least for the time being. They are being created using artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT.

    In recent weeks, social media users have been turning to A.I. to generate Barbie-fied versions of themselves, their dogs or their favorite famous figures. Anna Wintour has not been spared the A.I.-doll treatment. Neither has Ludwig van Beethoven.

    The trend has frustrated illustrators who oppose the use of unlicensed artwork to train these artificial intelligence tools, and who remain concerned about the effects of A.I. on their livelihoods. Several have responded by posting similar images of figurines that they illustrated themselves.

    “HUMAN MADE,” reads a text bubble in the corner of one such illustration by Linh Truong, who depicted herself with her sketchbook and her cat, Kayla.

    Ms. Truong, 23, an artist who lives in Manhattan, sees the A.I. action figures, the latest of several A.I. portraiture trends, as a way that tech companies are trying to connect with users on a personal level.

    “They’re like, ‘We want you to see yourself in our product,’” she said.

    To plenty of people, that’s a tempting possibility.

    Suzie Geria, 37, a fitness trainer in Toronto, thought the action figure created for her by ChatGPT was surprisingly realistic. It came with a kettlebell and a cartoon peach to represent the glute-focused class she teaches at a nearby gym.

    “It’s kind of cool to see yourself reflected in a cartoon form,” she said. “I think we’re looking at other ways to see ourselves in the world we live in, which is very much online.”

    Ms. Geria said she had empathy for those who worked in industries that might suffer job loss because of A.I. “It’s a tough one, but it’s bringing people joy as well,” she said.

    Pat Bassermann, 42, who works in marketing and lives in Andover, Mass., typed a paragraph-long prompt into ChatGPT to create an action figure of himself on Thursday.

    “Use this photo of me to create an action figure of myself in a blister pack, in the style like a premium collectible toy,” he wrote, adding requests for grilling tongs and a “relaxed, friendly smile.” He uploaded a headshot, and was presented with an image seconds later.

    “Wife & Kids Not Included. Messy House Sold Separately,” reads a line of text at the bottom of the image.

    Soon, his three daughters wanted their own versions. In a few more minutes, they were presented with figurines with ponytails, accessorized with ballet slippers, a video game controller and a cup of Boba tea.

    As A.I. platforms have surged in popularity, their image-generating abilities have come under scrutiny. Artists and musicians have argued that the technology threatens their livelihoods. Deepfake images, many of them explicit, have confounded schools, political campaigns and celebrities.

    (The New York Times filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI and its partner, Microsoft, accusing them of using published work without permission to train artificial intelligence. They have denied those claims.)

    In March, social media was flooded with videos that used ChatGPT to replicate the style of the Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki. In response, some users circulated a clip of Mr. Miyazaki calling A.I. “an insult to life itself” in a 2016 documentary.

    Martha Ratcliff, 29, an illustrator in Leeds, England, said she spent years developing a distinctive style of portraiture. She said she felt frustrated every time she saw a new A.I. portrait trend that ostensibly drew from the work of real artists without compensation.

    She gets that it’s fun to hop on a trend, she said. “But I think if you look at the bigger picture, there are a lot of creatives that are worried,” she added. “You just don’t want it to wipe out the whole creative industry.”

    She spent about 20 minutes on Saturday making her own hand-drawn rendition of the trend. She depicted herself holding her newborn, surrounded by flowers, colored pencils and a steaming mug that said “mama.”

    “A human doing it is so much better than a robot,” she said.





    Source link

  • It’s Springtime in Paris for David Hockney

    It’s Springtime in Paris for David Hockney


    Inside and outside the soaring spaces of the Louis Vuitton Foundation in Paris, everything is in bloom. “Do remember they can’t cancel the spring,” reads a pink neon sign above the museum’s entrance — a hopeful phrase that the English artist David Hockney sent to his friends, along with a drawing of daffodils, during the coronavirus pandemic.

    The foundation’s exhibition, “David Hockney 25” is the painter’s largest to date. While its title indicates a focus on his most recent 25 years of work, it feels like an overview of his whole career. It’s a joyful vision, and a record, of a life in art lived with passionate curiosity, attention to the human condition and reverence for the natural world.

