Arts & Entertainment
Gottlieb uses form and color
on untitled, unique paintings
in order to evoke emotions
art, |
By Garth Lienemann
Staff Reporter
Renowned American artist Adolph Gottlieb
developed all of his paintings by working in
series. This approach creates a definite theme
in his “Monotypes” collection, on display at
the Sheldon Memorial Art Gallery through
April 12.
Gottlieb often called the canvas he worked
on “the painter’s rectangle.” From this rec
tangle he would manipulate color and form to
evoke a response from the viewer.
In his 50-year career as an artist, Gottlieb
experimented with form and simplicity and
utilized basic themes. He had no idea whatkind
of response he would get from his paintings,
but he noticed that a few minor changes in any
given painting could elicit different responses.
Gottlieb, who died in 1974, had a stroke in
1970 that paralyzed one arm and made using a
wheelchair a necessity. Because of this drastic
lifestyle change, he needed to use a new system
of painting. He hired assistants to help him
move his painting surface so he could reach the
area he wished to work on.
Daphne Deeds, curator of the gallery, said
the difference between a painting and a mono
type is the way it is developed. A painting is a
work of art which uses acrylic directly applied
to a designated surface. A monotype, however,
is made from pressing a piece of paper onto a
glass, steel or cardboard surface that had been
freshly painted.
“It’s a unique print,” she said.
All of Gottlieb’s monotypes were printed in
1973 and 1974. His last two monotypes, which
also were his largest, were completed two
weeks before his death.
Two recurring elements in Gottlieb’s mono
types arc a horizontal line dividing the paper in
half, and a circular shape, usually positioned in
the upper hal f of the paper. Although the colors
and sizes of the circles vary, most of them arc
interpreted by viewers as the sun.
Other ideas about the circles include the
Buddhist conccptof yin and yang or a manifes
tation of sexual tension and release. It is diffi
cult to determine Gottlieb’s actual meaning —
or if he even had one—because all of his works
arc untitled.
An untitled painting, Deeds said, is “very
typical of Gottlieb’s era and generation. It is
indicative of an abstract impressionist.”
The display at Sheldon is strategically ar
ranged to allow the viewer maximum apprecia
tion of Gottlieb’s theme. A monotype will be
positioned on one wall of the display, with its
counterpart on another wall.
The first painting will capture the viewer’s
attention with ilsclcar-cul definition. The other
will be a repeal of the first painting but it will
appear different because it seems to be break
ing apart.
Often cited as a forerunner of minimalism,
Gottlieb stretches the imagination with only a
few ovals, splotches or “S” curves. The fasci
nating aspect of his abstractness is that many of
his monotypes include the same shapes, with
only lighter or darker shades, sloppier or neater
execution, and defined areas of control or free
dom.
One of the walls of the display is dedicated
to Gottlieb’s “dark” monotypes. These five or
six paintings have black backgrounds, with
color added on lop. These monotypes also are
different because Gottlieb used small pieces of
cardboard or his fingers to scrape paint or ink
off the surface. This process gives this section
of the display added character.
Gottlieb’s work is represented in collections
in virtually every major museum in the United
States, as well as many private and public
collections in the United States, Europe and
Japan.
Admission to the gallery is free.
Courtesy of the Adolph & Esther Gottlieb Foundation, Inc.
4 "v ■r
Fine line divides pornographic, erotic works
By Bryan Peterson
Staff Reporter
I have iwo magazines in front of me. One is
the April 1992 issue of Playboy — lhc“Girlsof
the Big Eight” issue. The other is the winter/
spring issue of Yellow Silk, a “Journal of
Erotic Arts.”
One costs $5 and has 180 pages; the other is
more expensive and much shorter. The second
came in the mail, while the first was purchased
at a local convenience shop.
I find each of them appealing and intrigu
ing, and the people pictured in both arc attrac
tive. Moreover, rewarding reading material is
to be found in each magazine.
One, however, is called “pornographic,”
while the other is called “erotic.” Each is
victim to the particular perceptions and asso
ciations that go with its respective label.
While to some minds the pornographic and
the erotic arc worlds apart—one accepted, the
other condemned — the two seem not loo
distant to me. There arc, of course, those who
would label both as trash, but such a view is not
of interest here.
