Cindy Sherman - Holding Up The Mirror by Geoff Harrison

Blogging about an artist as prolific and enduring as New York based Cindy Sherman is a challenge.  Where to start? Where to finish?  Listening to Sherman talking about her work doesn’t help a great deal.  She once claimed that she has no idea what her work is about until she reads a review of it. She works intuitively and it’s not always clear to her what she aims to achieve until she sees the final image.

47132360_303.jpg

What is clear is that she is one of the most significant American artists of the last 40 years.  She just keeps going on, this portrayer of alienation, of oddity (with a twist of humour), of what it’s like to be a woman in contemporary America.  And her medium is photography where she is not only the photographer, but also the model.  She painted whilst at college but found the process too laborious, she wanted to spend more time focusing on the composition and then get an instant image.

Untitled#92, from Sherman’s Centrefold series, 1981

Untitled#92, from Sherman’s Centrefold series, 1981

In her studio there are drawers crammed with props including false teeth, noses, eyeballs, boobs, makeup, clothes, masks etc. which she uses to disguise herself to the point of being completely unrecognisable in some of her imagery.  As a child she enjoyed dressing up, but not to look like a stunning model or prima ballerina, but quite the opposite.  Her aims were rather perverse, looking older even decrepit and not wanting to be recognisable. Needless to say Sherman spends a lot of time in clothing stores, but not before deciding what character type she is buying for.

Cindy Sherman being interviewed in Art 21, 2009

Cindy Sherman being interviewed in Art 21, 2009

She rarely titles her photographs for 2 reasons.  Firstly she says she is not a wordsmith (which suggests she must have hated art school, if her experiences were like mine), but also because she doesn’t want anyone to approach her work with preconceived ideas of what the characters are meant to be.

It’s been argued that Sherman’s work anticipated the selfie era, but I’m not so sure of that, although it could be fairly argued that the selfie era has made her work more relevant than ever.  Yet the selfie culture is “it’s all about me”, and I see Sherman’s work as “it’s all about them”, or “it’s all about a certain character”.  A recent exhibition of her work in London was titled “Cindy Sherman – the Original Selfie Queen”, a marketing strategy perhaps?

Her oeuvre encompasses so many themes that to cover them all would require a novel, so I’m going to focus on just a few.

Untitled Film Still, 1978

Untitled Film Still, 1978

In her movie stills series she wanted to explore character studies that also tell a story.  She didn’t want to produce something that looked like “art” or based on art theory but something that looked mass produced, like a movie and preferably a European movie.  She has found more inspiration from movies than anything else.  But TV has also had an influence (especially trashy TV) given that, like me, she is from the first generation to be brought up during the TV era.

Untitled, 2004

Untitled, 2004

In her clown series, she wanted to explore the sense of unease a clown’s makeup can create, a questioning of what motivates someone to be a clown. 

Untitled #468, 2008

Untitled #468, 2008

But it’s her society portraits from around 2008 that I want to focus on.  She has received criticism for some of these portraits which include what she calls her Hollywood Hampton types for supposedly poking fun at them, as in “she’s come from the east coast and who does she think she is?”

Untitled #475, 2008

Untitled #475, 2008

In his review of this series, Paul Moorhouse sees these women confronting the issue of their age.  “Rather than attempting an air of youthful attractiveness, they are preoccupied with their own status and sophistication as the means of preserving personal and social credibility."  He makes reference to a neurosis, a chilling self-absorption which lies beneath “a mask-like veneer of charm”. Moorhouse also makes reference to the “frosty surface that is their solution to age” and an impression of “poignant frailty.” I particularly like the comment “these images are about the failure to deceive and the compulsion to do so”.

Untitled #477, 2008

Untitled #477, 2008

These portraits deal with the issue of the passage of time and how each individual must confront his/her own mortality, an issue that Sherman was by now also confronting.  She was born in 1954.

For some strange reason, whilst writing this blog I found myself watching a documentary on the wonderful British comedy actor Peter Sellers for the umpteenth time.  Sellers was famous for completely absorbing the characters he portrayed, and was regarded as a human chameleon who could transform himself into any role.  Many who knew him well spoke of an inner darkness or intense loneliness that haunted him, and that performing these roles may have provided an escape or sanctuary.  He once claimed to have no identity of his own.