    Born in 1937 in Bradford, an industrial town in northern England, Hockney started painting at a young age and impressed locals with a 1955 portrait of his father. The small canvas, tightly composed and painted in muted tones, is a far cry from the huge, raucously colored works that have come to define Hockney’s oeuvre. But it brims with a painstaking humanity, captured in his father’s alert expression, his tightly clasped hands and his energetic posture.

    This work opens the exhibition, whose first two rooms lead viewers through Hockney’s quick, and frankly astonishing, evolution as a painter. Works he made in London during the late 1950s and early ’60s mix styles and aesthetics with abandon. Pop mingles with postwar European “art informel”; graffiti and collage stray into surrealist critiques of domesticity.

    Even as homosexuality was illegal in Britain (it was decriminalized for men over 21 in 1967), Hockney painted relationships between men. “Berlin: A Souvenir” (1962) shows a hedonistic abstraction of male figures — nude, in silhouette, about to embrace — merging and indistinct as forms. “Two Men in a Shower” (1963) and “Boy About to Take a Shower” (1964) show their subjects in intimate moments, naked bodies rendered in impressionistic flesh tones, as if colored by emotion or desire.

    When he lived in Los Angeles, from 1964 to 1998, Hockney produced some of his best-known portraits: romantic pairs, erotic interiors and outdoor scenes painted with clarity, bathed in soft California light. A 1968 painting, “Christopher Isherwood and Don Bachardy,” shows the writer Isherwood and his partner in matching armchairs. Bachardy’s head is turned toward Isherwood, in a scene of stunning tranquillity that mixes loosely painted figures with detailed surroundings.

    “A Bigger Splash” (1967) has the same beguiling flatness and Los Angeles palette, but here the figure has disappeared, and we see only its wake. A giant spray of water rises from the otherwise placid surface of a blue pool. We never see who plunged in just seconds before.

    The essence of Hockney’s work is the attempt to capture the animating force of life — in the faces of friends and loved ones, or in a blossoming tree, changing season or night sky. Just before the turn of the century, Hockney moved back to Yorkshire, where he grew up. He stayed for a little more than a decade, turning his eye to the familiar, inexhaustible landscape of his childhood. In these paintings, hills roll, roads twist and turn, trees shed and sprout foliage, fields are golden and russet patchworks, light illuminates dense forests in otherworldly crimson and fuchsia.

    A series of paintings of hawthorn trees in blossom show the flowers surging in dense, roiling masses, pouring along the roadside. A wall text for “Hawthorn Blossom Near Rudston” (2008) describes Hockney’s obsession with the hawthorn’s annual blooming, which arrives unpredictably at a moment he calls “action week.” At its appearance each year, no matter where he was at the time, the artist would drop everything to return to Yorkshire and paint the bountiful white flower, frothing, Hockney has said, like “champagne poured over everything.”

    Despite their British settings, the otherworldly hues and writhing lines of works like “Felled Trees,” “Bigger Trees Near Warter” (both 2008) and “Untitled No. 2 (The Arrival of Spring)” (2011), recall the Post-Impressionism of Vincent Van Gogh, or the symbolism of Maurice Denis. Both artists, like Hockney, believed that nature possessed infinite inspiration, and that any single view holds within it the entirety of the world: One must simply look.

    A room of portraits hung salon style presents the human figure as equally compelling. The walls teem with faces and forms painted in wildly different styles, a testament to Hockney’s range as well as his sensitivity. In “Charlie Scheips” (2005), the subject, an American curator, leans casually against a wall, the lines of his body painted energetically with a realist, Alice Neel quality. “Margaret Hockney, 14 February 2013,” shows Hockney’s sister, carefully sketched in charcoal. The artist himself peers out at us from “Self Portrait, 20th June 2022,” customarily bespectacled and dressed in flashy attire, a wry smile on his face as if to say, “I’m still here.”

    Hockney’s lavish attention to surface and detail make the exhibit’s transition to his many “iPad paintings,” his computer drawings printed on paper, and his oddly conceived 3-D drawings somewhat jarring.

    A collection of 220 iPad works called “Four Years in Normandy” (2019-23) are the most persuasive: A room of prints big and small, as well as screens with shifting images, harness the restlessness of the pandemic lockdown years, and show Hockney working at great speed en plein-air. A grid of 15 self-portraits from 2012 is likewise affecting — a reminder that the self, too, is relentlessly fluid.