Leaving aside such truly objectionable sub
jects as child pornography and snuff films, I
would like to examine somcoflhc similarities
and differences between these two magazines
and the fields they represent.
I know, never judge a book by its cover, but
that is exactly what people look at in the case of
magazines, at least initially.
The Playboy cover isglossy and lurid, show
ing some of what is to come to a reader who
already knows what to expect.
Yellow Silk’s cover is done in softer tones.
A nude woman is on the cover, but one docs not
know whether to look at the body or the thicket
like bird’s nest atop her partially shaven head.
David Badders/DN
From the front, we jump into the middle of
things. Playboy offers a centerfold with "Play
mate Data" written in a childish hand and with
little to say of any substance.
Yellow Silk features a pull-out section with
only one exposed breast. The journal’s adver
tising has been confined to this section so that
readers are not distracted by the ads.
While we arc there, let us examine those
ads. In Yellow Silk, there arc books, magazines
and "sensual products’’ only. Playboy, which
has a much higher percentage of advertising,
fills its pages with ads lor tobacco and alcohol
for the most part.
But these arc all secondary. The main ques
tion in this comparison is whether any substan
tial difference exists between what is called
pornography and what is called erotica.
These two categories cannot be wholly
separated, but some generalizations can be
made based upon these two magazines, which
will be taken as roughly representing larger
categories.
A basic division can be made between the
sexual and sensual, although there is again a
great range where the two overlap. There is no
blanket statement to be made, such as, “Well,
if it leads to sexual stimulation and/or orgasm,
it is scxual/pomographic” or “The erotic is
what pleases without appealing to prurient
interests.”
What is sexual can be sensual and vice
versa, but not all things sexual arc sensual (or,
again, the reverse). Things get even more
complicated upon observing that these distinc
tions and blurrings vary widely among indi
viduals.
Playboy seems to be oriented more toward
the strictly sexual, though its wordsand images
can also be sensual. Some fine fiction (William
Kennedy this month) and revealing interviews
(Jonathon Ko/.ol) can be found in its pages.
Unfortunately, the most challenging ideas
arc overshadowed by such backward ideas as a
cartoon about knowing when you “don’t have
to buy a woman any more drinks."
The criticisms also are familiar: Pornogra
phy degrades women (and men??), reduces
women (and men??) to mere objects and gives
a distorted, incomplete view of sexuality. These
criticisms are valid, but not as global con
demnations. Such things can and do occur, but
not in alt cases.
Much of the justification for the legitimacy
of erotica is that it docs not exist solely for
sexual gratification and that it presents a fuller,
healthier portrayal of sexuality. These things
also arc true — but not in all eases.
There is sexuality and sensuality in Yellow
Silk, but it is more “artistic”and “literary” than
that in Playboy; there arc more than blatant
photos. Yellow Silk also presents substantial
literary offerings, such as poetry, fiction, and
reviews by the likes of Louise Erdrich, Niozakc
Shangc and Jerry Bumpus in this issue alone.
Things do seem to be more subtle and chal
lenging, sometimes even disturbing, in Yellow
Silk’s pictures and words alike. In Playboy,
things arc straightforward: Here is a naked
woman in an alluring pose without a partner.
She is inevitably wearing lingerie and makeup,
possibly even high heels.
In Yellow Silk, we find photos of men and
women, all of them more natural in appearance
and pictured both alone and together. Surprise!
Skin can be wrinkly, and both breasts and
pcmscs can be small.
This particular issue of Yellow Silk docs
some ama/ing things with androgyny, pairing
men and women who look remarkably similar
at first glance. All of this is in marked contrast
to the small set of slyli/cd photos that appear in
every issue of Playboy.
Here, then, is one key distinction in the
visual realm: No matter how many times you
come back to Playboy, you arc looking at
glamorized, naked flesh. Yellow Silk offers
something different— subtle discoveries with
each return. Moreover, Yellow Silk’s words
tend to complement and enhance the photo
graphs it contains.
Some general distinctions between Playboy
and Yellow Silk (and, more generally, pornog
raphy and erotica) can be made, yet the two
cannot be wholly separated.
A person will generally find whatever he/
she is looking for, and will be interested, ex
cited, or aroused by whatever fils his/her tastes.
Ultimately, a person will find satisfaction (or
dissatisfaction) with whatever lies at hand.