Untitled #474, 2008

Untitled #474, 2008

Not that I’m suggesting that Sherman is the female equivalent of Sellers, after seeing her being interviewed a number of times over the years, she just seems like a very talented artist.  But she once said she wants to lose herself in the imagery and her figures to look like real people.  A 1994 BBC Arena program on Sherman is titled “Nobody is here but me” which says it all really.

Perhaps what we need is a male equivalent of Sherman, someone equally adept at portraying in the same dispassionate and probing manner various male character types.  Us guys need the mirror to be thrust in our faces.  If such an artist exists, please let me know.

At the end of an Art 21 documentary, we see Sherman leaving her exhibition at the Metro Pictures Gallery in New York on a pushbike.  She’s different.

References;

American PBS Art 21

Paul Moorhouse

BBC Arena







Mrs Hopper by Geoff Harrison

“Isn’t it nice to have a wife who paints?”  A rhetorical question asked by Jo Hopper of her illustrious husband, Edward.  “It stinks”, was the reply.

According to critic Waldemar Januszczak in his TV series ‘Big Sky, Big Dreams, Big Art, Made In The USA’, Jo once said that talking to Eddie was like throwing a stone into a well, except you don’t hear the thud when it reaches the bottom.  Alas, it seems their 43 years long marriage was not a happy one, or was it? 

Josephine Nivison Hopper - Self portrait

Josephine Nivison Hopper - Self portrait

Edward came across as a dour, reticent, towering figure who constantly belittled and denigrated his assertive, diminutive wife, who responded with verbal assaults of her own.  Sometimes those assaults became physical with cuffings, slappings and scratchings between them quite common.

An article by Stephen May in Artnews suggests that their hostility towards each other was based on resentments; Jo because her own artistic career (she studied under Robert Henri) was overshadowed by Edward’s, and Edward because he felt Jo was an inadequate wife.

Ed Hopper sketch.jpg

Sometimes, in the wake of an argument, Edward would dash off a quick sketch when Jo was out of the room and leave it on the table for her to find when she returned.  At their 25th wedding anniversary, Jo suggests they deserve a medal for distinguished combat.  Edward’s boyhood home in Nyack, New York is now the Edward Hopper House Centre and contains an exhibition documenting their feisty marriage under the title “Edward Hopper’s Caricatures: At Home With Ed and Jo”.

Edward Hopper - The Sacrament of Sex (female version)

Edward Hopper - The Sacrament of Sex (female version)

At the time she married Hopper, Josephine Nivison was 41, still a virgin (and possibly him too) and had an arts career going back 16 years.  She had exhibited alongside Mogdigliani, Picasso, Man Ray and Maurice Prendergast.  In 1924, the year they got married, she exhibited at the Brooklyn Museum together with Georgia O'Keeffe and John Singer Sargent and was singled out for praise.  Jo recommended Edward Hopper's work to the curators of that show, and when they bought one of his paintings after the exhibition had ended, it was only the second he had sold in 10 years. As a result of the exposure she had secured for him, Hopper was given a sell-out solo show by the gallery which would represent him for the rest of his life.

Jo Hopper - Gloucester Railroad Gate 1928 - Watercolour

Jo Hopper - Gloucester Railroad Gate 1928 - Watercolour

Their marriage was described as hermitic, and as Edward’s painting flourished, Jo’s waned. She became so involved in her husband’s work that she came to see it as a collaboration, and she insisted on being the sole model for every woman he painted. Her previous training as an actress may have helped here.  Speaking to a curator once, she referred to her own paintings as 'poor little stillborn infants, too nice to have been such friendless little Cinderellas. I don't much like them, but how sad for them if even I forsake them!’

Jo Hopper - Self Portrait, 1956

Jo Hopper - Self Portrait, 1956

She kept careful records of every painting Hopper produced and sold, she wrote practically all his correspondence, and she began writing her diaries just months before his first major retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art.  It is thought she perceived this as a ticket to posterity.

Jo died in 1968, a year after Edward, having bequeathed the entirety of Ed’s work and hers to the Whitney Museum of American Art. The gift of some three thousand pieces was without precedent in the history of museums at the time.  The Whitney decided to keep just 3 of Jo’s paintings and supposedly trashed the rest, keeping only a list. 