    In other parts of the show, Hockney’s use of technology seems random at best, or lazy at worst, if only because most of his work is so considered and exquisite.

    A trio of ungainly “photographic drawings” from 2018 are effectively experiments in Photoshop. Each shows a large room filled with people sitting or standing, sometimes in conversation, sometimes lost in contemplation. The technological process used to model each figure, a wall text says, forces us to observe them more closely, “unlike traditional photography.” Another text, for a video of roadside foliage made with multiple cameras, compares the work to Dürer’s botanical studies. Maybe. Or maybe not.

    But alongside these forays, Hockney is still, fortunately, painting. The exhibit ends with a series of new works inspired by Edvard Munch and William Blake, both of whom painted transcendent visions of the world. “Play Within a Play Within a Play and Me With a Cigarette” (2025) shows Hockney in his London garden. He is hard at work on a version of the very image we see before us. Though the trees are still bare, the daffodils to his left are in bloom. It must be spring.

    David Hockney 25
    Through Aug. 31 at the Louis Vuitton Foundation, in Paris; fondationlouisvuitton.fr.



    Source link

  • How Los Angeles Museums Prepare for Fires and Other Catastrophes

    How Los Angeles Museums Prepare for Fires and Other Catastrophes


    When the Palisades fire swept through Los Angeles’ western hills, the Getty Villa and its collection of Greek and Roman antiquities stood directly in its path. But the building and collection survived because of substantial museum preparation.

    The city occupies a unique position among art locations: an urban metropolis that meets wilderness areas where natural threats loom. In 2021, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ranked the county as the riskiest place in the nation for natural disasters, not to mention the increased threat caused by climate change.

    So how do the city’s major art museums manage? With collections valued in the billions, the possibility of a cataclysmic incident is high. Yet it is these challenges that have pushed city institutions to become innovative leaders in conservation and creating safe spaces for people and art.

    “I was astounded by how many people asked, ‘Did you think about evacuating the art?’” said Katherine Fleming, president and chief executive of the J. Paul Getty Trust, in a recent telephone interview. “The danger to artwork would have risen as soon as you go about moving it. These facilities were built to keep art safe in Los Angeles and everything that comes with that.”

    Yet are they prepared enough?

    On Jan. 7, Les Borsay, the Getty’s emergency planning specialist, was testing the fire system at the Getty Villa, a museum in the Palisades full of ancient treasures, when Los Angeles found itself at the center of a national disaster. That morning, a text from the Getty Center, the museum’s main headquarters in Brentwood, alerted Borsay that an approaching fire storm would soon be bearing down on the museum, a replica Roman country house built by the oil tycoon J. Paul Getty that became a museum in 1974.

    Borsay and about a dozen emergency staff members executed a well-rehearsed protocol: They sent nonessential staff home (and would have sent visitors home, as well, but the museum was closed), sealed the gallery doors with painter’s tape and monitored camera feeds from a conference room as flames approached.

    The irrigation system, activated since the start of the red-flag warning, reduced fires on the grounds, but staff members still had to extinguish spot outbreaks while awaiting firefighters.

    That night, as anxiety spread across the city and with the scope of the disaster yet to be clear, rumors circulated online that the building had been lost. The Getty confirmed on Jan. 8 that the museum and its collection had survived the night.

    In the months since, green shoots have started to emerge in the hills, and save for some burned trees, singed rosemary and a slightly scorched parking structure, the Getty Villa stands robust and tranquil — a stark contrast to the nearby charcoal color palms and the burned remains of houses.

    “We didn’t suffer any damage to our buildings or collections,” even as the threats multiplied, Borsay said in the museum’s marble courtyard on a recent Tuesday. He pointed to a bluff cresting into view from the courtyard. After the fires came rains, and there was a mudslide that ran into the top of the property, but the institution remained safe.

    Fleming, the Getty Foundation’s chief executive, recalled how the Getty Center — home to Rembrandts, Monets and van Goghs — also came under fire threat later. She felt confident in the museums’ ability to handle disaster. “We have an almost comically well-developed culture of safety, which in normal times can feel excessive, but in a crisis, it serves us really, really well,” she said.

    On both properties, the fires would have found minimal fuel to burn and both locations have water tanks. Both buildings were also built with fire in mind, constructed out of materials like stone, travertine and concrete.