But not so.  To be found in New York City hospital lobbies, reception areas and waiting rooms are Jo Hopper’s paintings, entrusted to the Whitney but regifted to spaces where women wait or pass through.

images (2).jpg

An exhibition of both the Hoppers’ work was held at the Provincetown Art Association and Museum in Massachusetts in 2017.

References;

The Paris Review

Artnews.com

The Guardian

Waldemar Januszczak - Big Sky, Big Dreams, Big Art: Made In the USA



Art In Tough Economic Times by Geoff Harrison

The Morrison Government’s recent decision to roll the Department of Communication and the Arts into a new super Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications has drawn widespread condemnation from the arts community.  For a start, there is no mention of the arts in this new super department.  There is no reference to its arts responsibilities at all.

The arts haven’t always been treated with such callous disregard during tough economic times.  We only have to look back to what happened during the great depression in the United States to find a more enlightened attitude.

Federal-Art-Project-Icon A.jpg

The Works Progress Administration was established by Franklin D Roosevelt shortly after he was elected US President in 1932.  It was part of his New Deal which involved massive programs to provide employment for the millions who were out of work.  The WPA provided programs to struggling writers and artists. 

Artists were commissioned to paint murals in post offices, town halls and railroad stations across the country.  And whilst this may have produced a lot of idealized kitsch, it did keep a lot of artists alive.  One such artist was Jack Levine. “Prior to the depression, many American artists were traveling to the left bank in Paris and were enjoying this hedonistic lifestyle until the money ran out, then they all returned to the US.  Many artists became very political and I became politicized out of my own poverty.  I didn’t have a dime.  I became very bitter and nobody wanted my work, so I went on the New Deal for a while and it felt as if someone had thrown me a life saver.”

Another WPA artist was Vincent Campanella “artists were able to see themselves as part of the working class and they saw themselves as free to be what they wanted to be under the WPA, painters who were free to paint the common life.  They were free to share opinions, share thoughts, share peoples financial difficulties, freedom to dedicate yourself and say I am a painter who is a human being and my fellow human beings are my subjects.”

Campanella’s portrait of Thomas Hart Benton

Campanella’s portrait of Thomas Hart Benton

Corporations also encouraged public art at this time.  New York’s Rockefeller Centre is full of it.  There is a sample of it on the Associated Press Building by Isamu Noguchi. 

Isamu Noguchi

Isamu Noguchi

The famous photographer Lewis Hine worked as chief photographer for the WPA’s National Research Project, which studied changes in industry and their effect on employment.  During the depression he produced images of “worker as hero” to use Robert Hughes’ terminology including images of construction workers on the Empire State Building.

Lewis Hine Construction workers on the Empire State Building

Lewis Hine Construction workers on the Empire State Building

Contrast all this to the Morrison Government’s attitude to the arts. The government denies that the arts has been downgraded by this decision, but the outgoing Secretary of the Departments of Communications and the Arts, Mike Mrdak disagrees.  In an email sent to his staff on the day the new super department was announced, Mrdak (pictured below) made his feelings plain.  "We were not permitted any opportunity to provide advice on the machinery of government changes, nor were our views ever sought on any proposal to abolish the department or to changes to our structure and operations."

images.jpg

Many bureaucrats are concerned a departmental secretary managing the competing demands of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications may never prioritise a Cabinet submission from Arts.

Needless to say this move by the Morrison Government has been labelled philistine, and it ignores recent studies showing the link between involvement in the arts and good mental health.  But to me, the argument goes beyond this.  It ignores the many thousands involved in the manufacture of artist’s materials, and their retailers.  And then there are the thousands of galleries across the country and their staff they employ, the performing arts, theatres and writers.  It’s an entire creative industry potentially being trashed by a government fixated on mining and infrastructure.  A 2017 report from the Department of Communications and the Arts stated that the “creative industries” contributed 6.4% to the nations GDP.

But what else would you expect from a third rate advertising man who got kicked out of Tourism Australia.  So we made him Prime Minister instead.

REFERENCES

ABC News Online

“American Visions”, Robert Hughes, ABC TV

“Big Sky, Big Dreams, Big Art, Made In The USA” , Waldemar Januszczak