    The destruction caused by the January fires was amplified by extreme winds from the Santa Anas blowing in from Southern California’s inland deserts. These winds and the Eaton fire, to the east of the city, caused black smoke to blanket Pasadena and the Los Angeles basin.

    “It may not be as immediately devastating as a collection burning, but smoke and soot on artworks does damage,” said John Griswold, the head of conservation at the Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, which is full of old masters and works from Asia. “The museum was directly in the path of the Eaton smoke plume,” Griswold said, adding that “when it comes from urban areas, the problems become complex; they can contain lead, asbestos and other nefarious substances.”

    Officials at other Los Angeles institutions like the Museum of Contemporary Art, Los Angeles County Museum of Art and the Broad, when asked, all cited their own protocols and a reliance on air filtration systems to help prevent smoke and pollution from entering gallery spaces. Yet as fire seasons intensify, museums such as the Norton Simon in Pasadena have had to develop extra precautions. “We’ve had to do more to control potentially vulnerable points of entry such as ventilation ducts where smoke might enter during very bad seasons,” Griswold said.

    The disaster long feared in this region is, of course, an earthquake. The city sprawls above hundreds of fault lines, including major active ones like the San Andreas, Puente Hills and Santa Monica, but the last major temblor was the 1994 Northridge quake.

    That the threat looms over the museums in Los Angeles is evidenced in how a recent crop of museum buildings are prioritizing their quake preparedness. In Exposition Park, the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art, founded by the filmmaker George Lucas and his wife, Mellody Hobson, and scheduled to open in 2026 — sits on 281 seismic base isolators that allow it to move 42 inches in any direction. “It’s designed to move flexibly like a giant roller skate during an earthquake,” Michael Siegel, the principal architect, said in an email.

    In Miracle Mile, a neighborhood in Los Angeles that contains a cluster of museums, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art is nearing the completion of its David Geffen Galleries, a $750 million building that spans Wilshire Boulevard. Engineers have anchored 56 specialized seismic base isolators to its foundation, allowing controlled movement during tremors.

    “We all know it’s a matter of when, not if,” said Richard Hards, a senior mount maker at the Getty. For 18 years, Hards, along with a small team, has been preparing artworks for exhibition by adding devices to pedestals, ensuring they are safe during a quake.

    “Every object here is mounted and secured to be earthquake ready, from tiny glassware to bronze statues,” Hards explained in a phone interview. Usually, he would be found at the Getty’s mount-making workshops, but he has been working remotely since losing his home in the Eaton fire.

    The mounts the Getty use were invented in-house, but iterations are found in the city’s major museums as well as in earthquake prone regions globally. The mount is essentially a base isolator that involves a three-layer mechanical apparatus within a display pedestal, where the bottom layer anchors to the floor while the upper layers glide on ball bearings in different directions with springs limiting and controlling movement. It all snaps into action when a tremor occurs. This engineering is all but invisible to visitors.

    Earlier at the museum, Borsay had jangled some keys before opening a door. In the center of the room stood “Victorious Youth,” a Greek bronze statue dating to 300-100 B.C., which was found by a fishing trawler in the Adriatic Sea in 1964. One of the few life-size Greek bronzes to survive, it is anchored to its display, which is anchored to the floor. On the night of the fires, staff members had rushed in a humidifier before sealing the gallery doors.

    “He’s survived a lot,” Borsay said of the sculpture. “When the big one hits,” he added, “that’ll be the next test.”

    In May, the Getty is hosting an American Alliance of Museums event to share disaster preparedness knowledge.

    “It underscored how our sector works,” said Elizabeth Merritt the founding director of the Center for the Future of Museums, which helps institutions prepare for a host of challenges, including environmental ones. “We know that figuring it out individually is never effective.”

    In January, as soon as the fire threat passed, Fleming drove to the Getty Villa. She was relieved that all staff members were safe, and while she had been confident in the building and the collections’ safety, she was anxious to check in on the antiquities.

    “I remember seeing them, and I know they’re inanimate objects, but I thought if they could talk they’d be saying something like, ‘Calm down, everybody’s fine, we’ve been around for thousands of years, surviving all sorts of disasters,’” she said. “It was a relief to see them after a major scare.”




    Source link